IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v5y2016i3p25-d74945.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis and Prediction of Land Use Changes Related to Invasive Species and Major Driving Forces in the State of Connecticut

Author

Listed:
  • Wenjie Wang

    (Department of Geography, University of Connecticut, 215 Glenbrook Rd, Storrs, CT 06269, USA)

  • Chuanrong Zhang

    (Department of Geography, University of Connecticut, 215 Glenbrook Rd, Storrs, CT 06269, USA)

  • Jenica M. Allen

    (Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of New Hampshire, 56 College Road, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

  • Weidong Li

    (Department of Geography, University of Connecticut, 215 Glenbrook Rd, Storrs, CT 06269, USA)

  • Mark A. Boyer

    (Department of Geography, University of Connecticut, 215 Glenbrook Rd, Storrs, CT 06269, USA)

  • Kathleen Segerson

    (Department Economics, University of Connecticut, 365 Fairfield Way, Storrs, CT 06269, USA)

  • John A. Silander

    (Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, 75 N. Eagleville Road, Storrs, CT 06269, USA)

Abstract

Land use and land cover (LULC) patterns play an important role in the establishment and spread of invasive plants. Understanding LULC changes is useful for early detection and management of land-use change to reduce the spread of invasive species. The primary objective of this study is to analyze and predict LULC changes in Connecticut. LULC maps for 1996, 2001 and 2006 were selected to analyze past land cover changes, and then potential LULC distribution in 2018 was predicted using the Multi-Layer Perceptron Markov Chain (MLP_MC) model. This study shows that the total area of forest has been decreasing, mainly caused by urban development and other human activity in Connecticut. The model predicts that the study area will lose 5535 ha of deciduous forest and gain 3502 ha of built-up area from 2006 to 2018. Moreover, forests near built-up areas and agriculture lands appear to be more vulnerable to conversion. Changes in LULC may result in subtle spatial shifts in invasion risk by an abundant invasive shrub, Japanese barberry ( Berberis thunbergii ). The gain of developed areas at the landscape scale was most closely linked to increased future invasion risk. Our findings suggest that the forest conversion needs to be controlled and well managed to help mitigate future invasion risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenjie Wang & Chuanrong Zhang & Jenica M. Allen & Weidong Li & Mark A. Boyer & Kathleen Segerson & John A. Silander, 2016. "Analysis and Prediction of Land Use Changes Related to Invasive Species and Major Driving Forces in the State of Connecticut," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:3:p:25-:d:74945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/3/25/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/3/25/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donato S. La Mela Veca & Sebastiano Cullotta & Sebastiano Sferlazza & Federico G. Maetzke, 2016. "Anthropogenic Influences in Land Use/Land Cover Changes in Mediterranean Forest Landscapes in Sicily," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, January.
    2. Olson, Lars J., 2006. "The Economics of Terrestrial Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 178-194, April.
    3. Ilkwon Kim & Quang Bao Le & Soo Jin Park & John Tenhunen & Thomas Koellner, 2014. "Driving Forces in Archetypical Land-Use Changes in a Mountainous Watershed in East Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Pimentel, David & Zuniga, Rodolfo & Morrison, Doug, 2005. "Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 273-288, February.
    5. MacDonald, James M. & O'Donoghue, Erik J. & McBride, William D. & Nehring, Richard F. & Sandretto, Carmen L. & Mosheim, Roberto, 2007. "Profits, Costs, and the Changing Structure of Dairy Farming," Economic Research Report 6704, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Nora L. Álvarez-Berríos & Daniel J. Redo & T. Mitchell Aide & Matthew L. Clark & Ricardo Grau, 2013. "Land Change in the Greater Antilles between 2001 and 2010," Land, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-27, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ruci Wang & Hao Hou & Yuji Murayama, 2018. "Scenario-Based Simulation of Tianjin City Using a Cellular Automata–Markov Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Jian Gong & Jingye Li & Jianxin Yang & Shicheng Li & Wenwu Tang, 2017. "Land Use and Land Cover Change in the Qinghai Lake Region of the Tibetan Plateau and Its Impact on Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, July.
    3. Amah Akodéwou & Johan Oszwald & Slim Saïdi & Laurent Gazull & Sêmihinva Akpavi & Koffi Akpagana & Valéry Gond, 2020. "Land Use and Land Cover Dynamics Analysis of the Togodo Protected Area and Its Surroundings in Southeastern Togo, West Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-23, July.
    4. Ruiting Zhai & Chuanrong Zhang & Weidong Li & Mark A. Boyer & Dean Hanink, 2016. "Prediction of Land Use Change in Long Island Sound Watersheds Using Nighttime Light Data," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Motuma Shiferaw Regasa & Michael Nones, 2022. "Past and Future Land Use/Land Cover Changes in the Ethiopian Fincha Sub-Basin," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Behnoosh Abbasnezhad & Jesse B. Abrams & Jeffrey Hepinstall-Cymerman, 2023. "Incorporating Social and Policy Drivers into Land-Use and Land-Cover Projection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Megersa Kebede Leta & Tamene Adugna Demissie & Jens Tränckner, 2021. "Modeling and Prediction of Land Use Land Cover Change Dynamics Based on Land Change Modeler (LCM) in Nashe Watershed, Upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-24, March.
    8. Baolei Zhang & Qiaoyun Zhang & Chaoyang Feng & Qingyu Feng & Shumin Zhang, 2017. "Understanding Land Use and Land Cover Dynamics from 1976 to 2014 in Yellow River Delta," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-20, March.
    9. Markos Mathewos & Semaria Moga Lencha & Misgena Tsegaye, 2022. "Land Use and Land Cover Change Assessment and Future Predictions in the Matenchose Watershed, Rift Valley Basin, Using CA-Markov Simulation," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-28, September.
    10. Peter Chrastina & Pavel Hronček & Bohuslava Gregorová & Michaela Žoncová, 2020. "Land-Use Changes of Historical Rural Landscape—Heritage, Protection, and Sustainable Ecotourism: Case Study of Slovak Exclave Čív (Piliscsév) in Komárom-Esztergom County (Hungary)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-25, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liu, Yanxu & Sims, Charles, 2016. "Spatial-dynamic externalities and coordination in invasive species control," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 23-38.
    2. Jardine, Sunny L. & Sanchirico, James N., 2018. "Estimating the cost of invasive species control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 242-257.
    3. Charles Perrings, 2016. "Options for managing the infectious animal and plant disease risks of international trade," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 27-35, February.
    4. İ. Esra Büyüktahtakın & Robert G. Haight, 2018. "A review of operations research models in invasive species management: state of the art, challenges, and future directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 357-403, December.
    5. Courtois, Pierre & Figuieres, Charles & Mulier, Chloe & Weill, Joakim, 2018. "A Cost–Benefit Approach for Prioritizing Invasive Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 607-620.
    6. Paul Mwebaze & Jim Monaghan & Nicola Spence & Alan MacLeod & Martin Hare & Brian Revell, 2010. "Modelling the Risks Associated with the Increased Importation of Fresh Produce from Emerging Supply Sources Outside the EU to the UK," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 97-121, February.
    7. McDermott, Shana M. & Finnoff, David C., 2016. "Impact of repeated human introductions and the Allee effect on invasive species spread," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 329(C), pages 100-111.
    8. Olson, Lars J., 2006. "The Economics of Terrestrial Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 178-194, April.
    9. Kıbış, Eyyüb Y. & Büyüktahtakın, İ. Esra, 2017. "Optimizing invasive species management: A mixed-integer linear programming approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 308-321.
    10. Shuyao Wu & Jiao Huang & Shuangcheng Li, 2020. "Classifying ecosystem disservices and comparing their effects with ecosystem services in Beijing, China," Papers 2001.01605, arXiv.org.
    11. Charles Perrings, 2016. "Options for managing the infectious animal and plant disease risks of international trade," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 27-35, February.
    12. Onal, Sevilay & Akhundov, Najmaddin & Büyüktahtakın, İ. Esra & Smith, Jennifer & Houseman, Gregory R., 2020. "An integrated simulation-optimization framework to optimize search and treatment path for controlling a biological invader," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    13. Haight, Robert G. & Polasky, Stephen, 2010. "Optimal control of an invasive species with imperfect information about the level of infestation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 519-533, November.
    14. Melstrom, Richard T., 2014. "Managing apparent competition between the feral pigs and native foxes of Santa Cruz Island," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 157-162.
    15. Haden Chomphosy, William & Manning, Dale T. & Shwiff, Stephanie & Weiler, Stephan, 2023. "Optimal R&D investment in the management of invasive species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    16. Katarina Elofsson & Ing-Marie Gren, 2015. "Regulating invasive species with different life history," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 113-136, July.
    17. Mwebaze, P. & MacLeod, A. & Tomlinson, D. & Barois, H. & Rijpma, J., 2010. "Economic valuation of the influence of invasive alien species on the economy of the Seychelles islands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2614-2623, October.
    18. Haab, Timothy C. & Whitehead, John C. & Parsons, George R. & Price, Jammie, 2010. "Effects of information about invasive species on risk perception and seafood demand by gender and race," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 586-599, November.
    19. Martínez, Yolanda & Cirujeda, Alicia & Gómez, Miguel I. & Marí, Ana I. & Pardo, Gabriel, 2018. "Bioeconomic model for optimal control of the invasive weed Zea mays subspp. (teosinte) in Spain," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 116-127.
    20. Yajie Liu & Jon Olaf Olaussen & Anders Skonhoft, 2011. "When a Fish is a Fish: The Economic Impacts of Escaped Farmed Fish," Working Paper Series 12011, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:3:p:25-:d:74945. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.