Spatial modeling of land cover change and watershed response using Markovian cellular automata and simulation

Water Resources Research

Volumn 44, Issue 4, 2008, Pages

  Marshall, Eric ^a   Randhir, Timothy O ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATA THEORY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MARKOV PROCESSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

LAND COVER CHANGE; REGIONAL WATERSHED;

WATERSHEDS;

AUTOMATA THEORY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MARKOV PROCESSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; WATERSHEDS;

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; CELLULAR AUTOMATON; FOREST COVER; HYDROLOGICAL RESPONSE; LAND COVER; MARKOV CHAIN; POLICY APPROACH; RUNOFF; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; URBANIZATION; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER QUALITY; WATERSHED;

EID: 44349174838     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2006WR005514     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Arnell, N. W. (2004), Climate change and global water resources: SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios, Global Environ. Change, 14, 31-52.
2. Arnold, J. G., and P. M. Allen (1999), Automated methods for estimating baseflow and groundwater recharge from streamflow records, J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc, 35(2), 411-424.
3. Arnold, J. G., P. M. Allen, and G. Bernhardt (1993), A comprehensive surface-groundwater flow model, J. Hydrol., 142, 47-69.
4. Baker, W. L. (1989), A review of models in landscape change, Landscape Ecol., 2(2), 111-133.
5. Bell, E. J. (1974), Markov analysis of land use change - An application of stochastic processes to remotely sensed data, J. Socioeconomic Plann. Sci, 8, 311-316.
6. Boerner, R. E., M. N. DeMaers, J. W. Simpson, F. J. Artigas, A. Silva, and L. A. Berns (1996), Markov models of inertia and dynamism on two contiguous Ohio landscapes, Geogr. Analysis, 28(1), 56-66.
7. Briassoulis, H. (2000), Analysis of land use change: Theoretical and modeling approaches. Web Book, URL: http://www.rri.wvu.edu/WebBook/Briassoulis/ chapter4 (models6).htm#4.7.2.
8. Brown, D. G., B. C. Pijanowski, and J. D. Duh (2000), Modeling the relationships between land use and land cover on private lands in the Upper Midwest, USA, J. Environ. Manage., 59, 247-263.
9. Center for Watershed Protection (CWP) (1998), Cost and Benefits of Storm Water BMPs, Ellicott City, Maryland, USA.
10. Eastman, R. (2003), IDRISI Kilimanjaro guide to GIS and image processing, Clark Labs, Clark University, http://www.clarklabs.org.
11. Flam, R. O., and M. G. Turner (1994), Alternative mode formulation for a stochastic simulation of landscape change, Landscape Ecology, 19(1), 37-46.
12. Gamerman, D. (1997), Markov Chain Monte Carlo: Stochastic Simulation for Bayesian Inference, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
13. Gilruth, P. T., S. E. Marsh, and R. Kami (1995), A dynamic spatial model of shifting cultivation in the highlands of Guinea, West Africa, Ecol. Modell., 79, 179-197.
14. GRANIT (2004), New Hampshire geographically referenced analysis and information transfer system, (Accessed 2004) http://www.granit.sr.unh.edu/, University of New Hampshire, Durhum, NH, USA.
15. Greenwald, J., B. Roberts, and A. A. Reamer (2001), Community Adjustment to Climate Change, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, VA.
16. Guerin, K. (2004), Theory vs Reality: Making Environmental Use Rights Work in New Zealand, Treasury Working Paper Series 04/06, New Zealand Treasury.
17. Hargreaves, G. L., G. H. Hargreaves, and J. P. Riley (1985), Agricultural benefits for Senegal River basin, J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 111(2), 113-124.
18. Horn, H. S. (1975), Markovian properties of forest succession, in Ecology and Evolution of Communities, edited by M. L. Cody, and J. M. Diamond, Belknap Press, Cambridge, Mass.
19. Houghton, R. A. (1994), The worldwide extent of land-use change, BioScience, 44, 305-313.
20. Howard, D. M., P. J. A. Howard, and D. C. Howard (1995), A Markov model projection of soil organic-carbon stores following land-use changes, J. Environ. Manage., 45, 287-302.
21. International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) (1999), Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: Implementation Strategy, Joint IGBP/IHDP publication, edited by C. Nunes, and J. I. Augé.
22. Lein, J. K. (1989), The assessment of land use/land cover impacts on local climate, J. Environ. Manage., 28, 157-174.
23. Logsdon, M. G., E. J. Bell, and F. V. Westerlund (1996), Probability mapping of land use change: A GIS interface for visualizing transition probabilities, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst., 20(6), 389-398.
24. MADEP (1993), Massachusetts nonpoint source management manual, "The Megamanual", A Guidance for Municipal Officials, Office of Watershed Management, Nonpoint Source Program, Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Boston, MA.
25. Manguerra, H. B., and B. A. Engel (1998), Hydrologic parameterization of watersheds for runoff prediction using SWAT, J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc, 34(5), 1149-1162.
26. Marshall, E. (2005), Modeling regional impacts of climate change and landuse change on watershed processes, Unpublished MS Thesis Submitted to The Department of Natural Resources Conservation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.
27. MassGIS (2004), Massachusetts geographic information systems (online), (Accessed 2004) URL: http://www.mass.gov/mgis/massgis.htm, Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Boston, MA, USA.
28. Mather, J. R., and G. V. Sdasyuk (1991), Global Change: Geographic Approaches, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
29. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2004), National climatic data center. URL: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html.
30. Neitsch, S. L., J. G. Arnold, J. R. Kiniry, and J. R. Williams (2001), SWAT: Soil Water Assessment Tool, Texas A&M University, Texas Agricultural Experimental Station, Blackland Research Center.
31. Palone, R. S., and A. H. Todd (Eds.) (1998), Chesapeake Bay Riparian Handbook: A Guide for Establishing and Maintaining Riparian Forest Buffers, USDA Forest Service Northeastern Area. NA-TP-02-97.
32. Parker, D., T. Berger, and S. Manson (2002), Agent-based models of land-use and land-cover change, LUCC Report Series No. 6. IGBP/IHDP-LUCC Project, LUCC Focus I Office, Bloomington, IN.
33. Pontius, R. G., Jr. (2000), Quantification error versus location error in comparison of categorical maps, Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens., 66(8), 1011-1116.
34. Rindfuss, R. R., S. J. Walsh, B. L. Turner, J. Fox, and V. Mishra (2004), Developing a science of land change: Challenges and methodological issues, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci U. S. A., 101(39), 13,976-13,981.
35. Santhi, S., J. G. Arnold, J. R. Williams, W. A. Dugas, R. Srinivasan, and L. M. Hauck (2001), Validation of the SWAT model on a large river basin with point and nonpoint sources, J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 37(5), 1169-1187.
36. Shriver, D., and T. O. Randhir (2006), Integrating stakeholder values with multiple attributes to quantify watershed performance, Water Resour. Res., 42(8), 1-15, W08435, doi:10.1029/2005WR004413.
37. Singh, A. K. (2003), Masters Thesis: Modeling land use land cover changes using cellular automata in a geo-spatial environment, International Insti-tute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation.
38. The Environmental Institute (TEI) (2004), Community development plan for Deerfield Massachusetts, Office of Geographic Information Analysis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
39. Thomas, B. G. (1997), Process modeling, in Advanced Physical Chemistry for Process Metallurgy, edited by M. Maeda, Academic Press.
40. Turner, M. G. (1990), Landscape changes in nine rural counties in Georgia, PERS, 56(3), 379-386.
41. Turner, M. G., R. Costanza, and F. Sklar (1989), Methods to evaluate the performance of spatial simulation models, Ecol. Modell, 48(1/2), 1-18.
42. Turner, B. L., III, W. B. Meyer, and D. L. Skole (1994), Global land use/land cover change: Toward an integrated program of study, Ambio, 23, 91-95.
43. U. S. Census (2005), State and County Quickfacts, U. S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, Available: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/.
44. U. S. Department of Agriculture-NRCS (1997), Riparian forest buffer handbook for the Chesapeake bay watershed, United States Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, Forest Service and Northeastern Area State & Private Forestry, NA-TT-02-97, Washington, DC.
45. U. S. Department of Agriculture -SCS (1972), National engineering handbook section 4 hydrology, Available: http://www.info.usda.gov/CED/ftp/CED/ neh630-ch07.pdf.
46. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1999), Protocols for developing nutrient TMDLs, Office of Water EPA 841-B-99-007, USEPA, Washington, D.C.
47. U. S. EPA (2001), Better assessment science integrating point and nonpoint sources. Office of science and technology, EPA 823-B-01-001, USEPA, Washington, D. C.
48. U. S. EPA (2003), American Heritage Rivers Site, http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/ heritage/rivers.html. Internet Accessed October 13.
49. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1995), Silvio O. Conte national fish and wildlife refuge final action plan and environmental impact statement, Hadley, MA.
50. USGS (United States Geological Survey) (1992), National land cover dataset, http://seamless.usgs.gov.
51. Van Hulst, R. (1979), On the dynamics of vegetation: Markov chains as models of succession, Vegetatio, 40, 3-14.
52. Williams, J. R. (1975), Sediment routing for agricultural watersheds, Water Resour. Bull. (currently JAWRA), 11, 965-974.
53. Wood, E. C., J. E. Lewis, G. G. Tappan, and R. W. Lietzow (1997), The development of a land cover change model for southern Senegal, presented at Land Use Modeling Workshop, EROS Data Center, Sioux Falls, S.Dak., June 5-6.