Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v337y2016icp281-297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Divergent projections of future land use in the United States arising from different models and scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Sohl, Terry L.
  • Wimberly, Michael C.
  • Radeloff, Volker C.
  • Theobald, David M.
  • Sleeter, Benjamin M.
Abstract
A variety of land-use and land-cover (LULC) models operating at scales from local to global have been developed in recent years, including a number of models that provide spatially explicit, multi-class LULC projections for the conterminous United States. This diversity of modeling approaches raises the question: how consistent are their projections of future land use? We compared projections from six LULC modeling applications for the United States and assessed quantitative, spatial, and conceptual inconsistencies. Each set of projections provided multiple scenarios covering a period from roughly 2000 to 2050. Given the unique spatial, thematic, and temporal characteristics of each set of projections, individual projections were aggregated to a common set of basic, generalized LULC classes (i.e., cropland, pasture, forest, range, and urban) and summarized at the county level across the conterminous United States. We found very little agreement in projected future LULC trends and patterns among the different models. Variability among scenarios for a given model was generally lower than variability among different models, in terms of both trends in the amounts of basic LULC classes and their projected spatial patterns. Even when different models assessed the same purported scenario, model projections varied substantially. Projections of agricultural trends were often far above the maximum historical amounts, raising concerns about the realism of the projections. Comparisons among models were hindered by major discrepancies in categorical definitions, and suggest a need for standardization of historical LULC data sources. To capture a broader range of uncertainties, ensemble modeling approaches are also recommended. However, the vast inconsistencies among LULC models raise questions about the theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of current modeling approaches. Given the substantial effects that land-use change can have on ecological and societal processes, there is a need for improvement in LULC theory and modeling capabilities to improve acceptance and use of regional- to national-scale LULC projections for the United States and elsewhere.

Suggested Citation

  • Sohl, Terry L. & Wimberly, Michael C. & Radeloff, Volker C. & Theobald, David M. & Sleeter, Benjamin M., 2016. "Divergent projections of future land use in the United States arising from different models and scenarios," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 281-297.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:337:y:2016:i:c:p:281-297
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.07.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380016302605
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.07.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Verburg & Bas Eickhout & Hans Meijl, 2008. "A multi-scale, multi-model approach for analyzing the future dynamics of European land use," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 42(1), pages 57-77, March.
    2. Huntzinger, D.N. & Post, W.M. & Wei, Y. & Michalak, A.M. & West, T.O. & Jacobson, A.R. & Baker, I.T. & Chen, J.M. & Davis, K.J. & Hayes, D.J. & Hoffman, F.M. & Jain, A.K. & Liu, S. & McGuire, A.D. & N, 2012. "North American Carbon Program (NACP) regional interim synthesis: Terrestrial biospheric model intercomparison," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 144-157.
    3. Helen Couclelis, 2005. "“Where has the Future Gone?†Rethinking the Role of Integrated Land-Use Models in Spatial Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(8), pages 1353-1371, August.
    4. Christoph Schmitz & Hans van Meijl & Page Kyle & Gerald C. Nelson & Shinichiro Fujimori & Angelo Gurgel & Petr Havlik & Edwina Heyhoe & Daniel Mason d'Croz & Alexander Popp & Ron Sands & Andrzej Tabea, 2014. "Land-use change trajectories up to 2050: insights from a global agro-economic model comparison," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 69-84, January.
    5. Richard H. Moss & Jae A. Edmonds & Kathy A. Hibbard & Martin R. Manning & Steven K. Rose & Detlef P. van Vuuren & Timothy R. Carter & Seita Emori & Mikiko Kainuma & Tom Kram & Gerald A. Meehl & John F, 2010. "The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7282), pages 747-756, February.
    6. Junichi Fujino, Rajesh Nair, Mikiko Kainuma, Toshihiko Masui and Yuzuru Matsuoka, 2006. "Multi-gas Mitigation Analysis on Stabilization Scenarios Using Aim Global Model," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 343-354.
    7. Shilpa Rao and Keywan Riahi, 2006. "The Role of Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases in Climate Change Mitigation: Long-term Scenarios for the 21st Century," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 177-200.
    8. G. Hurtt & L. Chini & S. Frolking & R. Betts & J. Feddema & G. Fischer & J. Fisk & K. Hibbard & R. Houghton & A. Janetos & C. Jones & G. Kindermann & T. Kinoshita & Kees Klein Goldewijk & K. Riahi & E, 2011. "Harmonization of land-use scenarios for the period 1500–2100: 600 years of global gridded annual land-use transitions, wood harvest, and resulting secondary lands," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 117-161, November.
    9. Steven J. Smith and T.M.L. Wigley, 2006. "Multi-Gas Forcing Stabilization with Minicam," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 373-392.
    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. Brian Pickard & Joshua Gray & Ross Meentemeyer, 2017. "Comparing Quantity, Allocation and Configuration Accuracy of Multiple Land Change Models," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Jordan Dornbierer & Steve Wika & Charles Robison & Gregory Rouze & Terry Sohl, 2021. "Prototyping a Methodology for Long-Term (1680–2100) Historical-to-Future Landscape Modeling for the Conterminous United States," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-31, May.
    3. Yee, Susan H. & Paulukonis, E. & Simmons, C. & Russell, M. & Fulford, R. & Harwell, L. & Smith, L.M., 2021. "Projecting effects of land use change on human well-being through changes in ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 440(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Yanhua Xie & Mitch Hunter & Ann Sorensen & Theresa Nogeire-McRae & Ryan Murphy & Justin P. Suraci & Stacy Lischka & Tyler J. Lark, 2023. "U.S. Farmland under Threat of Urbanization: Future Development Scenarios to 2040," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    6. Hui Xiang & Yinhua Ma & Rongrong Zhang & Hongji Chen & Qingyuan Yang, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Future Simulation of Agricultural Land Use in Xiangxi, Central China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, April.
    7. Peizhi Tian & Binyang Jian & Jianrui Li & Xitian Cai & Jiangfeng Wei & Guo Zhang, 2023. "Land-Use-Change-Induced Cooling and Precipitation Reduction in China: Insights from CMIP6 Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-24, August.
    8. Johnson, Kelsey K. & Parton, Lee & Nolte, Christoph & Williamson, Matt & Nogeire-McRae, Theresa & Paudel, Jayash & Brandt, Jodi, 2023. "Moving to the country: Understanding the effects of Covid-19 on property values and farmland development risk," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).

    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. Guerra, Omar J. & Tejada, Diego A. & Reklaitis, Gintaras V., 2019. "Climate change impacts and adaptation strategies for a hydro-dominated power system via stochastic optimization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233, pages 584-598.
    2. Zhang, Hailing & Liu, Changxin & Wang, Can, 2021. "Extreme climate events and economic impacts in China: A CGE analysis with a new damage function in IAM," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    3. Angel Manuel Benitez Rodriguez & Ian Michael Trotter, 2019. "Climate change scenarios for Paraguayan power demand 2017–2050," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 425-445, October.
    4. Kuik, Onno & Brander, Luke & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "Marginal abatement costs of greenhouse gas emissions: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1395-1403, April.
    5. Mason-D'Croz, Daniel & Sulser, Timothy B. & Wiebe, Keith & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Lowder, Sarah K. & Nin-Pratt, Alejandro & Willenbockel, Dirk & Robinson, Sherman & Zhu, Tingju & Cenacchi, Nicola & Duns, 2019. "Agricultural investments and hunger in Africa modeling potential contributions to SDG2 – Zero Hunger," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 38-53.
    6. Duro, Juan Antonio & Giménez-Gómez, José-Manuel & Vilella, Cori, 2020. "The allocation of CO2 emissions as a claims problem," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    7. Muhammad Rizwan Shahid & Abdul Wakeel & Wajid Ishaque & Samia Ali & Kamran Baksh Soomro & Muhammad Awais, 2021. "Optimizing different adaptive strategies by using crop growth modeling under IPCC climate change scenarios for sustainable wheat production," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 11310-11334, August.
    8. Samuel Carrara & Giacomo Marangoni, 2013. "Non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation modeling with marginal abatement cost curv es: technical change, emission scenarios and policy costs," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 91-124.
    9. Samuel Carrara & Giacomo Marangoni, 2013. "Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Modeling with Marginal Abatement Cost Curves: Technical Change, Emission Scenarios and Policy Costs," Working Papers 2013.110, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    10. Yong Chen & Gary W. Marek & Thomas H. Marek & Dana O. Porter & Jerry E. Moorhead & Qingyu Wang & Kevin R. Heflin & David K. Brauer, 2020. "Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Historical and Future Climate Data in the Texas High Plains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-19, July.
    11. Heinz-Peter Witzke & Pavel Ciaian & Jacques Delince, 2014. "CAPRI long-term climate change scenario analysis: The AgMIP approach," JRC Research Reports JRC85872, Joint Research Centre.
    12. Changchang Liu & Chuxiong Deng & Zhongwu Li & Yaojun Liu & Shuyuan Wang, 2022. "Optimization of Spatial Pattern of Land Use: Progress, Frontiers, and Prospects," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-22, May.
    13. Riccardo Rebonato & Riccardo Ronzani & Lionel Melin, 2023. "Robust management of climate risk damages," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(3), pages 1-43, September.
    14. Qun'ou Jiang & Yuwei Cheng & Qiutong Jin & Xiangzheng Deng & Yuanjing Qi, 2015. "Simulation of Forestland Dynamics in a Typical Deforestation and Afforestation Area under Climate Scenarios," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-26, September.
    15. Grundy, Michael J. & Bryan, Brett A. & Nolan, Martin & Battaglia, Michael & Hatfield-Dodds, Steve & Connor, Jeffery D. & Keating, Brian A., 2016. "Scenarios for Australian agricultural production and land use to 2050," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 70-83.
    16. Antolin, Luís A.S. & Heinemann, Alexandre B. & Marin, Fábio R., 2021. "Impact assessment of common bean availability in Brazil under climate change scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    17. Xiangzheng Deng & Chunhong Zhao & Yingzhi Lin & Tao Zhang & Yi Qu & Fan Zhang & Zhan Wang & Feng Wu, 2014. "Downscaling the Impacts of Large-Scale LUCC on Surface Temperature along with IPCC RCPs: A Global Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, April.
    18. Pignalosa, Antonio & Silvestri, Nicola & Pugliese, Francesco & Corniello, Alfonso & Gerundo, Carlo & Del Seppia, Nicola & Lucchesi, Massimo & Coscini, Nicola & De Paola, Francesco & Giugni, Maurizio, 2022. "Long-term simulations of Nature-Based Solutions effects on runoff and soil losses in a flat agricultural area within the catchment of Lake Massaciuccoli (Central Italy)," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    19. Elettra Agliardi & Thomas Alexopoulos & Christian Cech, 2019. "On the Relationship Between GHGs and Global Temperature Anomalies: Multi-level Rolling Analysis and Copula Calibration," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(1), pages 109-133, January.
    20. Melania Michetti & Matteo Zampieri, 2014. "Climate–Human–Land Interactions: A Review of Major Modelling Approaches," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-41, July.

    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:eee:ecomod:v:337:y:2016:i:c:p:281-297. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    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.