A GIS BASED EVALUATION OF LAND USE CHANGES AND ECOLOGICAL CONNECTIVITY INDEX

*Poppy Indrayani  -  Kyushu University, Japan and Fajar University Makassar, Japan
Yasuhiro Mitani  -  Kyushu University, Japan
Ibrahim Djamaluddin  -  Hasanuddin University, Indonesia
Hiro Ikemi  -  Kyushu University, Japan
Received: 31 Aug 2016; Published: 1 Mar 2017.
Open Access License URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0

Citation Format:
Abstract
Recently, the Makassar region is a significant land use planning and management issue, and has many impacts on the ecological function and structure landscape. With the development and infrastructure initiatives mostly around the urban centers, the urbanization and sprawl would impact the environment and the natural resources. Therefore, environmental management and careful strategic spatial planning in landscape ecological network is crucial when aiming for sustainable development. In this paper, the impacts of land use changes from 1997 to 2012 on the landscape ecological connectivity in the Makassar region were evaluated using Geographic Information System (GIS). The resulted GIS analysis clearly showed that land use changes occurring in the Makassar region have caused profound changes in landscape pattern. The spatial model had a predictive capability allowing the quantitative assessment and comparison of the impacts resulting from different land use on the ecological connectivity index. The results had an effective performance in identifying the vital ecological areas and connectivity prior to development plan in areas.
Keywords: land use change; landscape pattern; ecological connectivity; GIS; urban planning
Funding: Yasuhiro Mitani, Kyushu University, Japan, Departement of Civil Engineering, Ibrahim Djamaluddin, Hasanuddin University, Indonesia, Departemen of Civil Engineering, Hiro Ikemi, Kyushu University, Japan, Departemen of Civil Engineering

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Articles
Language: EN
In Vol 4, No 1 (2017)
Statistics: 2228 2147
Related articles
SPATIAL TRANSFORMATION OF SURAKARTA’S PERIPHERAL RURAL VILLAGES UNDER IN-SITU URBANIZATION PHENOMENON : THE CASE OF GENTAN VILLAGE Assessing Landscape Pattern Relationship with Dengue Incidence in Peninsular Malaysia Urban Feature Extraction from Merged Airborne LiDAR Data and Digital Camera Data MODEL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES APPLICATION BASED ON DISTRICT SPATIAL PLANNING IN MAMASA WATERSHED, SOUTH SULAWESI POTENTIAL OF BIG DATA FOR PRO-ACTIVE PARTICIPATORY LAND USE PLANNING

  1. Adriaensen, F., et al. (2003). The application of “least-cost” modelling as a functional landscape model. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64(4), 233–247. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00242-6">CrossRef]

  2. Bender, D. J., Contreras, T. A., & Fahrig, L. (1998). Habitat Loss and Population Decline: A Meta-Analysis of the Patch Size Effect. Ecology, 79(2), 517. [https://doi.org/10.2307/176950">CrossRef] 

  3. Benedict, M. A., et al. (2012). Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and Communities. Island Press. [https://books.google.co.id/books?id=2xTJvYqzFNkC">GoogleBook]

  4. Breuste, J., et al. (2015). Special Issue on Green Infrastructure for Urban Sustainability. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 141(3), A2015001. [https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000291">CrossRef] 

  5. Broquet, T., et al. (2006). Genetic isolation by distance and landscape connectivity in the American marten (Martes americana). Landscape Ecology, 21(6), 877–889. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-005-5956-y">CrossRef]

  6. Crooks, K. R., & Sanjayan, M. (2006). Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press. [https://books.google.co.id/books?id=FWFTKyv9VPgC">GoogleBook]

  7. Dupras, J., et al. (2016). The impacts of urban sprawl on ecological connectivity in the Montreal Metropolitan Region. Environmental Science & Policy, 58, 61–73. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.005">CrossRef]

  8. Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 34(1), 487–515. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419">CrossRef]

  9. Forman, R. T. T. (1995). Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press. [https://books.google.co.id/books?id=sSRNU_5P5nwC">GoogleBook]

  10. Girvetz, E. H., et al. (2008). Integration of landscape fragmentation analysis into regional planning: A statewide multi-scale case study from California, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86(3–4), 205–218. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.02.007">CrossRef]

  11. Graves, T. A., et al. (2007). Identification of functional corridors with movement characteristics of brown bears on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska. Landscape Ecology, 22(5), 765–772. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-007-9082-x">CrossRef]

  12. Indrayani, P., et al. (2016). Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Land Use Changes in the Makassar Region Using GIS. Int. Symp. On Earth Science and Technology, Fukuoka, 298–303.

  13. Levin, N., et al. (2007). Landscape continuity analysis: A new approach to conservation planning in Israel. Landscape and Urban Planning, 79(1), 53–64. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.04.001">CrossRef]

  14. Li, J., et al. (2013). Spatiotemporal pattern of urbanization in Shanghai, China between 1989 and 2005. Landscape Ecology, 28(8), 1545–1565. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9901-1">CrossRef]

  15. Mao, Q. Z., et al. (2012). Research advances in ecological assessment of urban greenspace. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 32(17), 5589–5600. [https://doi.org/10.5846/stxb201112141912">CrossRef]

  16. Marulli, J., & Mallarach, J. M. (2005). A GIS methodology for assessing ecological connectivity: application to the Barcelona Metropolitan Area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 71(2–4), 243–262. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.03.007">CrossRef]

  17. Mathey, J., et al. (2015). Brownfields as an Element of Green Infrastructure for Implementing Ecosystem Services into Urban Areas. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 141(3), A4015001. [https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000275">CrossRef]

  18. Parasati, H. (2013). Program Pembangunan Perkotaan Nasional. In Konferensi e-Indonesia Initiative forum IX/2013. Jakarta.

  19. Parcerisas, L., et al. (2012). Land use changes, landscape ecology and their socioeconomic driving forces in the Spanish Mediterranean coast (El Maresme County, 1850–2005). Environmental Science & Policy, 23, 120–132. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.08.002">CrossRef]

  20. Pino, J., & Marull, J. (2012). Ecological networks: Are they enough for connectivity conservation? A case study in the Barcelona Metropolitan Region (NE Spain). Land Use Policy, 29(3), 684–690. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.11.004">CrossRef]

  21. Richter, M., & Weiland, U. (2011). Applied Urban Ecology: A Global Framework. Wiley.

  22. Selman, P. (2006). Planning at the Landscape Scale. Taylor & Francis. [https://books.google.co.id/books?id=TMh-AgAAQBAJ">GoogleBook]

  23. Tscharntke, T., et al. (2012). Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Biological Conservation, 151(1), 53–59. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.068">CrossRef]

  24. Turner, M. G. (2005). Landscape Ecology: What Is the State of the Science? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 36(1), 319–344. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.102003.152614">CrossRef]

  25. Zhou, W., et al. (2014). Relationships between land cover and the surface urban heat island: seasonal variability and effects of spatial and thematic resolution of land cover data on predicting land surface temperatures. Landscape Ecology, 29(1), 153–167. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9950-5">CrossRef] 


Last update: 2021-05-15 07:56:42

  1. QUANTIFICATION OF THE CHANGE IN ECOLOGICAL CONNECTIVITY USING A GIS-BASED MODEL AND CURRENT COMPLEXITY METRICS

    Derya GÜLÇİN, Tuluhan YILMAZ. lnternational Journal of Geography and Geography Education, 2020. doi: 10.32003/igge.746242

Last update: 2021-05-15 07:56:42

  1. Assessment of Urban Ecosystem Health Using the Pressure-State-Response Model: A Case Study in Makassar City, Indonesia

    Harusi N.M.R.. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 2020. doi: 10.1145/3386762.3386781
Copyright (c) 2017 Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning
License URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0