There were 2 purposes to attend this meeting:
(a) Primarily to discuss the Global Observation of Forest Cover
(GOFC) project
(b) Secondly, to attend the LUCC Data gathering workshop.
LUCC Data Gathering Workshop
The LUCC project is a working group of IGBP (International Global
Biosphere Program) and its task is to provide to other IGBP working
groups land cover and land use change products for the globe.
The project commenced in 1996. The project office is in Barcelona,
Spain. My understanding is that Australia's involvement in the
LUCC at this stage has been limited.
The meeting in Barcelona 17th - 19th November was to develop methodologies with respect to data gathering and data collection for the land use and land cover projects. It involved around 25 presentations from both IGBP member organizations as well as other researchers involved in mapping land use and land cover throughout the world. Whilst, the overall objective of the LUCC is to provide global datasets there was a recognition that higher spatial and temporal resolution datasets may be required for certain parts of the globe. Therefore the use of high spatial resolution remotely sensed data as well as incorporating census and 'social' datasets was discussed. In addition to presentations there were a number of breakout groups to discuss a number of issues which then were reported back to the main group.
In general, there were a number of themes that emerged from the workshop:
Use of Social / Economic / Cultural data in datasets
It was recognized that whilst remote sensing data, (both fine and coarse spatial resolution) can provide an indication of land COVER particularly when it is combined with other data such as digital elevation data (DEM) it is very difficult to obtain land USE information from remote sensing alone.
There was continuing debate as how to best derive land USE data from these layers. A major input to deriving land use data is to combine the RS data with additional data from the 'social' sciences such as demographic, population and cultural statistics. A number of presentations from India, Indonesia and Brazil detailed studies where fine scale maps of land cover where matched to population and income statistics and, in some cases, cultural data such as religious and cultural importance of the land cover. These studies were mostly at very fine scales and most concluded that demographic statistics were (a) difficult and expensive to collect (b) difficult to obtain outside an individual country and (c) raised a number of issues with respect to data privacy and confidentiality.
There appeared to be some success however in the mapping of land use when these data were combined with land cover maps and it appears that, at a regional or local level, that progress is being made in this issue.
Linking PAGES (long term environmental data with LUCC)
A second theme that emerged from the workshop was the use of
long term land cover change data in the development of the LUCC
layers. The use of pollen records, corals, and bio-chemical data
are all providing an insight into historical land cover of the
globe. Traditionally, this type of data provided an indication
of change over the past 100's or 1000's of years and has not played
a role in estimating recent land cover changes as census reports,
tax records and remote sensing have come on-line. There were a
number of presentations however, which indicated that these types
of paelentological records are now sufficiently accurate to provide
indications of change in the past 20 or 30 years (in the intervals
of 12 months in some cases). As a result increased research is
taking place which relates recent changes in land cover to changes
as monitored by remote sensing. This will then provide a verification
and better accuracy assessment of these long term datasets.
Development of 'Hotspots'
Thirdly, there was a great deal of discussion as to linking global
and local land cover and land use issues. As it is not possible,
at this stage, to complete a land cover study for the whole globe
at very fine spatial resolution (i.e. 30m) there is a need to
select key areas to do this high resolution research. There was
debate as to the selection of these sites. It was proposed that
'hotspots' be selected, such as deforestation in Brazil and areas
of China, Indonesia, Russia and so on (the usual suspects !).
However, it was debated that maybe hotspots are not the best
approach as some of the most important land cover changes may
not be 'short term' and dynamic (sexy if you like) rather they
are much slower, such as the clearing of woodlands and savanna
and gradual deforestation and fragmentation. If the fine resolution
work is solely focussed on these dynamically changing areas then
maybe the slower, yet eventually more massive changes, may be
missed.
There was no clear resolution to the debate.. and much of it comes down to the definition of a 'hotspot'. If the definition was based, not on short-term dynamics, rather critical thresholds, it may be possible to emphase land cover changes like woodland clearing ahead of forest clearing.
Conclusions:
I was surprised during the LUCC workshop that there was no Australian
input or representation on this working group. I am unsure as
to who the most appropriate people are, and if Australian representation
is required, however the work that BRS is doing on the Australian
land cover change project seems highly relevant to this work and
I believe that the Australian research would be of great interested
to the LUCC. As far as I am aware the TM work that BRS is larger
than any single piece of work presented at the workshop.
I have a full set of abstracts presented at the workshop as well as a list of participants. Additional background to the LUCC and the meeting as well as a final report of the meeting are available at:
Global Observation of Forest Change (GOFC)
The Global Observation of Forest Change (GOFC) (apparently pronounced
Gough 'C') is a new initiate proposed by the Committee of Earth
Observation Satellites (CEOS) to produce and develop accurate,
consistent layers of forest related information for the globe
to NASA, IGBP, JSC and other non-governmental agencies.
To date, the Canadian Centre for Remote Sensing has employed Dr. Frank Ahern to foster interest and promote the project for a 5 year period with the hope of attracting additional, significant (in the order of millions of dollars) funding. There was a meeting in Italy in June of 1998 which brought together interested researchers and a draft document has been written indicating what and how GOFC will produce. Since then a published copy of the DRAFT proposal is available with a final copy available in the new year.
The draft indicates that GOFC is intending to produce 3 key datasets to the wider global change and forest monitoring community.
Forest Fire Dataset:
This is seen one of the highest priorities of the GOFC program,
and one of the easiest to achieve. It is proposed to map the
globe every 12 months at 1km spatial resolution to produce a fire
coverage layer indicating areas which have seen extensive forest
fires in this time. It is expected that this layer would be of
benefit to IGBP and others concerned with forest fires and clearing.
It is proposed that the dataset be developed in conjunction with FIRENET which is an initiative involving many countries on the reporting of fires world wide. At this stage, GOFC understands that Australia has a representative on FireNET but they are unsure who it is.
Forest Cover dataset:
This is the second, and perhaps most primary and sought after
dataset from GOFC. It is proposed that the globes forests be classified
using a matrix based on leaf longevity (i.e. evergreen vs deciduous),
leaf size (conifer vs broad leaf) and then a simple index of cover
or height. At this stage the FAO definition of forest will be
used by GOFC (which believe it or not includes all vegetation
with > 10% foliage cover !).
It is proposed to do this classification using NOAA AVHRR 1 km data every 5 years with key countries or regions completing the work at 30 or 100m
Forest Bio-physical dataset:
The third, and most difficult dataset to produce is the bio-physical
dataset. This is partly due to the ongoing nature of a number
of programs which intend to produce global forest derived products
as part of MODIS (such as NPP and LAI layers). As a result, the
requirement for GOFC to produce these layers on a regular time
frame is not needed. GOFC believes however there is a gap between
the GOFC community (perceived to be regional forest managers (i.e.
states and the commonwealth in Australia's case) and the MODIS
type developers. Thus whilst GOFC won't develop many of these
bio-physical layers itself there appears to be a role for GOFC
in the promotion / validation / use of these 'third party' layers.
At this stage GOFC is still an un-funded program. As of November 1998 CEOS has a new chair so Frank Ahern is keen to re-promote the concept within CEOS. Frank Ahern will spend the first 6 months of 1999 present the proposal, as well as letters of support from a range of agencies, to possible funding agencies. The primary funding bodies may be NASA, ESA, NASDA and the other satellite operators and data processors.
What GOFC want from Australia:
GOFC believe that the inclusion of Australia into the program
would be a great benefit in the promotion and successful funding
of the GOFC program. It is hoped that Australia will provide both
advice and expertise as well as data to the program if it is funded.
I believe GOFC would like to see forest managers more involved
in Australia's representation (I suspect some representation from
Commonwealth as well as CSIRO).
In particular GOFC would like NOW:
Identification of interest /potential use from Australian agencies
to the development of a GOFC fire layer.
I have indicated to Frank Ahern that I would be happy to undertake
all of the above requests.
Conclusions of GOFC:
At this stage, GOFC requires no financial or time commitment from
Australian representatives apart from the specific requests listed
above. In general, I believe it is a worthwhile project, but one
which should involve a number of researchers rather than just
CSIRO representation. If the project gets funded there will be
significantly more input requested (and I assumed funding !) with
much of that research needing to be undertaken by other agencies
in addition to CSIRO (for example, the fire and AVHRR analysis
may be undertaken with ERIN, forest cover layer with BRS and bio-physical
data with CSIRO). As a result, I feel we should remain abreast
of developments, continue our representation but also try to gauge
interest within Australia from these other agencies as to the
usefulness and interest in GOFC.
I have a number of documents on GOFC, and will be sent the final copy of the proposed program in January 1999. I will pass sections of this report on to BRS and ERIN, and have undertaken to write an article for the BRS published land cover change newsletter.
Attendance at the LUCC workshop was jointly funded by the CSIRO Earth Observation Centre (EOC) and CSIRO Forestry and Forest Products (FFP).
Nicholas Coops
20 November 1998