Assessing the transition from deforestation to forest regrowth with an agent-based model of land cover change for south-central Indiana (USA)

Geoforum

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 819-832

  Evans, Tom P ^a   Kelley, Hugh ^b  

^a Department of Geography ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Agent based model; Complexity; Forest regrowth; Forest transition theory; GIS; Land cover change; Reforestation

Indexed keywords

BIOPHYSICS; DECISION MAKING; DEFORESTATION; FOREST COVER; GIS; HOUSEHOLD SURVEY; LAND COVER; LAND USE; REFORESTATION; REGROWTH; REMOTE SENSING; TIMBER HARVESTING;

INDIANA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 39849096718     PISSN: 00167185     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.03.010     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. An L., Linderman M., Qi J., Shortridge A., and Liu J. Exploring complexity in a human-environment system: an agent-based spatial model for multidisciplinary and multiscale integration. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 95 1 (2005) 54-79
2. Atkinson G., and Oleson T. Urban sprawl as a path dependent process. Journal of Economic Issues 30 (1996) 609-615
3. Axtell R., Epstein J., Dean J., Gumerman G., Swedlund A., Harburger J., Chakravarty S., Hammond R., Parker J., and Parker M. Population growth and collapse in a multiagent model of the Kayenta Anasazi in Long House Valley. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science's (USA) 99 Suppl. 3 (2002) 7275-7279
4. Balmann A. Modeling land use with multi-agent systems: perspectives for the analysis of agricultural policies. Proceedings, IIFET Conference Microbehavior and Macroresults (2001), Oregon State University, Corvallis
5. Barbier E. Introduction to the environmental Kuznets curve. Environment and Development Economics 2 4 (1997) 369-381
6. Berger, T., Parker, D.C., 2002. Introduction to part 3: Examples of specific research. In: Parker, D.C., Berger, T., Manson, S. (Eds.), Agent-based models of land-use and land-cover change: Report and review of an international workshop, Irvine, CA, USA, October 4-7, 2001. LUCC report series no. 6, Focus 1 Office of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme and the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. pp. 27-35. .
7. Berger T., and Ringler C. Trade-offs, efficiency gains and technical change: modeling water management and land use within a multiple-agent framework. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 41 1-2 (2002) 119-144
8. Brown D., Page S., Riolo R., Zellner M., and Rand W. Path dependence and the validation of agent-based spatial models of land use. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 19 2 (2005) 153-174
9. Clarke K.C., and Gaydos L.J. Loose-coupling a cellular automaton model and GIS: long-term urban growth prediction for San Francisco and Washington/Baltimore. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 12 (1998) 699-714
10. CIPEC Biocomplexity Group, 2004. Report on Monroe County Landowners Survey, 2003. CIPEC Working Paper CWP-04-07. Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change (CIPEC), Indiana University, Bloomington.
11. Davis M.B. Old Growth in the East (1993), The Cenozoic Society, Richmond, VT
12. DeFries R.S., Foley J.A., and Asner G.P. Land-use choices: balancing human needs and ecosystem function. Frontiers in Ecology and Management 2 5 (2004) 249-257
13. Epstein J.M., and Axtell R. Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up (1996), Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
14. Evans T.P., Green G.M., and Carlson L.A. Multi-scale analysis of land cover composition and landscape management of public and private lands in Indiana. In: Millington A., Walsh S., and Osborne P. (Eds). Remote Sensing and GIS Applications in Biogeography and Ecology (2001), Kluwer Publications, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 271-287
15. Evans T.P., Manire A., de Castro F., Brondizio E., and McCracken S. A dynamic model of household decision making and parcel level land cover change in the eastern Amazon. Ecological Modelling 143 1-2 (2001) 95-113
16. Evans T.P., and Kelley H. Multi-scale analysis of a household level agent-based model of landcover change. Journal of Environmental Management 72 (2004) 57-72
17. Foley J., DeFries R., Asner G., Barford C., Bonan G., Carpenter S., Chapin F., Coe M., Daily G., Gibbs H., Helkowski J., Holloway T., Howard E., Kucharik C., Monfreda C., Patz J., Prentice C., Ramankutty N., and Snyder P. Global consequences of land use. Science 309 5734 (2005) 570-574
18. Foster A.D., and Rosenzweig M.R. Economic growth and the rise of forests. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118 2 (2003) 601-637
19. Grimm V., Revilla E., Berger U., Jeltsch F., Mooij W., Raisback S., Thulke H., Weiner J., Weigand T., and DeAngelis D. Pattern-oriented modeling of agent-based complex systems: lessons from ecology. Science 310 (2005) 987-991
20. Hoffmann M., Kelley H., and Evans T.P. Simulating land-cover change in Indiana: an agent-based model of de/reforestation. In: Janssen M. (Ed). Complexity and Ecosystem Management: The Theory and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems (2002), Edward Elgar Publishers, Cheltenham, UK/Northampton, MA 218-247
21. Huth A., and Wissel C. The simulation of the movement of fish schools. Journal of Theoretical Biology 156 3 (1992) 365-385
22. Kelley, H., Evans, T.P., 2006. The relative influence of landowner and landscape heterogeneity in an agent-based model of land use. CIPEC Working Paper CWP-06-03. Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change (CIPEC), Indiana University, Bloomington.
23. Kellog R.S. The timber supply of the United States. Forest Service Circular vol. 166 (1909), US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC 24p
24. Klooster D. Forest transitions in Mexico: institutions and forests in a globalized countryside. The Professional Geographer 55 2 (2003) 227-237
25. Koontz T.M. Money talks-but to whom? Financial versus nonmonetary motivations in land use decisions. Society and Natural Resources 14 (2001) 51-65
26. LeBaron B. Empirical regularities from interacting long- and short-memory investors in an agent-based stock market. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 5 5 (2001) 442-455
27. Lindsey A.A. Walking in wilderness. In: Jackson M.T. (Ed). The Natural Heritage of Indiana (1997), Indiana University Press, Bloomington 113-123
28. Lindsey A.A., Crankshaw W.B., and Quadir S.A. Soil relations and distribution map of the vegetation of pre-settlement Indiana. Botanical Gazette 126 (1965) 155-163
29. MacDonald D., Crabtree J.R., Wiesinger G., Dax T., Stamou N., Fleury P., Lazpita J.G., and Gibon A. Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: environmental consequences and policy response. Journal of Environmental Management 59 1 (2000) 47-69
30. Mather A. The forest transition. Area 24 4 (1992) 367-379
31. Mather A., Fairbairn J., and Needle C.L. The course and drivers of the forest transition: the case of France. Journal of Rural Studies 15 1 (1999) 65-90
32. Mather A. The transition from deforestation to reforestation in Europe. In: Angelson A., and Kaimowitz D. (Eds). Agricultural Technologies and Tropical Deforestation (2001), CABI Publishing, Center for International Forestry Research, New York 35-52
33. McCracken S., Brondi{dotless}́zio E., Nelson D., Moran E., Siqueira A., and Rodriguez-Pedraza C. Remote sensing and GIS at farm property level: demography and deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 65 11 (1999) 1311-1320
34. Messina, J.P., Walsh, S.J., 2001. Simulating land use and land cover dynamics in the Ecuadorian Amazon through cellular automata approaches and an integrated GIS. Paper presented at the 2001 Open Meeting of the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Research Community, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, October 6-8. .
35. Mol A., and Sonnenfeld D. Ecological Modernization Around the World (2000), Frank Cass, Portland
36. Nelson, J., 1998. Indiana's forests: Past, present, and future. The Woodland Steward 7 (3). (click on 'Past Woodland Steward Articles').
37. Parker D.C., Manson S.M., Janssen M.A., Hoffmann M.J., and Deadman P. Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land-cover change: a review. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 93 2 (2003) 316-340
38. Parker D., and Meretsky V. Measuring pattern outcomes in an agent based model of edge-effect externalities using spatial metrics. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 101 (2004) 233-250
39. Perz S. Grand theory and context specificity in the study of forest dynamics: forest transition theory and other directions. Professional Geographer 59 1 (2007) 105-114
40. Perz S., and Skole D. Secondary forest expansion in the Brazilian Amazon and the refinement of forest transition theory. Society and Natural Resources 16 (2003) 277-294
41. Polanyi K. The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of our Time (1944), Rinehart, New York
42. Pontius G., and Malanson J. Comparison of the structure and accuracy of two land change models. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 19 2 (2005) 243-265
43. Puu T. Mathematical Location and Land Use Theory (1997), Springer, Berlin
44. Rouchier J., Bousquet F., Requier-Desjardins M., and Antona M. A multi-agent model for describing transhumance in North Cameroon: comparison of different rationality to develop a routine. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 25 3-4 (2001) 527-559
45. Rudel T.K., Coomes O., Moran E., Achard F., Angelsen A., Xu J., and Lambin E. Forest transitions: towards a global understanding of land use change. Global Environmental Change Part A 15 1 (2005) 23-31
46. Smith, W.B., Vissage, J., Sheffield, R., Darr, D., 2001. Forest resources of the United States, 1997. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-219. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN, 190p.
47. Walsh S.J., Evans T.P., Welsh W.F., Entwisle B., and Rindfuss R.R. Scale-dependent relationships between population and environment in northeastern Thailand. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 65 (1999) 97-105
48. Walsh S., Rindfuss R., Prasartkul P., Entwisle B., and Chamratrithirong A. Population change and landscape dynamics: The Nang Rong, Thailand, studies. In: Entwisle B., and Stern P. (Eds). Population, Land Use, and Environment: Research Directions (2005), National Research Council, Washington, DC 135-162
49. Wilson A.G. Complex Spatial Systems: The Modelling Foundations of Urban and Regional Analysis (2000), Pearson, New York