IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i22p12852-d683792.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trends in United States Human Footprint Revealed by New Spatial Metrics of Urbanization and Per Capita Land Change

Author

Listed:
  • John B. Vogler

    (Center for Geospatial Analytics, North Carolina State University, 2800 Faucette Drive, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)

  • Jelena Vukomanovic

    (Center for Geospatial Analytics, North Carolina State University, 2800 Faucette Drive, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
    Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, North Carolina State University, 2820 Faucette Drive, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)

Abstract

Accelerations in population growth and urban expansion are transforming landscapes worldwide and represent a major sustainability challenge. In the United States, land conversion to impervious surfaces has outpaced population increases, yet there are few spatial metrics of urbanization and per capita land change available nationwide for assessing local to regional trends in human footprint. We quantified changes (2000–2010) in housing density, imperviousness, per capita land consumption, and land-use efficiency for block groups of the contiguous U.S. and examined national patterns and variation in these metrics along the urban–rural gradient and by megaregion. Growth in housing (+13.6%) and impervious development (+10.7%) resulted in losses of rural lands, primarily due to exurbanization and suburbanization. Mean per capita consumption increased in all density classes but was over 8.5 times greater in rural lands than in exurban, suburban, and urban areas. Urban and suburban areas had significantly lower mean consumption, yet change was unsustainable in 60% of these areas. Megaregions across the sprawling Sun Belt, spanning from Arizona to North Carolina, grew most unsustainably, especially compared to regions in the Pacific Northwest and Front Range. This work establishes 21st-century benchmarks that decision-makers can use to track local and regional per capita land change and sustainable growth in the U.S.; however, these metrics of the form, extent, rate, and efficiency of urbanization can be applied anywhere concurrent built-up area and population data are available over time. Our web mapping application allows anyone to explore spatial and temporal trends in human footprint and download metrics, and it is designed to be easily updatable with future releases of validated developed land cover, protected areas, and decennial Census data.

Suggested Citation

  • John B. Vogler & Jelena Vukomanovic, 2021. "Trends in United States Human Footprint Revealed by New Spatial Metrics of Urbanization and Per Capita Land Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-22, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:22:p:12852-:d:683792
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12852/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12852/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert I. McDonald & Andressa V. Mansur & Fernando Ascensão & M’lisa Colbert & Katie Crossman & Thomas Elmqvist & Andrew Gonzalez & Burak Güneralp & Dagmar Haase & Maike Hamann & Oliver Hillel & Kangn, 2020. "Research gaps in knowledge of the impact of urban growth on biodiversity," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(1), pages 16-24, January.
    2. Saleh Ahmed & Douglas Jackson-Smith, 2019. "Impacts of Spatial Patterns of Rural and Exurban Residential Development on Agricultural Trends in the Intermountain West," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, August.
    3. Lei Zhao, 2018. "Urban growth and climate adaptation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(12), pages 1034-1034, December.
    4. Narayan Sastry & Jesse Gregory, 2014. "The Location of Displaced New Orleans Residents in the Year After Hurricane Katrina," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 51(3), pages 753-775, June.
    5. Reisig, Dawson & Mullan, Katrina & Hansen, Andrew & Powell, Scott & Theobald, David & Ulrich, Rachel, 2021. "Natural amenities and low-density residential development: Magnitude and spatial scale of influences," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Pickard, Brian R. & Daniel, Jessica & Mehaffey, Megan & Jackson, Laura E. & Neale, Anne, 2015. "EnviroAtlas: A new geospatial tool to foster ecosystem services science and resource management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 45-55.
    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. Lin Li & Kaixu Zhao & Xinyu Wang & Sidong Zhao & Xingguang Liu & Weiwei Li, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Driving Mechanism of Urbanization in Small Cities: Case Study from Guangxi," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-34, March.
    2. Dakota B. Walker & Alican Mertan & Joshua Farley & Donna Rizzo & Travis Reynolds, 2024. "Land Stewardship and Development Behaviors Under an Ecological-Impact-Weighted Land Value Tax Scheme: A Proof-of-Concept Agent-Based Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-25, October.

    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. Song, Weize & Yang, Wenqing & Wang, Na & Wang, Can & Li, Zheng & Ou, Yifu & Zhang, Xiaoling, 2024. "How does industrial transformative process shape the spatial dynamics of urban development?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    2. Mohamed F. Sallam & Chelsea Fizer & Andrew N. Pilant & Pai-Yei Whung, 2017. "Systematic Review: Land Cover, Meteorological, and Socioeconomic Determinants of Aedes Mosquito Habitat for Risk Mapping," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Kate Burrows & Ji-Young Son & Michelle L. Bell, 2021. "Do Socioeconomic Factors Influence Who Is Most Likely to Relocate after Environmental Disasters? A Case Study in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-13, June.
    4. Qin Fan & Meri Davlasheridze, 2019. "Economic Impacts Of Migration And Brain Drain After Major Catastrophe: The Case Of Hurricane Katrina," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(01), pages 1-21, February.
    5. Wan Ting Katty Huang & Pierre Masselot & Elie Bou-Zeid & Simone Fatichi & Athanasios Paschalis & Ting Sun & Antonio Gasparrini & Gabriele Manoli, 2023. "Economic valuation of temperature-related mortality attributed to urban heat islands in European cities," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Muir, Jonathan A. & Cope, Michael R. & Angeningsih, Leslie R. & Jackson, Jorden & Brown, Ralph B., 2019. "Migration and Mental Health in the Aftermath of Disaster: Evidence from Mt. Merapi, Indonesia," OSF Preprints 2u6dg, Center for Open Science.
    7. Matzek, Virginia & Wilson, Kerrie A. & Kragt, Marit, 2019. "Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 79-86.
    8. Boustan, Leah Platt & Kahn, Matthew E. & Rhode, Paul W. & Yanguas, Maria Lucia, 2020. "The effect of natural disasters on economic activity in US counties: A century of data," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Zachary Bleemer & Wilbert Van der Klaauw, 2017. "Disaster (over-)insurance: the long-term financial and socioeconomic consequences of Hurricane Katrina," Staff Reports 807, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    10. Thomas Rotolo & Scott Frickel, 2019. "When disasters strike environmental science: a case–control study of changes in scientific collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 301-317, July.
    11. Schmidt, Stefan & Seppelt, Ralf, 2018. "Information content of global ecosystem service databases and their suitability for decision advice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 22-40.
    12. Abdullah Addas & Ahmad Maghrabi, 2020. "A Proposed Planning Concept for Public Open Space Provision in Saudi Arabia: A Study of Three Saudi Cities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-36, August.
    13. Tyler Ransom, 2022. "Labor Market Frictions and Moving Costs of the Employed and Unemployed," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(S), pages 137-166.
    14. Sabrina Katharina Beckmann & Michael Hiete & Michael Schneider & Christoph Beck, 2021. "Heat adaptation measures in private households: an application and adaptation of the protective action decision model," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    15. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    16. Jonathan A. Muir & Michael R. Cope & Leslie R. Angeningsih & Jorden E. Jackson & Ralph B. Brown, 2019. "Migration and Mental Health in the Aftermath of Disaster: Evidence from Mt. Merapi, Indonesia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-19, July.
    17. Margaret Yejide Onanuga & Adebayo Oluwole Eludoyin & Ifeanyi Emmanuel Ofoezie, 2022. "Urbanization and its effects on land and water resources in Ijebuland, southwestern Nigeria," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 592-616, January.
    18. Charles, Michael & Ziv, Guy & Bohrer, Gil & Bakshi, Bhavik R., 2020. "Connecting air quality regulating ecosystem services with beneficiaries through quantitative serviceshed analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    19. Rickman, Dan & Wang, Hongbo, 2020. "What goes up must come down? The recent economic cycles of the four most oil and gas dominated states in the US," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    20. Oosterbroek, Bram & de Kraker, Joop & Huynen, Maud M.T.E. & Martens, Pim, 2016. "Assessing ecosystem impacts on health: A tool review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 237-254.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:22:p:12852-:d:683792. 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.