Modeling Dynamics in Land Use and Land Cover and Its Future Projection for the Amazon Biome

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

My overall concern with the manuscript are the claims which are made in terms of serving as a basis for policy-making, and assuming a relevance of the projection for 2044, based on an approach that assumes that conditions of change in land use and land cover observed between data from 1985 and 2014 would remain the same over the coming decades. The advantage of the approach is to provide a broad overview of changes observed in the period, and thereby also possibly entry points for policy on land use choices, nationally or more locally, but the socio-economic and institutional conditions connected to both policy and land use choices by different actors do change (sometimes quite rapidly), at the same time that a growing body of research is pointing to major shifts in the biophysical, ecological and climate systems. From this perspective, far from displaying the dominating persistence of forest cover underlined in the manuscript and projected for the coming years, the Amazon is undergoing radical tipping points, that will seriously impact global climate change, as well as being affected by changes elsewhere. Notably, the LUCC approach and categorisations do not capture wider hydrological cycles (such as the disproportionate impact of land use change in the east on weather patterns to the west) or the degradation and increased vulnerability of forest cover. 

My recommendation would therefore be to 1) substantially revise sections that build on the 2044 projection, 2) place the study within the wider field of literature on the Amazon, both for the background and with respect to conclusions 3) clarify the limitations of the approach as a basis for policy-making. To make use of the work the authors have conducted, a possibility would be to elaborate on some implications for current policy for areas affected by the land use and land cover changes that you describe in your results.

I would further recommend you to include updated literature, review your figures and maps (which do not always effectively communicate significant points), and collaborate with English speakers familiar with the field both to correct language and improve the clarity of your arguments/statements. 

You may find the following references useful in your revisions:

Boulton, C. A., Lenton, T. M., & Boers, N. (2022). Pronounced loss of Amazon rainforest resilience since the early 2000s. Nature Climate Change, 12(3), 271-278.

Albert, J. S., Carnaval, A. C., Flantua, S. G., Lohmann, L. G., Ribas, C. C., Riff, D., ... & Nobre, C. A. (2023). Human impacts outpace natural processes in the Amazon. Science, 379(6630), eabo5003.

Rosan, T., Sitch, S., O'Sullivan, M., Basso, L., Wilson, C., Silva, C. V., ... & Aragão, L. (2023). Amazon forests a net carbon source during drought and under high rates of human-disturbance.

Amazon forests a net carbon source during drought and under high rates of human-disturbance - Abstract - Europe PMC   - Preprint from Research Square, 08 Mar 2023
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2598162/v1

Armstrong McKay, D. I., Staal, A., Abrams, J. F., Winkelmann, R., Sakschewski, B., Loriani, S., Fetzer, I., Cornell, S.E., Rockström, J. & Lenton, T. M. (2022). Exceeding 1.5 C global warming could trigger multiple climate tipping points. Science, 377(6611), eabn7950.

Wunderling, N., Staal, A., Sakschewski, B., Hirota, M., Tuinenburg, O. A., Donges, J. F., ... & Winkelmann, R. (2022). Recurrent droughts increase risk of cascading tipping events by outpacing adaptive capacities in the Amazon rainforest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(32), e2120777119.

MacLaren, Neil G., Prosenjit Kundu, and Naoki Masuda. "Early warnings for multi-stage transitions in dynamics on networks." Journal of the Royal Society Interface 20, no. 200 (2023): 20220743.

Liu, T., Chen, D., Yang, L., Meng, J., Wang, Z., Ludescher, J., ... & Schellnhuber, H. J. (2023). Teleconnections among tipping elements in the Earth system. Nature Climate Change, 1-8.

Silveira, Marcus VF, Celso HL Silva‐Junior, Liana O. Anderson, and Luiz EOC Aragão. "Amazon fires in the 21st century: The year of 2020 in evidence." Global Ecology and Biogeography 31, no. 10 (2022): 2026-2040.

Dutra, D. J., Anderson, L. O., Fearnside, P. M., Graça, P. M. L. D. A., Yanai, A. M., Dalagnol, R., ... & Betts, R. (2023). Fire Dynamics in an Emerging Deforestation Frontier in Southwestern Amazonia, Brazil. Fire, 6(1), 2.

You may also find the Amazon assessment report useful, although its content is not entirely updated.

For instance, for the use of the word biome: Albert, J., Hoorn, C., Malhi, Y., Phillips, O., Encalada, A. C., & Steege, H. (2021). The multiple viewpoints for the Amazon: geographic limits and meanings. Amazon Assessment Report.

Chapter 15:

Costa FA, Schmink M, Hecht S, Assad ED, Bebbington DH, Brondizio ES, Fearnside PM, Garrett R, Heilpern S, McGrath D, Oliveira G, Pereira HS, Pinedo-Vazquez M. 2021. Chapter 15: Complex, Diverse and Changing Agribusiness and Livelihood Systems in the Amazon. In: Nobre C, Encalada A, Anderson E, Roca Alcazar FH, Bustamante M, Mena C, Peña-Claros M, Poveda G, Rodriguez JP, Saleska S, Trumbore S, Val AL, Villa Nova L, Abramovay R, Alencar A, Rodríguez Alzza C, Armenteras D, Artaxo P, Athayde S, Barretto Filho HT, Barlow J, Berenguer E, Bortolotto F, Costa FA, Costa MH, Cuvi N, Fearnside PM, Ferreira J, Flores BM, Frieri S, Gatti LV, Guayasamin JM, Hecht S, Hirota M, Hoorn C, Josse C, Lapola DM, Larrea C, Larrea-Alcazar DM, Lehm Ardaya Z, Malhi Y, Marengo JA, Melack J, Moraes R M, Moutinho P, Murmis MR, Neves EG, Paez B, Painter L, Ramos A, Rosero-Peña MC, Schmink M, Sist P, ter Steege H, Val P, van der Voort H, Varese M, Zapata-Ríos G (Eds). Amazon Assessment Report 2021. United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, New York, USA. Available from https://www.theamazonwewant.org/spa-reports/. DOI: 10.55161/CGAP7652

Chapter 19:

Berenguer E, Armenteras D, Lees AC, Fearnside PM, Smith CC, Alencar A, Almeida C, Aragão L, Barlow J, Bilbao B, Brando P, Bynoe P, Finer M, Flores BM, Jenkins CN, Silva Junior CHL, Souza C, García-Villacorta R, Nascimento N. 2021. Chapter 19: Drivers and Ecological Impacts of Deforestation and Forest Degradation. In: Nobre C, Encalada A, Anderson E, Roca Alcazar FH, Bustamante M, Mena C, Peña-Claros M, Poveda G, Rodriguez JP, Saleska S, Trumbore S, Val AL, Villa Nova L, Abramovay R, Alencar A, Rodríguez Alzza C, Armenteras D, Artaxo P, Athayde S, Barretto Filho HT, Barlow J, Berenguer E, Bortolotto F, Costa FA, Costa MH, Cuvi N, Fearnside PM, Ferreira J, Flores BM, Frieri S, Gatti LV, Guayasamin JM, Hecht S, Hirota M, Hoorn C, Josse C, Lapola DM, Larrea C, Larrea-Alcazar DM, Lehm Ardaya Z, Malhi Y, Marengo JA, Melack J, Moraes R M, Moutinho P, Murmis MR, Neves EG, Paez B, Painter L, Ramos A, Rosero-Peña MC, Schmink M, Sist P, ter Steege H, Val P, van der Voort H, Varese M, Zapata-Ríos G (Eds). Amazon Assessment Report 2021. United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, New York, USA. Available from https://www.theamazonwewant.org/spa-reports/. DOI: 10.55161/AIZJ1133

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is devoted to analyze the dynamics of land use and land cover of the Amazon biome over time through spatial modeling. From my personal standpoint, the paper is an important study of the Amazon region. Since forecasting is extremely important for assessing and predicting the anthropogenic load on ecosystems. However, I encourage the authors to put in additional work to further improve the quality of the manuscript.

1. In the introduction, the authors could emphasize the significance of the study and the potential for modeling of land using for the Amazon Biome. While the citations in the introduction are appropriate, more recent publications should be included in some areas.

2. The methodology used in the study needs to be clearer explained. The authors should clearly justify each methodology used, including more details. More details are needed in the land cover classification methodology. 

3. Why was 2044 chosen for forecasting? How will the model work if the changes are non-linear? Is it enough to study only one period of 1985-2014 for such a long-term forecast? Perhaps the good convergence of the classes is because training was carried out for the period up to 2014, and modeling for the period up to 2017. The difference is only 3 years. Will there be such accuracy with a difference in training and model in 30 years?

Please make sure to include more details.

Specific comments.

1. Please note Table 3, the percentage column is not wide enough to show the contribution of each landscape class, e.g. mining class has changed significantly in relative units.

2. Cramer-V test is not shown in detail in the methodology. Page 14, line 317.

3. Kappa is not used anymore. This is a poor estimator of a classification. Page 17, line 351.

4. In the methodology section, it is necessary to explain about the indicators M(m), N(m), P(m). Page 18, line 358.

5. How does the Markov Chain algorithm work? Is there a time correction in the algorithm? Or can it only predict for a time period determined by the training data?

6. Data for simulated 2017 or true? Figure 14b.

7. There is little information on other classes. Do these classes need to be modeled? Can it be shown that they contribute minimally to the reduction of the forest? Wouldn’t it be better to show the development of technogenic classes (agriculture, mining, etc.) as independent factors influencing the natural environment? Table 5.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors. I am grateful to review an interesting article "Modeling Dynamics in Land Use and Land Cover and its Future Projection for the Amazon Biome".

The article is high-quality, interesting, has a large number of advantages.

Among the shortcomings of the article can be noted.

1. Separate the tables from Figures 4, 5, 6. Do not give them pictures.

2. In the Discussion section, compare the changes in LULC in your region with changes in other regions of America and/or the world. This will improve the value of the article.

3. Substantially rewrite the "Methods" section. He looks very weak. I understood what you did, but I didn't understand exactly how you did it.

4. Provide websites or references to literature from where the data were used (section 2.2).

5. It is unclear how you carried out modeling and forecasting for 2044. Give a detailed calculation method.

Author Response

Please write down Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The revised manuscript has been substantially improved. There are, however, some remaining concerns that should be addressed before it is ready for publication.

1. The fundamental assumption underlying your simulation is that future conditions and dynamics for the next two decades will be very similar to the conditions and dynamics of the preceding decades. Please reword passages in section 4.6 Land Cover Simulation and Future Prediction for 2044 and the Conclusions (lines 2120- 2152), to make it clear that your study cannot serve as a “prediction” of anticipated future developments. I suggest wording along the following lines:

The modeling on which the projection for 2044 is based used data on changes between 1985 and 2014, and was validated for changes between 2014 and 2017. Conditions and dynamics in the Amazon for the coming two decades are likely to differ from preceding years, due to changes in policy, social and economic drivers, global and regional climate dynamics, as well as loss of biodiversity and ecosystem collapse (here you can insert some of the relevant references you already have in your manuscript). For instance, Silva-Junior et al. (2023) show that the rate of deforestation and forest degradation in protected Brazilian Amazon indigenous areas increased dramatically in the period 2019-2021, compared to the period 2013-2018, with changes driven by mining rather than conversion to pasture.

However, the projection of the present study can serve as a comprehensive baseline scenario against which future improvements or deterioration in land use and forest cover can be easily assessed. Findings also point to the localities and areas that will likely be most vulnerable to changes, and to the most significant types of land use change, thereby providing highly useful information to guide national policy and local conservation efforts.

(see Silva-Junior, C., Silva, F., Arisi, B., Mataveli, G., Pessôa, A., Carvalho, N., ... & Melo, M. (2023). Brazilian Amazon Indigenous Territories under deforestation pressure. Scientific Reports, 13 (1): 5851.  doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-32746-7. )

2.     The figures used to illustrate methodology and findings are all at the scale of the entire Amazon biome in Brazil or larger. Please add two figures with examples of areas of significant change and vulnerability, at a scale that allows to visually see and understand the details of the dynamics that you describe, with a short description of what has been happening in these localities. I recommend that you select localities of significant changes where other studies have been conducted (so that your own description of the figures can remain short, and so that you can reference these studies).

Besides helping the reader interpret your methodology and main findings, adding two figures at a more local scale will provide an indication of how your study can inform concrete policy measures to combat deforestation and degradation, clarify how your study links to studies at other scales, and also direct future research and policy interventions towards localities with high vulnerability.

3.     Please correct reference formats to be consistent with the journal style (e.g. author names should not be in capital letters).

4.     Check the paper for spelling or punctuation inconsistencies and minor issues of English language and style, as well as issues of in text referencing (e.g. lines 95-99: Some works already developed in the literature in Brazil and in the world prove the importance and applicability of the study of soil dynamics and occupation. One can cite the research of RLD [11], in which the authors performed the modeling of the dynamics of change in use and cover for the Amazon;.[18] assessed land use and land cover change in Pakistan;.[19] analyzed changes in land use in the city of Lagos, and [20] characterized land use changes in a temperate tropical forest in Mexico. – syntax is not clear, since “the authors” refers to 11, not to the following studies. Also, it would be preferable to place the number with the reference after each brief description of these studies).

 Some minor comments:

 Abstract: Please replace ”The use and coverage of land in 2044 indicates” with “The projected land use and coverage for 2044 suggests”

Lines 74-75: several ecosystem disservices

Line 546: [45] provides information – here you need to write the names of the authors before 45, since you cannot start a sentence this way.

Lines 1389-1392: [63] also studied the dynamics of land use and cover, using modeling to predict changes and soil degradation in the Misones Tropical Forest in Argentina. The results showed that 19% of the remaining native forest would be transformed into agriculture or cultivated forest by 2030, in addition to a significant loss of soil. [64], using similar methodology to this study, demonstrated  - please write names of authors before the references

Line 1416:   [73] demonstrates in his work – please write names of authors before the references

Line 1642: Additionally, the lowest percentage of changes is also noteworthy – please clarify which percentage you are referring to here

Line 1644: This trend coincides - which trend are you referring to here? Please be more explicit, since the preceding paragraph refers both to persistence and to changes, do you mean both persistence and changes, or only changes, and if so which changes?

Author Response

Caro Revisor,

Agradecemos o comentário positivo sobre as correções do manuscrito. Em anexo estão as respostas aos comentários.

Atenciosamente,

Elaine Cordeiro dos Santos

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I thank the authors for the explanations provided. In general, the manuscript makes a positive impression and can be published.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

We appreciate the positive comment regarding the manuscript corrections.

kind regards,

Elaine Cordeiro dos Santos.

Reviewer 3 Report

Article can be accepted in present form.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

We appreciate the positive comment regarding the manuscript corrections.

Kind regards

Elaine Cordeiro dos Santos