Exploring agricultural landscape change from the second half of the twentieth century onwards: combining aerial imagery with farmer perspectives.

IF 4 2区环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY Landscape Ecology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-20 DOI:10.1007/s10980-024-01914-z

Franziska Mohr, Robert Pazur, Niels Debonne, Rebekka Dossche, Julian Helfenstein, Samuel Hepner, Christian Levers, Peter H Verburg, Matthias Bürgi

{"title":"Exploring agricultural landscape change from the second half of the twentieth century onwards: combining aerial imagery with farmer perspectives.","authors":"Franziska Mohr, Robert Pazur, Niels Debonne, Rebekka Dossche, Julian Helfenstein, Samuel Hepner, Christian Levers, Peter H Verburg, Matthias Bürgi","doi":"10.1007/s10980-024-01914-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Anthropogenic landscape change is an important driver shaping our environment. Historical landscape analysis contributes to the monitoring and understanding of these change processes. Such analyses are often focused on specific spatial scales and single research methods, thus covering only limited aspects of landscape change.Objectives: Here, we aim to assess the potential of combining the analysis of historical aerial imagery and local stakeholder interviews for landscape change studies using a standardized mapping and interviewing approach.Methods: We compared six agricultural landscapes across Europe and mapped land-cover using historical aerial imagery (starting between 1930 and 1980, depending on data availability, until recent years) with an object-based image analysis and random forest classification. For local perspectives of landscape change, we conducted oral history interviews (OHIs) with (almost) retired farmers. Comparing recorded landscape changes from both approaches provided insight into advantages of combining these two methods.Results: Object-based analysis enabled the identification of high-resolution land-cover dynamics, with scale enlargement and cropland/grassland expansion being the most commonly recurring trends across European landscapes. Perceived landscape changes identified in the OHIs included changes in farm management, landscape structure, and infrastructure. Farmers also reported drivers and personal values associated with landscape change. Combining the two historical landscape analysis tools resulted in a qualitative and quantitative understanding of changes in land-cover, land use, and land management.Conclusions: Comparing physical land-cover change with local farmer perspectives is key to a comprehensive understanding of landscape change. There are different ways the two methods can be combined, leading to different venues for science and policy making.Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-024-01914-z.","PeriodicalId":54745,"journal":{"name":"Landscape Ecology","volume":"39 7","pages":"120"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189988/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Landscape Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-024-01914-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Anthropogenic landscape change is an important driver shaping our environment. Historical landscape analysis contributes to the monitoring and understanding of these change processes. Such analyses are often focused on specific spatial scales and single research methods, thus covering only limited aspects of landscape change.

Objectives: Here, we aim to assess the potential of combining the analysis of historical aerial imagery and local stakeholder interviews for landscape change studies using a standardized mapping and interviewing approach.

Methods: We compared six agricultural landscapes across Europe and mapped land-cover using historical aerial imagery (starting between 1930 and 1980, depending on data availability, until recent years) with an object-based image analysis and random forest classification. For local perspectives of landscape change, we conducted oral history interviews (OHIs) with (almost) retired farmers. Comparing recorded landscape changes from both approaches provided insight into advantages of combining these two methods.

Results: Object-based analysis enabled the identification of high-resolution land-cover dynamics, with scale enlargement and cropland/grassland expansion being the most commonly recurring trends across European landscapes. Perceived landscape changes identified in the OHIs included changes in farm management, landscape structure, and infrastructure. Farmers also reported drivers and personal values associated with landscape change. Combining the two historical landscape analysis tools resulted in a qualitative and quantitative understanding of changes in land-cover, land use, and land management.

Conclusions: Comparing physical land-cover change with local farmer perspectives is key to a comprehensive understanding of landscape change. There are different ways the two methods can be combined, leading to different venues for science and policy making.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-024-01914-z.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

探索二十世纪下半叶以来的农业景观变化：将航空图像与农民视角相结合。

背景：人为景观变化是塑造我们环境的重要驱动力。历史景观分析有助于监测和了解这些变化过程。此类分析通常侧重于特定的空间尺度和单一的研究方法，因此只能涵盖景观变化的有限方面：在此，我们旨在评估将历史航空图像分析与当地利益相关者访谈相结合的潜力，利用标准化制图和访谈方法进行景观变化研究：我们比较了欧洲的六处农业景观，并利用历史航空图像（从 1930 年至 1980 年开始，视数据可用性而定，直至最近几年），通过基于对象的图像分析和随机森林分类绘制了土地覆盖图。为了从当地角度了解景观变化，我们对（几乎）退休的农民进行了口述历史访谈（OHI）。通过比较两种方法记录的景观变化，我们深入了解了将这两种方法相结合的优势：结果：基于对象的分析能够识别高分辨率的土地覆盖动态变化，在整个欧洲景观中，规模扩大和耕地/草地扩展是最常见的反复出现的趋势。在 OHI 中发现的景观变化包括农场管理、景观结构和基础设施的变化。农民还报告了与景观变化相关的驱动因素和个人价值。结合两种历史景观分析工具，可以从定性和定量的角度了解土地覆被、土地利用和土地管理的变化：将物理土地覆被变化与当地农民的观点进行比较是全面了解景观变化的关键。这两种方法有不同的结合方式，可为科学和政策制定提供不同的途径：在线版本包含补充材料，可查阅 10.1007/s10980-024-01914-z。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Landscape Ecology 环境科学-地球科学综合

CiteScore

8.30

自引率

7.70%

发文量

164

审稿时长

8-16 weeks

期刊介绍： Landscape Ecology is the flagship journal of a well-established and rapidly developing interdisciplinary science that focuses explicitly on the ecological understanding of spatial heterogeneity. Landscape Ecology draws together expertise from both biophysical and socioeconomic sciences to explore basic and applied research questions concerning the ecology, conservation, management, design/planning, and sustainability of landscapes as coupled human-environment systems. Landscape ecology studies are characterized by spatially explicit methods in which spatial attributes and arrangements of landscape elements are directly analyzed and related to ecological processes.