Mapping coastal land use changes 1965–2014: methods for handling historical thematic data

This paper describes a national analysis of coastal land use change in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It compares a survey conducted by volunteers in 1965 with the 2014 update created using digital topographic data and aerial photography in an open source GIS. The paper reviews the origins and impacts of differences in the way that land use classes are measured and reported, and highlights a generic issue when comparing thematic data. This is, that thematic data are frequently subject to changes in the way that classes are conceived, measured and classified with the result that similarly named classes in different datasets may have very different spatial extents with very different meanings and underlying semantics, even when there is little difference in reality. The sources and nature of such variation in landscape conceptualisations are discussed and placed into the context of historical GIS (HGIS) analyses of thematic change. The critical issue is the need to separate actual differences on the ground from artefactual differences arising from methodological inconsistencies to support robust statistical analyses. A set of rubrics for updating historical thematic data is suggested to minimise the potential for such inconsistencies. These are applied to the National Trust's 1965 Neptune coastal land use survey and its 2014 update to quantify land use changes. The results describe the magnitude and direction of change, provide insights into the developmental pressures experienced at the coast and demonstrate the positive impacts of the Trust's management. Of potentially wider research interest to the HGIS and related research communities is the consideration of methods for mapping and quantifying thematic and areal changes. This is an underdeveloped research area in HGIS, when compared with the extensive methods for dealing with counts and boundary changes (e.g. census areas), but one that is critical for robust analysis of historical cartographic data.

[1]  Stan Openshaw,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[2]  Ian N. Gregory,et al.  Different Places, Different Stories: Infant Mortality Decline in England and Wales, 1851–1911 , 2008 .

[3]  J Sheail,et al.  Assessing stock and change in land cover and biodiversity in GB: an introduction to Countryside Survey 2000. , 2003, Journal of environmental management.

[4]  S. Olson,et al.  Mortality in late nineteenth-century Montreal: Geographic pathways of contagion , 2011, Population studies.

[5]  Patrick A. Dunae,et al.  Dwelling Places and Social Spaces: Revealing the Environments of Urban Workers in Victoria Using Historical GIS , 2013 .

[6]  Peter F. Fisher,et al.  Semantics, Metadata, Geographical Information and Users , 2008, Trans. GIS.

[7]  Anne Kelly Knowles,et al.  Emerging Trends in Historical GIS , 2005 .

[8]  Russell G. Congalton,et al.  A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data , 1991 .

[9]  A. Comber,et al.  A spatial analysis of plant phenophase changes and the impact of increases in urban land use , 2015 .

[10]  A. Comber,et al.  Assessment of a Semantic Statistical Approach to Detecting Land Cover Change Using Inconsistent Data Sets , 2004 .

[11]  Richard A. Wadsworth,et al.  Text Mining Analysis of Land Cover Semantic Overlap , 2015 .

[12]  G. Smith,et al.  Life and death of the people of London: a historical GIS of Charles Booth's inquiry. , 2002, Health & place.

[13]  D. Rutledge,et al.  Geospatial Land-use Classification for New Zealand: Review and Recommendations , 2009 .

[14]  Richard A. Wadsworth,et al.  What is Land Cover? , 2005 .

[15]  Peter F. Fisher,et al.  Integrating land-cover data with different ontologies: identifying change from inconsistency , 2004, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[16]  James R. Anderson,et al.  A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data , 1976 .

[17]  A. Comber,et al.  Actor–network theory: a suitable framework to understand how land cover mapping projects develop? , 2003 .

[18]  Steffen Fritz,et al.  Land Use and Land Cover Semantics: Principles, Best Practices, and Prospects , 2015 .

[19]  G. B. Groom,et al.  Countryside Survey 1990: main report. (Countryside 1990 vol.2) , 1993 .

[20]  Christian Berger,et al.  From land cover-graphs to urban structure types , 2014, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[21]  Alexis J. Comber,et al.  Community detection in spatial networks: Inferring land use from a planar graph of land cover objects , 2012, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[22]  A. Belward,et al.  GLC2000: a new approach to global land cover mapping from Earth observation data , 2005 .

[23]  Alexis J. Comber,et al.  The separation of land cover from land use using data primitives , 2008 .

[24]  A. Comber,et al.  Land cover: to standardise or not to standardise? Comment on ‘Evolving standards in land cover characterization’ by Herold et al. , 2008 .

[25]  C. McClean,et al.  An investigation of uncertainty in field habitat mapping and the implications for detecting land cover change , 1995, Landscape Ecology.

[26]  Heiko Balzter,et al.  Methods to Quantify Regional Differences in Land Cover Change , 2016, Remote. Sens..

[27]  R. Zijdeman,et al.  Digital humanities and the history of working women: a cascade , 2014 .

[28]  R. Hill,et al.  The UK Land Cover Map 2000: Construction of a Parcel-Based Vector Map from Satellite Images , 2002 .

[29]  P. Bol,et al.  China Historical GIS , 2005 .

[30]  Alexis J. Comber,et al.  A retrospective analysis of land cover change using a polygon shape index , 2003 .

[31]  Ian N. Gregory,et al.  Historical GIS: structuring, mapping and analysing geographies of the past , 2007 .

[32]  A. Grainger The influence of end-users on the temporal consistency of an international statistical process: the case of tropical Forest Statistics , 2007 .