Spatiotemporal Monitoring of Urban Sprawl in a Coastal City Using GIS-Based Markov Chain and Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
Abstract
:1. Introduction and Theoretical Framework
- What are the spatial patterns of urban growth in the coastal governorate of Alexandria?
- What are the major driving forces that have a significant impact on land changes and what are its spatial characteristics?
- To what extent can future scenarios of LULC changes be successfully projected using remote sensing data and Machine Learning approaches?
- How will unplanned urbanization affect ecosystems and natural resources, especially agricultural land and biodiversity?
2. Study Area
3. Methods of Data Acquisition and Analysis
3.1. Satellite Imagery and LULC Classification
3.2. Accuracy Assessment of Classification
3.3. Markov Chain (MC)
3.4. Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP)
3.5. Spatial Trends
4. Results
4.1. Model Validation and Accuracy
4.2. Driving Forces of Urban Changes
4.3. Simulation of Potential Transition Changes
4.4. Observed LULC Changes
4.5. Spatial Forecasting of LULC Changes
4.6. Spatial Trends of LULC Changes
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- UN. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2019 Revision. Available online: https://population.un.org/wpp/publications/files/wpp2019_highlights.pdf (accessed on 25 July 2022).
- WorldBank. Urban Development. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/overview (accessed on 20 July 2021).
- Tibbetts, J. Coastal cities: Living on the edge. Environ. Health Perspect. 2002, 110, A674–A681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Moschetto, F.; Ribeiro, R.; De Freitas, D. Urban expansion, regeneration and socioenvironmental vulnerability in a mangrove ecosystem at the southeast coastal of São Paulo, Brazil. Ocean. Coast. Manag. 2020, 200, 105418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Small, C.; Nicholls, R.J. A global analysis of human settlement in coastal zones. J. Coast. Res. 2003, 19, 584–599. [Google Scholar]
- Neumann, B.; Vafeidis, A.T.; Zimmermann, J.; Nicholls, R.J. Future coastal population growth and exposure to sea-level rise and coastal flooding-a global assessment. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0118571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lee, Y.-C.; Ahern, J.; Yeh, C.-T. Ecosystem services in peri-urban landscapes: The effects of agricultural landscape change on ecosystem services in Taiwan’s western coastal plain. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2015, 139, 137–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baude, M.; Meyer, B.C.; Schindewolf, M. Land use change in an agricultural landscape causing degradation of soil based ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 659, 1526–1536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hersperger, A.M.; Grădinaru, S.R.; Siedentop, S. Towards a better understanding of land conversion at the urban-rural interface: Planning intentions and the effectiveness of growth management. J. Land Use Sci. 2020, 15, 644–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Güneralp, B.; Seto, K.C. Environmental impacts of urban growth from an integrated dynamic perspective: A case study of Shenzhen, South China. Glob. Environ. Change 2008, 18, 720–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simon, D. Urban environments: Issues on the peri-urban fringe. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2008, 33, 167–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malaque, I.R., III; Yokohari, M. Urbanization process and the changing agricultural landscape pattern in the urban fringe of Metro Manila, Philippines. Environ. Urban. 2007, 19, 191–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parsa, V.A.; Yavari, A.; Nejadi, A. Spatio-temporal analysis of land use/land cover pattern changes in Arasbaran Biosphere Reserve: Iran. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 2016, 2, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Maduako, I.N. Spatio-temporal urban Growth dynamics of Lagos Metropolitan Region of Nigeria based on Hybrid methods for LULC modeling and prediction. Eur. J. Remote Sens. 2018, 51, 251–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Almeida, C.M.D.; Monteiro, A.M.V.; Câmara, G.; Soares-Filho, B.S.; Cerqueira, G.C.; Pennachin, C.L.; Batty, M. GIS and remote sensing as tools for the simulation of urban land-use change. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2005, 26, 759–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kaliraj, S.; Chandrasekar, N.; Ramachandran, K.; Srinivas, Y.; Saravanan, S. Coastal landuse and land cover change and transformations of Kanyakumari coast, India using remote sensing and GIS. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 2017, 20, 169–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Long, H. Land use transitions and their dynamic mechanism: The case of the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain. J. Geogr. Sci. 2016, 26, 515–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Costache, R.; Bao Pham, Q.; Corodescu-Roșca, E.; Cîmpianu, C.; Hong, H.; Thi Thuy Linh, N.; Ming Fai, C.; Najah Ahmed, A.; Vojtek, M.; Muhammed Pandhiani, S. Using GIS, remote sensing, and machine learning to highlight the correlation between the land-use/land-cover changes and flash-flood potential. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khawaldah, H.; Farhan, I.; Alzboun, N. Simulation and prediction of land use and land cover change using GIS, remote sensing and CA-Markov model. Glob. J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 2020, 6, 215–232. [Google Scholar]
- Mansour, S.; Al-Belushi, M.; Al-Awadhi, T. Monitoring land use and land cover changes in the mountainous cities of Oman using GIS and CA-Markov modelling techniques. Land Use Policy 2020, 91, 104414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Munthali, M.; Mustak, S.; Adeola, A.; Botai, J.; Singh, S.; Davis, N. Modelling land use and land cover dynamics of Dedza district of Malawi using hybrid Cellular Automata and Markov model. Remote Sens. Appl. Soc. Environ. 2020, 17, 100276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guzy, M.R.; Smith, C.L.; Bolte, J.P.; Hulse, D.W.; Gregory, S.V. Policy research using agent-based modeling to assess future impacts of urban expansion into farmlands and forests. Ecol. Soc. 2008, 13, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mena, C.F.; Walsh, S.J.; Frizzelle, B.G.; Xiaozheng, Y.; Malanson, G.P. Land use change on household farms in the Ecuadorian Amazon: Design and implementation of an agent-based model. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31, 210–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Singh, V.K. An Algorithm Development Using Agent-Based Modeling and Simulation for Land Use Land Cover Change under Geospatial Framework. Ph.D. Thesis, Indian Institute of Remote Sensing (ISRO), Dehradun, India, 2014; p. 90. [Google Scholar]
- Tian, G.; Ma, B.; Xu, X.; Liu, X.; Xu, L.; Liu, X.; Xiao, L.; Kong, L. Simulation of urban expansion and encroachment using cellular automata and multi-agent system model—A case study of Tianjin metropolitan region, China. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 70, 439–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Kong, X.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Y. Simulating the conversion of rural settlements to town land based on multi-agent systems and cellular automata. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e79300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mustafa, A.; Cools, M.; Saadi, I.; Teller, J. Coupling agent-based, cellular automata and logistic regression into a hybrid urban expansion model (HUEM). Land Use Policy 2017, 69, 529–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, D.; Zheng, X.; Wang, H. Land-use Simulation and Decision-Support system (LandSDS): Seamlessly integrating system dynamics, agent-based model, and cellular automata. Ecol. Model. 2020, 417, 108924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; Helmer, E.H.; Gao, F.; Liu, D.; Chen, J.; Lefsky, M.A. A flexible spatiotemporal method for fusing satellite images with different resolutions. Remote Sens. Environ. 2016, 172, 165–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kafy, A.-A.; Shuvo, R.M.; Naim, M.N.H.; Sikdar, M.S.; Chowdhury, R.R.; Islam, M.A.; Sarker, M.H.S.; Khan, M.H.H.; Kona, M.A. Remote sensing approach to simulate the land use/land cover and seasonal land surface temperature change using machine learning algorithms in a fastest-growing megacity of Bangladesh. Remote Sens. Appl. Soc. Environ. 2021, 21, 100463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Basse, R.M.; Omrani, H.; Charif, O.; Gerber, P.; Bódis, K. Land use changes modelling using advanced methods: Cellular automata and artificial neural networks. The spatial and explicit representation of land cover dynamics at the cross-border region scale. Appl. Geogr. 2014, 53, 160–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Guo, A.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Li, X. Simulation of landscape spatial layout evolution in rural-urban fringe areas: A case study of Ganjingzi District. GISci. Remote Sens. 2019, 56, 388–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chettry, V.; Surawar, M. Delineating Urban Growth Boundary Using Remote sensing, ANN-MLP and CA model: A Case Study of Thiruvananthapuram Urban Agglomeration, India. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 2021, 49, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.S.; Tanaka, M. Impacts of pollution on coastal and marine ecosystems including coastal and marine fisheries and approach for management: A review and synthesis. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2004, 48, 624–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rajakumari, S.; Sundari, S.; Meenambikai, M.; Divya, V. Impact analysis of land use dynamics on coastal features of Deshapran block, Purba East Medinipur, West Bengal. J. Coast. Conserv. 2020, 24, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berlanga-Robles, C.A.; Ruiz-Luna, A. Integrating remote sensing techniques, geographical information systems (GIS), and stochastic models for monitoring land use and land cover (LULC) changes in the northern coastal region of Nayarit, Mexico. GISci. Remote Sens. 2011, 48, 245–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdullah, A.Y.M.; Masrur, A.; Adnan, M.S.G.; Baky, M.; Al, A.; Hassan, Q.K.; Dewan, A. Spatio-temporal patterns of land use/land cover change in the heterogeneous coastal region of Bangladesh between 1990 and 2017. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hosseini, S.; Gholami, H.; Esmaeilpoor, Y. Assessment of land use and land cover change detection by using remote sensing and gis techniques in the coastal deserts, South of Iran. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2019, 42, 489–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rahman, M.T.; Aldosary, A.S.; Mortoja, M. Modeling future land cover changes and their effects on the land surface temperatures in the Saudi Arabian eastern coastal city of Dammam. Land 2017, 6, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hussein, K.; Alkaabi, K.; Ghebreyesus, D.; Liaqat, M.U.; Sharif, H.O. Land use/land cover change along the Eastern Coast of the UAE and its impact on flooding risk. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk 2020, 11, 112–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- El-Hattab, M.M. Applying post classification change detection technique to monitor an Egyptian coastal zone (Abu Qir Bay). Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 2016, 19, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- El-Gammal, M.I.; Ali, R.R.; Eissa, R. Land use assessment of barren areas in Damietta Governorate, Egypt using remote sensing. Egypt. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2014, 1, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Halmy, M.W.A.; Gessler, P.E.; Hicke, J.A.; Salem, B.B. Land use/land cover change detection and prediction in the north-western coastal desert of Egypt using Markov-CA. Appl. Geogr. 2015, 63, 101–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shalaby, A.; Tateishi, R. Remote sensing and GIS for mapping and monitoring land cover and land-use changes in the Northwestern coastal zone of Egypt. Appl. Geogr. 2007, 27, 28–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abd El-Kawy, O.; Rød, J.; Ismail, H.; Suliman, A. Land use and land cover change detection in the western Nile delta of Egypt using remote sensing data. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31, 483–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El-Zeiny, A.M.; Effat, H.A. Environmental monitoring of spatiotemporal change in land use/land cover and its impact on land surface temperature in El-Fayoum governorate, Egypt. Remote Sens. Appl. Soc. Environ. 2017, 8, 266–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esmail, M.; Masria, A.; Negm, A. Monitoring land use/land cover changes around Damietta Promontory, Egypt, using RS/GIS. Procedia Eng. 2016, 154, 936–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Radwan, T.M.; Blackburn, G.A.; Whyatt, J.D.; Atkinson, P.M. Dramatic loss of agricultural land due to urban expansion threatens food security in the Nile Delta, Egypt. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ferro, L.; Magli, G. The astronomical orientation of the urban plan of Alexandria. Oxf. J. Archaeol. 2012, 31, 381–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Heysham, N. Alexandria’s cultural landscapes: Historical parks between originality and deterioration. WIT Trans. Built Environ. 2017, 170, 73–83. [Google Scholar]
- Azaz, L. Dilemma of Vibrant City and Endless Urban Growth, Lessons from Alexandria, Egypt. In Proceedings of the REAL CORP 2015. PLAN TOGETHER–RIGHT NOW–OVERALL. From Vision to Reality for Vibrant Cities and Regions. Proceedings of 20th International Conference on Urban Planning, Regional Development and Information Society, Ghent, Belgium, 5–6 May 2015; pp. 759–765. [Google Scholar]
- Von Glasow, R.; Jickells, T.D.; Baklanov, A.; Carmichael, G.R.; Church, T.M.; Gallardo, L.; Hughes, C.; Kanakidou, M.; Liss, P.S.; Mee, L. Megacities and large urban agglomerations in the coastal zone: Interactions between atmosphere, land, and marine ecosystems. Ambio 2013, 42, 13–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Todd, P.A.; Heery, E.C.; Loke, L.H.; Thurstan, R.H.; Kotze, D.J.; Swan, C. Towards an urban marine ecology: Characterizing the drivers, patterns and processes of marine ecosystems in coastal cities. Oikos 2019, 128, 1215–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wells, P.G. Biomonitoring the health of coastal marine ecosystems–the roles and challenges of microscale toxicity tests. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 1999, 39, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Andres, M.; Barragan, J.M. Development of coastal cities and agglomerations: Pressure and impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems. Coast. Cities Sustain. Future 2015, 148, 63–71. [Google Scholar]
- Frihy, O.E.; Dewidar, K.M.; El Raey, M.M. Evaluation of coastal problems at Alexandria, Egypt. Ocean Coast. Manag. 1996, 30, 281–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El-Asmar, H.; Ahmed, M.; Taha, M.; Assal, E. Human impacts on geological and cultural heritage in the coastal zone west of Alexandria to Al-Alamein, Egypt. Geoheritage 2012, 4, 263–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohamed, S.A. Coastal vulnerability assessment using GIS-Based multicriteria analysis of Alexandria-northwestern Nile Delta, Egypt. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 2020, 163, 103751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seto, K.C.; Fragkias, M.; Güneralp, B.; Reilly, M.K. A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e23777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samat, N.; Hasni, R.; Elhadary, Y.A.E. Modelling land use changes at the peri-urban areas using geographic information systems and cellular automata model. J. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 4, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; Qian, T.; Wei, Y. Do high-speed railways accelerate urban land expansion in China? A study based on the multi-stage difference-in-differences model. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2020, 71, 100846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, X.; Liu, X.; Li, X.; Chen, Y.; Tian, H.; Yao, Y. Delineating multi-scenario urban growth boundaries with a CA-based FLUS model and morphological method. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2018, 177, 47–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xian, G.; Crane, M. Assessments of urban growth in the Tampa Bay watershed using remote sensing data. Remote Sens. Environ. 2005, 97, 203–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fazal, S. The need for preserving farmland: A case study from a predominantly agrarian economy (India). Landsc. Urban Plan. 2001, 55, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinuzzi, S.; Gould, W.A.; González, O.M.R. Land development, land use, and urban sprawl in Puerto Rico integrating remote sensing and population census data. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 79, 288–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaur, S.; Mittal, A.; Bandyopadhyay, A.; Holman, I.; Singh, R. Spatio-temporal analysis of land use and land cover change: A systematic model inter-comparison driven by integrated modelling techniques. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2020, 41, 9229–9255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viana, C.M.; Rocha, J. Evaluating Dominant Land Use/Land Cover Changes and Predicting Future Scenario in a Rural Region Using a Memoryless Stochastic Method. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foody, G.M. Sample size determination for image classification accuracy assessment and comparison. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2009, 30, 5273–5291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verma, P.; Raghubanshi, A.; Srivastava, P.K.; Raghubanshi, A. Appraisal of kappa-based metrics and disagreement indices of accuracy assessment for parametric and nonparametric techniques used in LULC classification and change detection. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 2020, 6, 1045–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bratley, K.; Ghoneim, E. Modeling urban encroachment on the agricultural land of the eastern Nile Delta using remote sensing and a GIS-based Markov chain model. Land 2018, 7, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Saeidi, S.; Mohammadzadeh, M.; Salmanmahiny, A.; Mirkarimi, S.H. Performance evaluation of multiple methods for landscape aesthetic suitability mapping: A comparative study between multi-criteria evaluation, logistic regression and multi-layer perceptron neural network. Land Use Policy 2017, 67, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Satellite/Sensor | Pixel Size | Path/Raw | Date Acquired | Product Type | Correction |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Landsat 7 ETM | 30 m | 178/038 | 9 November 2000 | L1TP | Scanline |
Landsat 7 ETM | 30 m | 178/038 | 27 April 2010 | L1TP | - |
Landsat 8 OLI-TIRS | 30 m | 178/038 | 7 October 2020 | L1TP | - |
Parameters | Suitability for Expansion | Rationale for Urbanization | Data Source |
---|---|---|---|
Elevation | −1 m to −10 m = high suitability −11 m to 40 m = decreasing suitability −41 m to 90 m = lowest suitability | Relatively low elevations are more suitable for urban development and expansion than high rugged lands [59,60,61]. | Elevation data were extracted from DEM (30 m), USGS: http//www.edc.usgs.gov (accessed on 11 July 2021). |
Slopes | 0 degree to 40 degree = high suitability 41 degrees to 70 degrees = decreasing suitability 71 km to 97 degrees = lowest suitability | Upslopes and steeper lands are less suitable for built-up expansion, while lower slopes are considered the most suitable for residential development [20]. | Slopes generation from DEM (30 m), USGS: source: http//www.edc.usgs.gov (accessed on 19 June 2021) |
Proximity to Points of Interests | 10 m to 50 km = high suitability 51 m to 1000 m = decreasing suitability 1001 m to 13,000 m = lowest suitability | Major public and private infrastructure and facilities such as schools, colleges, universities, hospitals and banks play significant roles in increasing residential expansion, particularly over surrounded vacant land [62]. | Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), 2021. https://www.capmas.gov.eg/ (accessed on 3 August 2021) |
Proximity to Railways | <1 km = high suitability 1 km to 15 km = decreasing suitability 15 km to 22 km = lowest suitability | Railway network is considered an influential driving force on urban development and often new added stations accelerate urban expansion [63,64]. | Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), 2021. https://www.capmas.gov.eg/ (accessed on 10 May 2021) |
Proximity to Urban Centres | <1 km to 1 km = high suitability 1 km to 6 km = decreasing suitability 6 km to 12 km = lowest suitability | Agricultural and barren lands near the existing urban centres are often high in price and highly suitable for urban development and constructing new housing units; the shorter the distance, the quicker the land transformation into a built-up area [65]. | Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), 2021. https://www.capmas.gov.eg/ (accessed on 10 May 2021) |
Proximity to Major Roads | <1 km to 1 km = high suitability 1 km to 6 km = decreasing suitability 6 km to 9 km = lowest suitability | Vacant and agricultural lands near highways and major roads are highly accessible and more valuable; subsequently, are highly suitable for housing construction and urbanization [64]. | Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), 2021. https://www.capmas.gov.eg/ (accessed on 10 May 2021) |
Population Concentration (14 to 29 Age Group) | Very high density = high suitability High to medium = decreasing suitability Low to very low = lowest suitability | Vacant, agricultural and desert lands near densely inhabited neighborhoods are more attractive than land adjacent to sparsely populated settlements [20,66]. | Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), 2021. https://www.capmas.gov.eg/ (accessed on 10 May 2021) |
Proximity to Water Canals | <1 km to 1 km = high suitability 1 km to 3 km = decreasing suitability 3 km to 6 km = lowest suitability | Proximity to water canals is a vital factor which accelerates urban expansion where households prefer to construct new houses along water canals. Thus, land near water canals is highly susceptible to urbanization [67]. | Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), 2021. https://www.capmas.gov.eg/ (accessed on 10 May 2021) |
Parameter | Outcome |
---|---|
Input layer neurons | 8 |
Hidden layer neurons | 4 |
Output layer neurons | 2 |
Requested samples per class | 10,000 |
Final learning rate | 0.0000 |
Momentum factor | 0.5 |
Sigmoid constant | 1 |
Acceptable RMS | 0.01 |
Iterations | 10,000 |
Training RMS | 0.2196 |
Testing RMS | 0.2217 |
Accuracy rate | 95.94% |
Skill measure | 0.9188 |
Model | Accuracy (%) | Skill Measure | Influence Order |
---|---|---|---|
With all variables | 95.94 | 0.9188 | N/A |
Var. 1 constant (Elevations) | 62.07 | 0.2414 | 1 (most influential) |
Var. 2 constant (Slope) | 96.80 | 0.9360 | 7 |
Var. 3 constant (Facilities) | 95.94 | 0.9188 | 6 |
Var. 4 constant (Railways) | 95.94 | 0.9188 | 5 |
Var. 5 constant (Urban Centres) | 95.94 | 0.9188 | 4 |
Var. 6 constant (Major Roads) | 95.94 | 0.9188 | 3 |
Var. 7 constant (Populations) | 95.94 | 0.9188 | 2 |
Var. 8 constant (Water canals) | 95.94 | 0.9188 | 8 (least influential) |
Model | Variables Included | Accuracy (%) | Skill Measure |
---|---|---|---|
With all variables | All variables | 95.94 | 0.9188 |
Step 1: var. [2] constant | [1,3–8] | 96.80 | 0.9360 |
Step 2: var. [2,3] constant | [1,4–8] | 96.80 | 0.9360 |
Step 3: var. [2–4] constant | [1,5–8] | 96.80 | 0.9360 |
Step 4: var. [2–5] constant | [1,6–8] | 96.80 | 0.9360 |
Step 5: var. [2–6] constant | [1,7,8] | 96.80 | 0.9360 |
Step 6: var. [2–6,8] constant | [1,7] | 96.80 | 0.9360 |
Step 7: var. [2–8] constant | [1] | 96.79 | 0.9358 |
LULC Type | Area in 2010 (ha) | Area in 2020 (ha) | Change (2010–2020) |
---|---|---|---|
Built-up | 42,599.45 | 55,076.96 | 12,477.51 |
Agriculture | 78,873.57 | 71,433.18 | −7440.39 |
Bare land | 31,549.08 | 26,644.17 | −4904.91 |
Water | 20,735.90 | 20,735.90 | 0.00 |
LULC Type | Area in 2020 (ha) | Area in 2030 (ha) | Change (2020–2030) |
---|---|---|---|
Built-up | 55,076.96 | 71,543.99 | 16,467.03 |
Bare land | 26,644.17 | 21,200.25 | −5443.92 |
Agriculture | 71,433.19 | 60,410.08 | −11,023.11 |
Water | 20,735.90 | 20,735.90 | 0.00 |
LULC Type | Area in 2030 (ha) | Area in 2040 (ha) | Change (2030–2040) |
Built-up | 71,543.99 | 81,982.95 | 10,438.96 |
Bare land | 21,200.25 | 18,047.80 | −3152.45 |
Agriculture | 60,410.08 | 53,123.58 | −7286.50 |
Water | 20,735.90 | 20,735.90 | 0.00 |
LULC Type | Area in 2040 (ha) | Area in 2050 (ha) | Change (2040–2050) |
Built-up | 81,982.95 | 91,074.71 | 9091.76 |
Bare land | 18,047.80 | 15,213.01 | −2834.79 |
Agriculture | 53,123.58 | 46,866.61 | −6256.97 |
Water | 20,735.90 | 20,735.90 | 0.00 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mansour, S.; Ghoneim, E.; El-Kersh, A.; Said, S.; Abdelnaby, S. Spatiotemporal Monitoring of Urban Sprawl in a Coastal City Using GIS-Based Markov Chain and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15030601
Mansour S, Ghoneim E, El-Kersh A, Said S, Abdelnaby S. Spatiotemporal Monitoring of Urban Sprawl in a Coastal City Using GIS-Based Markov Chain and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Remote Sensing. 2023; 15(3):601. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15030601
Chicago/Turabian StyleMansour, Shawky, Eman Ghoneim, Asmaa El-Kersh, Sayed Said, and Shimaa Abdelnaby. 2023. "Spatiotemporal Monitoring of Urban Sprawl in a Coastal City Using GIS-Based Markov Chain and Artificial Neural Network (ANN)" Remote Sensing 15, no. 3: 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15030601
APA StyleMansour, S., Ghoneim, E., El-Kersh, A., Said, S., & Abdelnaby, S. (2023). Spatiotemporal Monitoring of Urban Sprawl in a Coastal City Using GIS-Based Markov Chain and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Remote Sensing, 15(3), 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15030601