Have there been forest transitions? Forest transition theory revisited in the context of the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8360643 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jacek Kozak (0000-0003-1001-8151, Jagiellonian University, corresponding author), Marcin Szwagrzyk (0000-0002-9768-9363, Jagiellonian University) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 504-512 |
| Publication date | 2016-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Area (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0004-0894 • E-ISSN: 1475-4762 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/area.12267 |
| OpenAlex | W2311893524 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 30 |
Forest transition, a concept introduced in the early 1990s by Alexander Mather, proposes a reversal of forest cover change trends: from long‐term deforestation to stable or increasing forest cover. Several well‐documented examples of forest transition have been described since its proposal, typically at the national level. Initially, forest transition was explained by endogenous drivers, yet recently researchers have linked forest transition to spatial interactions taking place over increasingly larger distances and land use displacements occurring beyond national boundaries. Therefore, in the telecoupled global land use system, country‐level analysis of forest cover changes includes several pitfalls highlighted by the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem ( MAUP ) and it may therefore not be appropriate to draw conclusions about the occurrence of forest transitions. In this study, we attempt to explain this problem with a simple land use change simulation that extends the model introduced by Mather and Needle in 1998, and case study data from the Carpathian Mountains in Poland. Our results suggest that an abrupt increase of interaction distance is sufficient to cause land use displacements beyond the boundaries of areal units, resulting in reversals of previous land use trends and forest transitions. With interaction distance exceeding the dimensions of areal units considered in the analysis, these areal units may be considered arbitrary, and forest transitions occurring within their boundaries spurious in the sense of MAUP . We conclude that this finding may apply to other contemporary country‐level analyses of forest cover change, and argue that at present, only the global‐level forest transition is MAUP ‐insensitive, possessing properties relevant to its early theoretical meaning
Context (archaeology) · Deforestation (computer science) · Forest cover · Geography · Land cover · Land use · Land use, land-use change and forestry · Physical geography · Spurious relationship · Statistics · Computer Science · Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management · Ecology · Forest Management and Policy · Land Use and Ecosystem Services · Mathematics
Global Forest Transition
Combining top-down and bottom-up dynamics in land use modeling
The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission
Grand Theory and Context-Specificity in the Study of Forest Dynamics
Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement of land use
Forest Transitions in Mexico
Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity
From Floods to Reforestation
Forest transitions
Reforestation amidst deforestation
The course and drivers of the forest transition
Forest and agricultural land change in the Carpathian region—A meta-analysis of long-term patterns and drivers of change
Regional interdependence and forest “transitions”
The causes of the reforestation in Vietnam
The forest transition
Prevailing Myths About Agricultural Abandonment and Forest Regrowth in the United States
A Tropical Forest Transition? Agricultural Change, Out-migration, and Secondary Forests in the Ecuadorian Amazon
The forest transition
From deforestation to reforestation
Land use transitions
The scale of forest transition
The relationships of population and forest trends
Framing Sustainability in a Telecoupled World
Is There a Forest Transition? Deforestation, Reforestation, and Development1
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,5 |
| Citation span | 2018 - 2023 (6) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |