Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rsase

Is there a relationship between human population distribution and land

surface temperature? Global perspective in areas with different
climatic classifications
Salahuddin M. Jaber
Department of Water Management and Environment, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Hashemite University, P.O. Box 330010, 13133, Zarqa, Jordan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Whether pessimistic believing that overpopulation is the ultimate cause of many environmental problems or
LandScan optimistic arguing for social justice and technological development, studying human population dynamics and
MOD11C3 their impacts on the environment is an important and ongoing field of study. This type of research should take
Population
advantage of the many benefits offered by indirect remote sensing, geographic information systems, and other
Regression
Temperature
related disciplines data that are based on relationships developed at the field. Nevertheless, many facets of the
subject including the relationship between human population distribution (HPD) and land surface temperature
(LST) in areas that have different climatic classifications are still lacking attention. Hence, this study focused on
bridging this gap in order to provide supporting scientific evidence for planners and decision makers all over the
globe. Four areas that represent the four main populated climate zones were randomly selected. They are: (1) El-
Salvador for equatorial climate, (2) Kuwait for arid climate, (3) Lebanon for warm temperate climate, and (4)
New Hampshire for boreal climate. For the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for the four areas, HPD data were ob­
tained from LandScan project while LST data were derived from MOD11C3 product. An integrated framework
approach was implemented. This approach included: (1) basic descriptive non-spatial statistics, (2) spatial Global
Moran’s I Index and Anselin Local Moran’s I Index, (3) non-spatial Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and or­
dinary least squares (OLS) regression, and (4) spatial lag model (SLM) and spatial error model (SEM) regressions.
It has been observed that the strength and direction of the relationship between HPD and LST do not vary from
time to time but vary from climate zone to another. The strongest relationship can be found in boreal climates,
followed by warm temperate climates, and then arid and equatorial climates. In boreal, warm temperate, and
equatorial climates the relationship is positive while in arid climates the relationship is negative providing in­
direct supporting evidence for the inversion of surface urban heat islands phenomenon in arid climates.
Furthermore, it has been noticed that the relationship between HPD and LST is highly spatially dependent
regardless the time and climate zone where some type of spatial diffusion or spillover processes might be present.
Still, it is clear that this relationship is complex and not amenable to direct explanation and needs further
investigation in order to be explained.

1. Introduction
For thousands of years, human population increased very slowly.
However, since nearly 1600, human population began to increase
rapidly and reached about three billion in 1960 (Cunningham and
Cunningham, 2013). According to the 2019 Revision of the World
Population Prospects, human population reached about 7.7 billion in
2019 and is projected to reach 8.5 billion in 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050,
and 10.9 billion in 2100. This unprecedented growth of human popu­
lation is accompanied with unsustainable characteristics of other critical
and interrelated and complex issues related to human population dy­
namics such as distribution, composition, and consumption/production
patterns (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
Population Division, 2019). Whether the links between human popula­
tion dynamics and the environment are envisaged as being linear (i.e.,
Malthusian and Boserupian), or multiplicative (i.e., according to Ehrlich
Identity), or through mediating factors (e.g., social, economic, cultural,
and political), or development-dependent (i.e., according to develop­
ment processes), or complex (i.e., between complex ecological and
human systems) (Marquette, 1997), an everlasting deep and thorough

E-mail address: sjaber@hu.edu.jo.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2020.100435
Received 20 June 2020; Received in revised form 28 October 2020; Accepted 29 October 2020
Available online 31 October 2020
2352-9385/© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S.M. Jaber
reflections and studies have been conducted in order to understand how
human population dynamics are impacting on the environment (Shaw,
1992; Dietz and Rosa, 1994; Preston, 1996; Sherbinin et al., 2007;
Bradshaw et al., 2010; Bradshaw and Brook, 2014; Pimentel et al., 2015;
Galvani et al., 2016; Jain and Jain, 2016; Gamelon et al., 2017; Weber
and Sciubba, 2019).
According to the International Land Surface Temperature and
Emissivity Working Group (ILSTE-WG) (https://ilste-wg.info/, accessed
on April 22, 2020), land surface temperature (LST) is defined as a
measure of how hot or cold the surface of the earth would feel to the
touch in a particular location. For ground-based, airborne-based, and
space-based remote sensing sensors it is the mean radiometric radiative
skin temperature derived from thermal radiation of all objects
comprising the surface within the sensor’s field of view. LST is a
fundamental aspect of earth systems and critical for many applications
such as surface urban heat islands (Lo and Quattrochi, 2003; Weng et al.,
2004; Pena, 2008; Liu and Zhang, 2011; Lazzarini et al., 2013; Wang
et al., 2017; Jaber, 2018), soil moisture, evapotranspiration, and
drought (Gillies et al., 1997; Sandholt et al., 2002; Carlson, 2007; Han
et al., 2010; Patel et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2015; Muhlbauer et al., 2016;
Orimoloye et al., 2019a), climate variability and change (Oku and Ish­
ikawa, 2006; Abdramane et al., 2018; Hooker et al., 2018; Orimoloye
et al., 2019b; Jaber and Abu-Allaban, 2020), forest fires and wildfires
(Guangmeng and Mei, 2004; Veraverbeke et al., 2012; Viassova et al.,
2014; Liu et al., 2018a; Maffei et al., 2018), and earthquake prediction
(Tronin, 2010; Nezammahalleh et al., 2013; Zoran et al., 2016; Bhard­
waj et al., 2017; Pavlidou et al., 2019). Accordingly, many researchers
studied the possible determinant factors of LST spatial and temporal
behavior such as topographic characteristics (i.e., elevation, slope, and
aspect of slope) (Malbeteau et al., 2017; Peng et al., 2017; Khandelwal
et al., 2018; Phan et al., 2018; He et al., 2019) and land use land cover
characteristics (i.e., vegetation, forests, bare soil, impervious surfaces,
and built-up areas) (Goetz, 1997; Yuan and Bauer, 2007; Xiao et al.,
2008, 2018; Feizizadeh et al., 2012; Peng et al., 2017; Deng et al., 2018;
Islam and Ma, 2018; Ogunjobi et al., 2018; Orimoloye et al., 2018;
Fashae et al., 2020).
Several authors investigated the relationship between human pop­
ulation distribution (HPD), which is an important component of human
population dynamics, and LST either indirectly through using indicators
for HPD or directly by incorporating HPD as a variable. For example,
Jenerette et al. (2007) suggested that LST for an early summer day was
negatively correlated with population density in Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Mallick and Rahman (2012) showed that nighttime surface temperature
in Delhi, India, changes with the increase in the impervious surface area,
which is related to the increase in the population density. Li et al. (2014)
showed that in Wuhan, China, high LST regions concentrated on the
residential and industrial areas with high population density. The au­
thors recommended decreasing high LST regions concentration by
reducing population density. Bonafoni and Keeratikasikorn (2018)
found a strong correlation between urban density and LST in Bangkok,
Thailand.
Despite these endeavors, this relationship is still lacking the antici­
pated attention. Hence, the present study tries to forge this scientific
gap. It builds upon previous scarce research and aims at expanding and
nourishing the common understanding and knowledge about the rela­
tionship between HPD and LST explicitly by incorporating HPD as a
variable. This study adds to previous work by (1) investigating whether
this relationship differs from one climate zone to another and from one
year to another and (2) exploring the type of the spatial dependence of
this relationship on a global scale. The results of the present study should
be important for policy and decision makers all over the world.
2. Study areas
Four areas that represent the four main populated climate zones
according to the re-analyzed high-resolution Koppen-Geiger map, which
2
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435
is representative for the period 1986–2010 (http://koeppen-geiger.
vu-wien.ac.at/, accessed on October 10, 2018), were randomly
selected (Fig. 1). These areas are: (1) El-Salvador, which represents the
equatorial climate, (2) Kuwait, which represents the arid climate, (3)
Lebanon, which represents the warm temperate climate, and (4) New
Hampshire, which represents the boreal climate. Polar climate was not
included because it is not heavily populated. Below is a brief description
of these four study areas obtained from Encyclopedia Britannica
(https://www.britannica.com/, accessed on January 9, 2019) and
World Factbook (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/
the-world-factbook/, accessed on January 9, 2019).
With a total area of 21,041 km2 and total population of 6.2 million
and population growth rate of 0.25%, El-Salvador is the smallest and
most densely populated country in Central America. About 72% of the
total population is urban. The population is mainly concentrated around
the capital city – San Salvador. Known as the Land of Volcanoes, the
country is mostly mountainous with narrow coastal belt and central
plateau and has a mean elevation of 442 m above mean sea level.
Agricultural lands and forests constitute nearly 88% of the country’s
total area.
Kuwait is a Middle Eastern country along the Arabian Gulf. It has a
total area of 17,818 km2 and total population of 2.9 million and popu­
lation growth rate of 1.38%. All the population of the country is urban.
The densest settlement is along the Arabian Gulf, particularly in Kuwait
City. The country’s terrain is mainly flat to slightly undulating desert
plain with a mean elevation of 108 m above mean sea level. Agricultural
lands and forests constitute only 9% of the county’s total area.
Lebanon is also a Middle Eastern country but bordering the Medi­
terranean Sea. It has a total area of 10,400 km2 and total population of
6.1 million and population growth rate of -3.13%. About 89% of the
total population is urban. The majority of the people live on or near the
Mediterranean coast and of those most live in and around the capital city
– Beirut. The country is characterized by a narrow coastal plain in the
west and high mountains in the east with mean elevation of 1,250 m
above mean sea level. Agricultural lands and forests constitute 77% of
the county’s total area.
New Hampshire is a state in the New England region of the north­
eastern United States along the Atlantic Ocean. The state covers a total
area of 24,214 km2 and has a total population of 1.3 million and pop­
ulation growth rate of 2.00%. About 60% of the total population is
urban. The largest city is Manchester. It is the only city in the state with
more than 100,000 residents. The northern third of the state has just 5%
of the state’s total population. Known as the Granite State, the moun­
tains are the most striking feature of the state’s landscape with mean
elevation of 300 m above mean sea level. More than 80% of the state is
under forest cover and only 5–7% of the land is in agricultural use.
3. Data
With the development of remote sensing, geographic information
systems, and their related sciences and technologies, obtaining indirect
data based on relationships developed at the field about the spatial and
temporal characteristics of complex variables such as LST and HPD was
made reasonable and feasible. These data are characterized by being
reliable, world-wide even in areas that are not readily accessible,
repeatable, spatially continuous and homogenous, and cost-effective.
Annual mean daytime and nighttime LST data (in ◦ C) for the years
2001, 2009, and 2017 for the four study areas (Figs. 2–4) were obtained
from the MODIS/Terra Land Surface Temperature and Emissivity
Monthly L3 Global 0.05◦ Climate Modeling Grid (CMG) V6 Product
(MOD11C3) (https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/products/mod11c3v006/;
accessed on October 10, 2018). First, monthly daytime and nighttime
data were accumulated to produce annual daytime and nighttime data.
Then, the means of annual daytime and nighttime data were calculated.
MOD11C3 V6 product (Wan et al., 2015) provides global monthly
daytime and nighttime LST and emissivity data at 0.05◦
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Fig. 1. Location map for the four study areas showing world countries in addition to the five main climate zones.

Fig. 2. Thematic maps showing the spatial distribution of annual mean daytime and nighttime LST in 2001 classified using the standard deviation algorithm based
on 1 standard deviation intervals.

3
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Fig. 3. Thematic maps showing the spatial distribution of annual mean daytime and nighttime LST in 2009 classified using the standard deviation algorithm based
on 1 standard deviation intervals.

Fig. 4. Thematic maps showing the spatial distribution of annual mean daytime and nighttime LST in 2017 classified using the standard deviation algorithm based
on 1 standard deviation intervals.

latitude/longitude grid. The LST and emissivity values are derived by
compositing and averaging the values from the corresponding month of
MOD11C1 daily files. Due to the major improvements and changes,
especially in arid and semi-arid regions, validation of Collection 6
products over wide ranges of surface and atmospheric conditions
showed that the quality of this latest collection is much better than the
qualities of previous collections (Wan, 2014).
Annual HPD data (in population counts) for the years 2001, 2009,
and 2017 for the four study areas (Figs. 5–7) were obtained from the Oak
Ridge National Laboratory LandScan™ Project (LandScan) (https://
landscan.ornl.gov/; accessed on October 10, 2018). LandScan,
updated annually, was first introduced in 1998 as an improved resolu­
tion global annual HPD database for estimating populations at risk at
0.008333333◦ latitude/longitude grid. It is developed using sub-
national level best available worldwide demographic (census counts)
and geographic data (including land cover, roads, elevation, slope,
urban areas, and village locations) and remote sensing high resolution
imagery analysis techniques within a multivariate dasymetric modeling
framework to disaggregate census counts within administrative
boundaries. Verification and validation studies for LandScan products
are conducted routinely worldwide for all regions and their accuracies
have been found to be acceptable for scientific research (Dobson et al.,

4
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Fig. 5. Thematic maps showing the spatial distribution of annual HPD in 2001 classified using the standard deviation algorithm based on 1 standard devia­
tion intervals.

Fig. 6. Thematic maps showing the spatial distribution of annual HPD in 2009 classified using the standard deviation algorithm based on 1 standard devia­
tion intervals.

2000). descriptive non-spatial statistics (i.e., minimum, maximum, mean,

4. Methods
In order to explore and model the relationships between MODIS-
based annual mean daytime and nighttime LST (as the dependent vari­
able) and LandScan-based annual HPD (as the independent variable) in
the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for the four study areas, the following
integrated framework approach was followed.
First, for the acquired data the following univariate exploratory non-
spatial and spatial data analysis procedures were investigated: (1) basic
standard deviation, and coefficient of variation) (Bartolucci et al.,
2016), (2) test of global spatial autocorrelation using Global Moran’s I
Index (Mitchell, 2005), and (3) local spatial cluster and outlier analysis
using Anselin Local Moran’s I Index (Anselin, 1995). Global Moran’s I
Index (Mitchell, 2005) tests whether the spatial processes promoting the
observed spatial pattern in the dataset is random chance. The index
values fall between -1 and +1. Negative values indicate spatial disper­
sion where high values repel other high values and tend to be near low
values and vice versa. Positive values indicate spatial clustering where
high values cluster near other high values and low values cluster near

5
S.M. Jaber
Fig. 7. Thematic maps showing the spatial distribution of annual HPD in 2017 classified using the standard deviation algorithm based on 1 standard devia­
tion intervals.
other low values. Zero value indicates complete spatial randomness.
Global Moran’s I Index assumes a consistent spatial pattern in the
dataset across the study area and hence assesses the overall spatial
pattern. In contrast, Anselin Local Moran’s I Index (Anselin, 1995) as­
sesses each feature within the context of neighboring features and
compares the local situation to the global one. The index identifies local
spatial clusters of features with high values (hot spots or HH) or low
values (cold spots or LL) in addition to local spatial outliers in which a
high value is surrounded by low values (HL) or outliers in which a low
value is surrounded by high values (LH).
Then, Pearson correlation coefficients (r) (Garson, 2013) were
calculated to determine the strengths and directions of the non-spatial
linear relationships between the acquired variables. The coefficient
values vary between -1 and +1. A value of ±1 indicates a perfect degree
of linear association between two variables. As the correlation coeffi­
cient value goes towards zero, the linear relationships between the two
variables will be weaker. The sign of the coefficient indicates the di­
rection of the linear relationship between the two variables; a negative
sign indicates an inverse linear relationship while a positive sign in­
dicates a direct linear relationship.
Furthermore, the standard simple linear regression using the method
of ordinary least squares (OLS) (Hansen et al., 2013) was implemented.
This type of regression investigates the non-spatial linear relationship
between one dependent variable and one independent variable. The
regression coefficients are estimated by minimizing the sum of squared
prediction errors, where the error terms are assumed to be homosce­
dastic and uncorrelated.
However, when dealing with spatial data, there is always a possi­
bility that the variables or the errors in the regression model show
spatial dependence (Anselin and Rey, 2014). Hence, in order to consider
spatial dependence, either the spatial lag model (SLM) or spatial error
model (SEM) was adopted for further analysis using the software GeoDa
version 1.14.0 (https://geodacenter.github.io/). The SLM (or simulta­
neous spatial autoregressive model) assumes that the dependent vari­
able in one place is systematically related to the dependent variable in
adjacent areas and that the dependent variable in one place is also
systematically related to the independent variable in that place in
addition to adjacent areas. Hence, this model includes explicitly a
6
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435
coefficient on the spatially lagged dependent variable (spatial autore­
gressive coefficient, ρ) in the model. On the other hand, SEM assumes
that the error terms across different locations are correlated and hence
includes explicitly a coefficient on the spatially lagged error term
(spatial autoregressive coefficient, λ) in the model. Regression co­
efficients in both SLM and SEM are estimated using a maximum likeli­
hood (ML) approach by incorporating a spatial weights matrix (W). In
the present study, queen contiguity weights of either first or second
order, depending on the performance of the outputs, were used. Both
SLM and SEM capture the influence of omitted independent variables
and assume a possible diffusion process; i.e., events in one place predict
an increased likelihood of similar events in neighboring places. The
selection between SLM and SEM was based on the criteria suggested by
Anselin and Rey (2014). Basically, four types of Lagrange Multiplier
(LM) tests based on the residuals of the OLS regressions were performed
to assess the types of spatial dependence of the models. They are: (1) LM
test for a missing spatially lagged dependent variable (LMLAG), (2) LM
test for error dependence (LMERROR), (3) robust LMLAG (RLMLAG), and
(4) robust LMERROR (RLMERROR). The alternative spatial model specifi­
cation to OLS is the one which is most significant in rejecting the null
hypothesis, which says that is there is no spatial dependence. This
alternative spatial model should have the lowest Akaike information
criterion (AIC) and highest coefficient of determination (R2).
It is worth mentioning that all acquired data were checked for quality
and registered to have the same pixel size (as that of the dependent
variable) and same projection and coordinate system information. This
is a pre-requisite before conducting the analysis. In addition, assessing
the significance of all statistical tests was based on the 0.05 significance
level.
5. Results
Table 1 shows summary statistics for annual mean daytime and
nighttime LST data and annual HPD data in the years 2001, 2009, and
2017 for the four selected areas. With regard to LST data, Kuwait had the
highest values, followed by El-Salvador, followed by Lebanon, and then
New Hampshire. By studying the coefficient of variation values an in­
verse pattern can be noticed; the values for New Hampshire showed the
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Table 1
Basic descriptive non-spatial and spatial statistics for LST and HPD in the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for El-Salvador, Kuwait, Lebanon, and New Hampshire.
Variable Number of Data Minimum Maximum Mean Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation Global Moran’s I Index

Value p-Value Type

El-Salvador
SLST01 763 16.0083 30.8904 26.4235 2.1549 8.1552 0.8881 0.0000 Clustered
SLST09 15.7583 30.4850 25.9819 2.1594 8.3110 0.8945 0.0000 Clustered
SLST17 15.7108 29.2514 25.7592 1.9495 7.5681 0.8812 0.0000 Clustered
SHPD01 0.0000 17612 276.5413 1201.3654 434.4253 0.3309 0.0000 Clustered
SHPD09 0.0000 32566 328.6855 1575.4208 479.3096 0.3056 0.0000 Clustered
SHPD17 0.0000 22374 272.5609 1204.0271 441.7460 0.3685 0.0000 Clustered
Kuwait
KLST01 669 27.3417 32.5392 30.4020 0.7464 2.4551 0.6043 0.0000 Clustered
KLST09 25.4309 30.5625 29.0201 0.6537 2.2525 0.5025 0.0000 Clustered
KLST17 26.1342 31.6960 30.0700 0.8099 2.6933 0.6026 0.0000 Clustered
KHPD01 0.0000 8464 109.0164 688.8913 631.9151 0.5214 0.0000 Clustered
KHPD09 0.0000 11186 138.9880 939.8828 676.2328 0.3427 0.0000 Clustered
KHPD17 0.0000 11331 143.8132 906.4433 630.2924 0.4021 0.0000 Clustered
Lebanon
LLST01 473 7.2092 23.2117 18.1961 2.9920 16.4431 0.8586 0.0000 Clustered
LLST09 5.2750 22.1000 17.1523 3.0793 17.9525 0.8524 0.0000 Clustered
LLST17 7.1558 22.9450 18.2236 3.0152 16.5458 0.8538 0.0000 Clustered
LHPD01 0.0000 16140 191.3256 838.8534 438.4429 0.0265 0.3429 Random
LHPD09 0.0000 13413 209.6068 751.4071 358.4842 0.1217 0.0005 Clustered
LHPD17 0.0000 6160 398.9831 725.2205 181.7672 0.2715 0.0000 Clustered
New Hampshire
NLST01 1203 1.5908 11.0942 6.3507 1.8526 29.1713 0.9660 0.0000 Clustered
NLST09 0.4817 10.1775 5.3145 1.9587 36.8562 0.9683 0.0000 Clustered
NLST17 1.3933 11.2383 6.3159 1.8149 28.7349 0.9643 0.0000 Clustered
NHPD01 0.0000 2142 35.3283 126.6768 358.5698 0.3088 0.0000 Clustered
NHPD09 0.0000 2912 39.5495 164.3689 415.6035 0.1777 0.0000 Clustered
NHPD17 0.0000 3081 38.1862 162.1762 424.6985 0.1816 0.0000 Clustered

largest dispersion around the mean, followed by Lebanon, followed by
El-Salvador, and then Kuwait. With regard to HPD data, El-Salvador and
Lebanon had the highest values, followed by Kuwait, and then New
Hampshire. By studying the coefficient of variation values another
pattern can be observed; the values for Kuwait showed the largest
dispersion around the mean, followed by El-Salvador, Lebanon, and
New Hampshire. El-Salvador, Lebanon, and New Hampshire had almost
similar variability around their means.
Global Moran’s I Index (Table 1) revealed that all annual mean
daytime and nighttime LST data and annual HPD data in the years 2001,
2009, and 2017 for the four selected areas were highly spatially clus­
tered. Anselin Local Moran’s I Index applied on annual mean daytime
and nighttime LST data (Figs. 8–10) and annual HPD data (Figs. 11–13)
in the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for the four selected areas emphasized
the results obtained from applying Global Moran’s I Index and further
showed the presence of spatial hot spots (HH: high values surrounded by
high values) and cold spots (LL: low values surrounded by low values) in
addition to outliers (HL: high values surrounded by low values, and LH:

Fig. 8. Thematic maps showing the results of applying cluster and outlier analysis using Anselin Local Moran’s I Index on annual mean daytime and nighttime LST
in 2001.

7
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Fig. 9. Thematic maps showing the results of applying cluster and outlier analysis using Anselin Local Moran’s I Index on annual mean daytime and nighttime LST
in 2009.

Fig. 10. Thematic maps showing the results of applying cluster and outlier analysis using Anselin Local Moran’s I Index on annual mean daytime and nighttime LST
in 2017.

low values surrounded by high values). One exception can be noticed for
HPD data for Lebanon in 2001 where the data was randomly distributed
as obtained from applying Global Moran’s I Index (Table 1).
Table 2 shows the results of applying non-spatial linear Pearson
correlation coefficients (r) analysis on annual mean daytime and
nighttime LST data and annual HPD data in the years 2001, 2009, and
2017 for the four selected areas. It is clear that in El-Salvador no sig­
nificant non-spatial linear correlations between LST and HPD data in all
the years can be observed. However, in all the years, significant weak
positive non-spatial linear correlations between LST and HPD data can
be noticed in Lebanon and New Hampshire while significant weak
negative non-spatial linear correlations between LST and HPD data in
Kuwait in all the years can be observed. Relatively, the non-spatial linear
correlations were stronger in New Hampshire (r ≈ 0.33) as compared to
those in Lebanon (r ≈ 0.18) and Kuwait (r ≈ -0.18).
Standard non-spatial simple linear regression analysis using the
method of OLS applied between annual mean daytime and nighttime
LST data (dependent variable) and annual HPD data (independent var­
iable) in the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for the four selected areas
(Table 3) accentuated the results obtained from applying non-spatial
linear Pearson correlation coefficients (r) analysis. For El-Salvador the
models in all the years were not significant. While in all the years

8
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Fig. 11. Thematic maps showing the results of applying cluster and outlier analysis using Anselin Local Moran’s I Index on annual HPD in 2001.

Fig. 12. Thematic maps showing the results of applying cluster and outlier analysis using Anselin Local Moran’s I Index on annual HPD in 2009.

significant weak positive non-spatial linear relationships between LST
and HPD data were obtained in Lebanon and New Hampshire and sig­
nificant weak negative non-spatial linear relationships between LST and
HPD data in Kuwait were obtained. Relatively, the explanation powers
of the non-spatial linear OLS models for LST variabilities were stronger
in New Hampshire (R2 ≈ 0.11), followed by Lebanon (R2 ≈ 0.04), and
then Kuwait (R2 ≈ 0.03). Similar pattern can be observed for the co­
efficients associated with HPD data. In New Hampshire LST increased by
about 0.004 ◦ C for every one population counts increase in HPD, fol­
lowed by Lebanon in which LST increased by about 0.001 ◦ C for every
one population counts increase in HPD, followed by Kuwait in which
LST decreased by about -0.0002 ◦ C for every one population counts
increase in HPD.
LM tests based on the residuals of the OLS regressions applied on
annual mean daytime and nighttime LST data and annual HPD data in
the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for the four selected areas (Table 4)
revealed that the relationships between LST and HPD data were spatially
dependent. Following the criteria suggested by Anselin and Rey (2014)
for selecting the best spatial model that represents the type of spatial
dependence between LST and HPD data (Tables 4–5), SLMs were
deemed appropriate in all the years for all selected study areas, except
for El-Salvador in 2017 in which SEM was deemed appropriate. The AIC
values for the spatial models decreased significantly as compared to
those obtained from OLS regressions (Tables 3 and 5) indicating that the

9
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Fig. 13. Thematic maps showing the results of applying cluster and outlier analysis using Anselin Local Moran’s I Index on annual HPD in 2017.

implementing Pearson correlation coefficient (r), OLS, SLM, and SEM

Table 2
regressions produced multiple results that deserve further discussion.
Results of applying non-spatial linear Pearson correlation coefficients (r) be­
One key factor upon which the Koppen-Geiger map (http://koeppe
tween LST and HPD in the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for El-Salvador, Kuwait,
n-geiger.vu-wien.ac.at/, accessed on October 10, 2018) was based is
Lebanon, and New Hampshire.
the land surface air temperature (LSAT). It is the temperature of the air
Variable r p-Value
near the earth’s surface measured at 1.2–1.8 m above the surface of the
El-Salvador earth using common weather stations. Accordingly, Kuwait, which
SLST01 SHPD01 -0.0202 0.5781 represents arid climate, should have the highest LSAT, followed by El-
SLST09 SHPD09 -0.0089 0.8065
SLST17 SHPD17 0.0071 0.8445
Salvador, which represents equatorial climate, and then Lebanon,
Kuwait which represents warm temperate climate. New Hampshire, which
KLST01 KHPD01 -0.1955 0.0001 represents boreal climate, should have the lowest LSAT. Summary sta­
KLST09 KHPD09 -0.1477 0.0001 tistics obtained for LST data emphasized this expected pattern and
KLST17 KHPD17 -0.1893 0.0001
showed that Kuwait had the highest values, followed by El-Salvador,
Lebanon
LLST01 LHPD01 0.1392 0.0024 followed by Lebanon, and then New Hampshire with an inverse
LLST09 LHPD09 0.1743 0.0001 pattern for the dispersion of LST values around their means. This might
LLST17 LHPD17 0.2354 0.0001 lead to the question, which needs further investigation: “Given the fact
New Hampshire that LSAT and LST have different physical meanings and responses to at­
NLST01 NHPD01 0.3604 0.0001
NLST09 NHPD09 0.3110 0.0001
mospheric conditions, is there a relationship between them in areas with
NLST17 NHPD17 0.3169 0.0001 different climatic classifications?” Multiple studies indicated the presence
of significant positive correlation between LSAT and LST (Nichole, 1996;
Kawashima et al., 2000; Gallo et al., 2011; Schwarz et al., 2012; Lin
spatial models performed better than the OLS non-spatial linear models. et al., 2016; Hadria et al., 2017). However, Mutiibwa et al. (2015) found
In addition, R2 values for the spatial models increased significantly as that in complex terrain the relationship varied from season to another
compared to those obtained from OLS regressions (Tables 3 and 5). and diminished with increasing terrain roughness. Furthermore, sum­
Relatively, the strongest R2 values were obtained for New Hampshire mary statistics obtained for HPD data showed that El-Salvador and
(≈0.98), followed by Lebanon (≈0.88), followed by El-Salvador Lebanon had the highest values, followed by Kuwait, and then New
(≈0.87), and then Kuwait (≈0.53). The coefficients associated with Hampshire with a different pattern for the dispersion of HPD values
HPD data were significantly positive in all the years for El-Salvador, around their means. This might trigger another question, which also
Lebanon, and New Hampshire, while for Kuwait, the coefficients asso­ deserves further investigation: “Given the fact that El-Salvador, Kuwait,
ciated with HPD data in all the years were significantly negative. Lebanon, and New Hampshire have different climatic classifications and
different HPD patterns, is there a relationship between the HPD pattern of a
6. Discussion region and its climatic classification?” Although it is well known that
climate is one of the main factors determining HPD, the exact nature of
The integrated framework approach followed in the present study in this relationship is still long way ahead in order to be uncovered,
order to explore and model the relationships between LST and HPD in especially in the presence of other determining factors such as land use
2001, 2009, and 2017 in El-Salvador, which represents the equatorial land cover, topography, soils, energy and mineral resources, cultural
climate, Kuwait, which represents the arid climate, Lebanon, which factors, political boundaries, economic activities, and government pol­
represents the warm temperate climate, and New Hampshire, which icies (Stephenson et al., 2010; Nieves et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2018b).
represents the boreal climate, through applying univariate exploratory Global Moran’s I Index and Anselin Local Moran’s I Index showed
non-spatial and spatial data analysis procedures in addition to

10
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Table 3
Results of applying non-spatial simple linear regression using the method of OLS between LST and HPD in the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for El-Salvador, Kuwait,
Lebanon, and New Hampshire.
Variable F Statistic p-Value R2 AIC Variable Coefficient p-Value

El-Salvador
SLST01 SHPD01 0.3096 0.5781 0.0004 3339.57 Constant 26.43350 0.0000
SPOP01 -0.00003 0.5781
SLST09 SHPD09 0.0601 0.8065 0.0001 3342.98 Constant 25.98600 0.0000
SPOP09 -0.00001 0.8065
SLST17 SHPD17 0.0385 0.8445 0.0001 3186.96 Constant 25.75610 0.0000
SPOP17 0.00001 0.8445
Kuwait
KLST01 KHPD01 26.5088 0.0000 0.0382 1484.13 Constant 30.42510 0.0000
KPOP01 -0.00021 0.0000
KLST09 KHPD09 14.8720 0.0001 0.0218 1317.93 Constant 29.03430 0.0000
KPOP09 -0.00010 0.0001
KLST17 KHPD17 24.7801 0.0000 0.0358 1595.00 Constant 30.09430 0.0000
KPOP17 -0.00017 0.0000
Lebanon
LLST01 LHPD01 9.3119 0.0024 0.0194 2372.81 Constant 18.10110 0.0000
LPOP01 0.00050 0.0024
LLST09 LHPD09 14.7505 0.0001 0.0304 2394.69 Constant 17.00260 0.0000
LPOP09 0.00071 0.0001
LLST17 LHPD17 27.6408 0.0000 0.0554 2362.42 Constant 17.83300 0.0000
LPOP17 0.00098 0.0000
New Hampshire
NLST01 NHPD01 179.3230 0.0000 0.1299 4733.05 Constant 6.16449 0.0000
NPOP01 0.00527 0.0000
NLST09 NHPD09 128.6180 0.0000 0.0967 4912.13 Constant 5.16800 0.0000
NPOP09 0.00371 0.0000
NLST17 NHPD17 134.0330 0.0000 0.1004 4723.70 Constant 6.18052 0.0000
NPOP17 0.00355 0.0000

Table 4
Results of applying LM tests based on the residuals of the OLS regressions between LST and HPD in the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for El-Salvador, Kuwait, Lebanon,
and New Hampshire.
Variable LMLAG RLMLAG LMERROR RLMERROR

Value p-Value Value p-Value Value p-Value Value p-Value

El-Salvador
SLST01 SHPD01 1743.7957 0.0000 14.4160 0.0002 1738.8293 0.0000 9.4496 0.0021
SLST09 SHPD09 1811.4524 0.0000 9.8474 0.0017 1809.5288 0.0000 7.9239 0.0049
SLST17 SHPD17 1704.0950 0.0000 9.6057 0.0019 1705.7551 0.0000 11.2658 0.0008
Kuwait
KLST01 KHPD01 846.1101 0.0000 11.7497 0.0006 840.9763 0.0000 6.6159 0.0101
KLST09 KHPD09 1064.3451 0.0000 18.1543 0.0000 1052.6275 0.0000 6.4367 0.0112
KLST17 KHPD17 726.4024 0.0000 11.4395 0.0007 721.5316 0.0000 6.5687 0.0104
Lebanon
LLST01 LHPD01 1075.9287 0.0000 26.1837 0.0000 1055.4972 0.0000 5.7521 0.0165
LLST09 LHPD09 1057.9519 0.0000 20.8378 0.0000 1037.5188 0.0000 0.4048 0.5246
LLST17 LHPD17 1020.6062 0.0000 22.1366 0.0000 1001.2706 0.0000 2.8009 0.09421
New Hampshire
NLST01 NHPD01 3822.8410 0.0000 270.2207 0.0000 3583.3222 0.0000 30.7019 0.0000
NLST09 NHPD09 4004.1163 0.0000 254.3357 0.0000 3755.1543 0.0000 5.3737 0.0204
NLST17 NHPD17 3924.9730 0.0000 261.0379 0.0000 3668.4463 0.0000 4.5112 0.0337

that both LST and HPD are highly spatially clustered. This is not unex­
pected since LST and HPD are spatial variables that are affected as has
been stated earlier by many factors that force them to be spatially
clustered in certain locations (Small, 2004; Zhang and Zhu, 2011; Sal­
vacion and Magcale-Macandog, 2015; Sekiguchi et al., 2018; Wang
et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2019; Xu and Cohen, 2019). That is, high values
tend to be close to high values and vice versa, in addition to the presence
of some outliers in some localities where high values tend to be sur­
rounded by low values and vice versa. The one exception, which was
noticed for HPD data for Lebanon in 2001 where the data was randomly
distributed as obtained from applying Global Moran’s I Index, indicates
that in certain circumstances HPD can be spatially randomly distributed,
which is contrary to the common knowledge; a fact that deserves further
investigation in order to be explained. However, the question is: “Where
these clusters of hot spots and cold spots and outliers are located?” The
answer is not as simple as someone might expect and relying on visual
inspection alone might give false impressions. As has been stated earlier,
the four selected regions in this study have remarkable differences with
respect to their land use land cover characteristics, topographic repre­
sentations, socio-economic situations, political merits, cultural traits
and so on. In addition, these regions have different climatic classifica­
tions, which is the main factor chosen in the present study. However,
these factors need to be further studied separately for each region in
order to relate them to LST and HPD dynamics, which is beyond the
scope of the present study and, hence, might be the goal for future
suggested related studies.
Non-spatial linear Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and OLS anal­
ysis showed that the relationship between LST and HPD does not vary
from year to year but varies from climate zone to another. Although this
relationship can be generally described as being weak, the strongest

11
S.M. Jaber Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435

Table 5
Results of applying spatial regressions between LST and HPD in the years 2001, 2009, and 2017 for El-Salvador, Kuwait, Lebanon, and New Hampshire.
Variable Model R2 AIC Variable Coefficient p-Value

El-Salvador
SLST01 SHPD01 SLM 0.8731 1973.50 ρ 0.97985 0.0000
Constant 0.49292 0.0033
SPOP01 0.00008 0.0006
SLST09 SHPD09 SLM 0.8837 1911.76 ρ 0.98127 0.0000
Constant 0.45335 0.0042
SPOP09 0.00006 0.0006
SLST17 SHPD17 SEM 0.8675 1849.59 Constant 24.99630 0.0000
SPOP17 0.00010 0.0000
λ 0.97840 0.0000
Kuwait
KLST01 KHPD01 SLM 0.6437 936.33 ρ 0.86750 0.0000
Constant 4.03208 0.0000
KPOP01 -0.00008 0.0024
KLST09 KHPD09 SLM 0.4784 955.37 ρ 0.92638 0.0000
Constant 2.12557 0.0012
KPOP09 -0.00005 0.0091
KLST17 KHPD17 SLM 0.4797 1244.97 ρ 0.90900 0.0000
Constant 2.72498 0.0011
KPOP17 -0.00012 0.0000
Lebanon
LLST01 LHPD01 SLM 0.8803 1510.70 ρ 0.97467 0.0000
Constant 0.46502 0.0099
LPOP01 0.00016 0.0045
LLST09 LHPD09 SLM 0.8811 1535.38 ρ 0.97570 0.0000
Constant 0.40810 0.0146
LPOP09 0.00022 0.0006
LLST17 LHPD17 SLM 0.8798 1519.45 ρ 0.97412 0.0000
Constant 0.41047 0.0217
LPOP17 0.00025 0.0002
New Hampshire
NLST01 NHPD01 SLM 0.9824 355.13 ρ 0.97796 0.0000
Constant 0.11434 0.0000
NPOP01 0.00075 0.0000
NLST09 NHPD09 SLM 0.9853 286.20 ρ 0.98258 0.0000
Constant 0.07287 0.0007
NPOP09 0.00052 0.0000
NLST17 NHPD17 SLM 0.9783 562.84 ρ 0.97873 0.0000
Constant 0.11301 0.0001
NPOP17 0.00057 0.0000

relationship, relative to other relationships studied in this research, can
be found in boreal climates, followed by warm temperate climates, and
then arid climates. No non-spatial linear significant relationship can be
found in equatorial climates. This might trigger a fourth question, which
also deserves further investigation: “Given the fact that climate varies with
latitude and, hence, climatic classification also varies with latitude, does
latitude affect the strength of the relationship between LST and HPD?” It
seems that as we go further northward from the equator, the relationship
between LST and HPD gets stronger. Not only has the strength of the
relationship varied from climate zone to another but also the sign of this
relationship. In boreal and warm temperate climates the relationship is
positive while in arid climates the relationship is negative. Multiple
authors contended that in cities in arid environments lands behave as
surface urban cool islands (not surface urban heat islands) because
mainly of the lack of moisture and vegetation in non-urban areas sur­
rounding these cities (Lazzarini et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2014; Rasul
et al., 2016). Therefore, this specific result might provide indirect sup­
porting evidence of this phenomenon of inversion of surface urban heat
islands in desert cities. Actually, HPD is one of the main indicators of
urbanization and urban centers.
Finally, spatial regression analysis showed that the relationship be­
tween LST and HPD is spatially dependent regardless the time and
climate zone. By explicitly incorporating variables in the modeling
process, which represent the type of spatial dependence either in SLM or
SEM, spatial regression produced better results as compared to those
obtained from non-spatial regression through better specification, as
indicted by lower AIC values and higher R2 values. In addition to
asserting the results obtained from non-spatial regression, spatial
regression revealed some type of spatial diffusion or spillover processes
between LST and HPD. This might give a new understanding of the type
of the relationship between LST and HPD in different climate zones; a
fact that might need further studies in order to be explained.
7. Conclusions and recommendations
The present study produced the following main conclusions. (1)
Regardless the time and climatic classification of the area, the spatial
distributions of LST and HPD are highly clustered. However, in certain
circumstances HPD can be spatially randomly distributed. (2) The
strength of the non-spatial linear relationship between LST and HPD
does not vary from year to year but varies from climate zone to another.
That is, the strongest non-spatial linear relationship can be found in
boreal climates (|r| ≈ 0.33 and R2 ≈ 0.11 and linear change rate ≈
0.004 ◦ C/(people per cell)), followed by warm temperate climates (|r| ≈
0.18 and R2 ≈ 0.04 and linear change rate ≈ 0.001 ◦ C/(people per cell)),
and then arid climates (|r| ≈ 0.18 and R2 ≈ 0.03 and linear change rate
≈ -0.0002 ◦ C/(people per cell)) and equatorial climates (r and R2 are not
significant). (3) The direction of the non-spatial linear relationship be­
tween LST and HPD does not vary from year to year but varies from
climate zone to another. That is, in boreal, warm temperate, and equa­
torial climates the relationship is positive while in arid climates the
relationship is negative. This might provide indirect supporting evi­
dence for the inversion of surface urban heat islands phenomenon in arid
climates. (4) Spatial regression performed better than non-spatial
regression and showed that the relationship between LST and HPD is
highly spatially dependent regardless the time and climate zone. The

12
S.M. Jaber
strongest spatial relationship can be found in boreal climates (R2
increased to about 0.98), followed by warm temperate climates (R2
increased to about 0.88) and equatorial climates (R2 increased to about
0.87), and then arid climates (R2 increased to about 0.53). Furthermore,
spatial regression accentuated the results obtained from non-spatial
regression and showed that the direction of the relationship between
LST and HPD does not vary from year to year but varies from climate
zone to another. That is, in all climate zones the relationship is positive,
except in arid climates in which the relationship is negative. Spatial
regression provided a new understanding of the type of this relationship
in different climate zones where some type of spatial diffusion or spill­
over processes between LST and HPD might be present. These conclu­
sions indicate that the spatial distributions of LST and HPD and the
relationships between them are complex and not amenable to direct
explanation and need further investigation in order to be explained.
Accordingly, the present study recommended further investigation of
the following main issues. (1) Studying the relationship between LSAT
and LST in areas with different climatic classifications. (2) Studying the
relationship between HPD of a region and its climatic classification. (3)
Studying the spatial and temporal characteristics of LST and HPD and
their controlling factors, including latitude, in areas with different cli­
matic classifications.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
Abdramane, D., Ye, X., Amadou, T., 2018. Analysis of land surface temperature change
based on MODIS data, case study: inner Delta of Niger. Natural Hazards and Earth
System Sciences, pp. 2018–2208.
Anselin, L., 1995. Local indicators of spatial association – LISA. Geogr. Anal. 27, 93–115.
Anselin, L., Rey, S.J., 2014. Modern Spatial Econometrics in Practice. GeoDa Press LLC,
Chicago, IL, USA.
Bartolucci, A.A., Singh, K.P., Bae, S., 2016. Introduction to Statistical Analysis of
Laboratory Data, first ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bhardwaj, A., Singh, S., Sam, L., Joshi, P.K., Bhardwaj, A., Martin-Torres, F.J., Kumar, R.,
2017. A review on remotely sensed land surface temperature anomaly as an
earthquake precursor. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 63, 158–166.
Bonafoni, S., Keeratikasikorn, C., 2018. Land surface temperature and urban density:
multiyear modeling and relationship analysis using MODIS and Landsat data. Rem.
Sens. 10, 1471.
Bradshaw, C.J.A., Brook, B.W., 2014. Human population reduction is not a quick fix for
environmental problems. PANAS 111, 16610–16615.
Bradshaw, C.J.A., Giam, X., Sodhi, N.S., 2010. Evaluating the relative environmental
impact of countries. PloS One 5, e10440.
Carlson, T., 2007. An overview of the "Triangle Method" for estimating surface
evapotranspiration and soil moisture from satellite imagery. Sensors 7, 1612–1629.
Chen, S., Wen, Z., Jiang, H., Zhao, Q., Zhang, X., Chen, Y., 2015. Temperature vegetation
dryness index estimation of soil moisture under different tree species. Sustainability
7, 11401–11417.
Chen, A., Yao, X.A., Sun, R., Chen, L., 2014. Effect of urban green patterns on surface
urban cool islands and its seasonal variations. Urban For. Urban Green. 13, 646–654.
Cunningham, W.P., Cunningham, M.A., 2013. Principles of Environmental Science:
Inquiry and Application. McGraw-Hill Education, New York.
Deng, Y., Wang, S., Bai, X., Tian, Y., Wu, L., Xiao, J., Chen, F., Qian, Q., 2018.
Relationship among land surface temperature and LUCC, NDVI in typical karst area.
Sci. Rep. 8, 641.
Dietz, T., Rosa, E.A., 1994. Rethinking the environmental impacts of population,
affluence and technology. Human Ecology Review. Summer Acad. 1, 1994.
Dobson, J.E., Bright, E.A., Coleman, P.R., Durfee, R.C., Worley, B.A., 2000. LandScan: a
global population database for estimating populations at risk. Photogramm. Eng.
Rem. Sens. 66, 849–857.
Fashae, O.A., Adagbasa, E.G., Olusola, A.O., Obateru, R.O., 2020. Land use/land cover
change and land surface temperature of Ibadan and environs, Nigeria. Environ.
Monit. Assess. 192, 109.
Feizizadeh, B., Blaschke, T., Nazmfar, H., Akbari, E., Kohbanani, H.R., 2012. Monitoring
land surface temperature relationship to land use/land cover from satellite imagery
in Maraqeh County, Iran. J. Environ. Plann. Manag. 56, 1290–1315.
Gamelon, M., Grotan, V., Nilsson, A.L.K., Engen, S., Hurrell, J.W., Jerstad, K., Phillips, A.
S., Rostad, O.W., Slagsvold, T., Walseng, B., Stenseth, N.C., Saether, B.-E., 2017.
Interactions between demography and environmental effects are important
determinants of population dynamics. Population Dynamics 3, e1602298.
13
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435
Gallo, K., Hale, R., Tarpley, D., Yu, Y., 2011. Evaluation of the relationship between air
and land surface temperature under clear- and cloudy-sky conditions. Journal of
Applied Meteorology and Climatology 50, 767–775.
Galvani, A.P., Bauch, C.T., Anand, M., Singer, B.H., Levin, S.A., 2016. Human-
environment interactions in population and ecosystem health. PANAS 113,
14502–14506.
Garson, G.D., 2013. Correlation. Statistical Publishing Associates, Asheboro, NC, USA.
Gillies, R.R., Carlson, T.N., Cui, J., Kustas, W.P., Humes, K.S., 1997. A verification of the
‘triangle’ method for obtaining surface soil water content and energy fluxes from
remote measurements of the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and
surface radiant temperature. Int. J. Rem. Sens. 18, 3145–3166.
Goetz, S.J., 1997. Multi-sensor analysis of NDVI, surface temperature and biophysical
variables at a mixed grassland site. Int. J. Rem. Sens. 18, 71–94.
Guangmeng, G., Mei, Z., 2004. Using MODIS land surface temperature to evaluate forest
fire risk of northeast China. Geosci. Rem. Sens. Lett. IEEE 1, 98–100.
Hadria, R., Benabdelouahab, T., Mahyou, H., Balaghi, R., Bydekerke, L., El Hairech, T.,
Ceccato, P., 2017. Relationships between the three components of air temperature
and remotely sensed land surface temperature of agricultural areas in Morocco. Int.
J. Rem. Sens. 39, 356–373.
Han, Y., Wang, Y., Zhao, Y., 2010. Estimating soil moisture conditions of the Greater
Changbai Mountains by land surface temperature and NDVI. IEEE Trans. Geosci.
Rem. Sens. 48, 2509–2515.
Hansen, P.C., Pereyra, V., Scherer, G., 2013. Least Squares Data Fitting with
Applications. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MA.
He, J., Zhao, W., Li, A., Wen, F., Yu, D., 2019. The impact of the terrain effect on land
surface temperature variation based on Landsat-8 observations in mountainous
areas. Int. J. Rem. Sens. 40, 1808–1827.
Hooker, J., Duveiller, G., Cescatti, A., 2018. A global dataset of air temperature derived
from satellite remote sensing and weather stations. Scientific Data 5, 180246.
Islam, S., Ma, M., 2018. Geospatial monitoring of land surface temperature effects on
vegetation dynamics in the southeastern region of Bangladesh from 2001 to 2016.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 7, 486.
Jaber, S.M., 2018. Landsat-based vegetation abundance and surface temperature for
surface urban heat island studies: the tale of Greater Amman Municipality. Annals of
GIS 24, 195–208.
Jaber, S.M., Abu-Allaban, M.M., 2020. MODIS-based land surface temperature for
climate variability and change research: the tale of a typical semi-arid to arid
environment. European Journal of Remote Sensing 53, 81–90.
Jain, P., Jain, P., 2016. Population and development: impacts on environmental
performance. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment 14,
208–214.
Jenerette, G.D., Harlan, S.L., Brazel, A., Jones, N., Larsen, L., Stefanov, W.L., 2007.
Regional relationships between surface temperature, vegetation, and human
settlement in a rapidly urbanizing ecosystem. Landsc. Ecol. 22, 353–365.
Kawashima, S., Ishida, T., Minomura, M., Miwa, T., 2000. Relations between surface
temperature and air temperature on a local scale during winter nights. J. Appl.
Meteorol. 39, 1570–1579.
Khandelwal, S., Goyal, R., Kaul, N., Mathew, A., 2018. Assessment of land surface
temperature variation due to change in elevation of area surrounding Jaipur, India.
The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Sciences 21, 87–94.
Lazzarini, M., Marpu, P.R., Ghedira, H., 2013. Temperature-land cover interactions: the
inversion of urban heat island phenomenon in desert city areas. Remote Sensing of
Environment 130, 136–152.
Li, L., Tan, Y., Ying, S., Yu, Z., Li, Z., Lan, H., 2014. Impact of land cover and population
density on land surface temperature: case study in Wuhan, China. J. Appl. Remote
Sens. 8.
Lin, X., Zhang, W., Huang, Y., Sun, W., Han, P., Yu, L., Sun, F., 2016. Empirical
estimation of near-surface air temperature in China from MODIS LST data by
considering physiographic features. Rem. Sens. 8, 629.
Liu, L., Zhang, Y., 2011. Urban heat island analysis using the Landsat TM data and ASTER
data: a case study in Hong Kong. Rem. Sens. 3, 1535–1552.
Liu, Z., Ballantyne, A.P., Cooper, L.A., 2018a. Increases in land surface temperature in
response to fire in Siberian boreal forests and their attribution to biophysical
processes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 6485–6494.
Liu, C., Wang, F., Xu, Y., 2018b. Habitation environment suitability and population
density patterns in China: a regionalization approach. Growth Change 1–17, 2018.
Lo, C.P., Quattrochi, D.A., 2003. Land-use and land-cover change, urban heat island,
phenomenon, and health implications: a remote sensing approach. Photogramm.
Eng. Rem. Sens. 69, 1053–1063.
Maffei, C., Alfieri, S.M., Meneti, M., 2018. Relating spatiotemporal patterns of forest fires
burned area and duration to diurnal land surface temperatures anomalies. Rem.
Sens. 10, 1777.
Malbeteau, Y., Merlin, O., Gascoin, S., Gastellu, J.P., Mattar, C., Olivera-Guerra, L.,
Khabba, S., Jarlan, L., 2017. Normalizing land surface temperature data for elevation
and illumination effects in mountainous areas: a case study using ASTER data over a
steep-sided valley in Morocco. Remote Sensing of Environment 189, 25–39.
Mallick, J., Rahman, A., 2012. Impact of population density on the surface temperature
and micro-climate of Delhi. Curr. Sci. 102, 1708–1713.
Marquette, C., 1997. Population And Environment Relationships In Developing Countries: A
Select Review Of Approaches And Methods. Working Paper WP 1997: 15. Chr.
Michelsen Institute. Development Studies and Human Rights, Bergen, Norway.
Mitchell, A., 2005. The ESRI guide to GIS analysis. In: Spatial Measurements and
Statistics, ume 2. ESRI Press.
Muhlbauer, S., Costa, A.C., Caetano, M., 2016. A spatiotemporal analysis of droughts and
the influence of North Atlantic Oscillation in the Iberian Peninsula based on MODIS
imagery. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 124, 703–721.
S.M. Jaber
Mutiibwa, D., Strachan, S., Albright, T., 2015. Land surface temperature and surface air
temperature in complex terrain. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth
Observations and Remote Sensing 8 (10), 4762–4774.
Nezammahalleh, M.A., Noori, A.A., Assharmanesh, H., Pourhosseini, Z., Rastegar, A.,
rezai, H.S.S., Alavipanah, S.K., 2013. Identification of active areas of earthquake by
thermal remote sensing. Int. Arch. Photogram. Rem. Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci. XL-1/W3,
5–8. October 2013.
Nichole, J.E., 1996. High-resolution surface temperature patterns related to urban
morphology in a tropical city: a satellite-based study. J. Appl. Meteorol. 35,
135–146.
Nieves, J.J., Stevens, F.R., Gaughan, A.E., Linard, C., Sorichetta, A., Hornby, G., Patel, N.
N., Tatem, A.J., 2017. Examining the correlates and drivers of human population
distributions across low- and middle-income countries. J. R. Soc. Interface 14,
20170401.
Ogunjobi, K.O., Adamu, Y., Akinsanola, A.A., Orimoloye, I.R., 2018. Spatio-temporal
analysis of land use dynamics and its potential indications on land surface
temperature in Sokoto Metropolis, Nigeria, 5. Royal Society Open Science,
p. 180661.
Oku, Y., Ishikawa, H., 2006. Recent trends in land surface temperature on the Tibetan
Plateau. J. Clim. 19, 2995–3003.
Orimoloye, I.R., Mazinyo, S.P., Kalumba, A.M., Ekundayo, O.Y., Nel, W., 2019b.
Implications of climate variability and change on urban and human health: a review.
Cities 91, 213–223.
Orimoloye, I.R., Ololade, O.O., Mazinyo, S.P., Kalumba, A.M., Ekundayo, O.Y.,
Busayo, E.T., Akinsanola, A.A., Nel, W., 2019a. Spatial assessment of drought
severity in Cape Town area, South Africa. Heliyon 5, e02148.
Orimoloye, I.R., Mazinyo, S.P., Nel, W., Kalumba, A.M., 2018. Spatiotemporal
monitoring of land surface temperature and estimated radiation using remote
sensing: human health implications for East London, South Africa. Environmental
Earth Sciences 77, 77.
Pavlidou, E., Meijde, M., Werff, H., Hecker, C., 2019. Time series analysis of land surface
temperature in 20 earthquake cases worldwide. Rem. Sens. 11, 61.
Pena, M.A., 2008. Relationships between remotely sensed surface parameters associated
with the urban heat sink formation in Santiago, Chile. Int. J. Rem. Sens. 29,
4385–4404.
Peng, W., Zhou, J., Wen, L., Xue, S., Dong, L., 2017. Land surface temperature and its
impact factors in Western Sichuan Plateau, China. Geocarto Int. 32, 919–934.
Patel, N.R., Parida, B.R., Venus, V., Saha, S.K., Dadhwal, V.K., 2012. Analysis of
agricultural drought using vegetation temperature condition index (VTCI) from
Terra/MODIS satellite data. Environ. Monit. Assess. 184, 7153–7163.
Phan, T.N., Kappas, M., Tran, T.P., 2018. Land surface temperature variation due to
changes in elevation in Northwest Vietnam. Climate 6, 28.
Pimentel, D., Huang, X., Cordova, A., Pimentel, M., 2015. Impact of growing population
on natural resources: the challenge for environmental management. Front.
Interdiscip. J. Study Abroad III, 105–131.
Preston, S.H., 1996. The effect of population growth on environmental quality. Popul.
Res. Pol. Rev. 15, 95–108.
Rasul, A., Balzter, H., Smith, C., 2016. Diurnal and seasonal variation of surface urban
cool and heat islands in the semi-arid city of Erbil, Iraq. Climate 4, 42.
Salvacion, A.R., Magcale-Macandog, D.B., 2015. Spatial analysis of human population
distribution and growth in Marinduque Island, Philippines. Journal of Marine and
Island Cultures 4, 27–33.
Sandholt, I., Rasmussen, K., Andersen, J., 2002. A simple interpretation of the surface
temperature/vegetation index space for assessment of surface moisture status.
Remote Sensing of Environment 79, 213–224.
Schwarz, N., Schlink, U., Franck, U., Großmannc, K., 2012. Relationship of land surface
and air temperatures and its implications for quantifying urban heat island
indicators – an application for the city of Leipzig (Germany). Ecol. Indicat. 18,
693–704.
14
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 20 (2020) 100435
Sekiguchi, T., Tamura, K., Masuda, N., 2018. Population changes in residential clusters in
Japan. PloS One 13, e0197144.
Shaw, R.P., 1992. The impact of population growth on environment: the debate heats up.
Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 12, 11–36.
Sherbinin, A., Carr, D., Cassels, S., Jiang, L., 2007. Population and environment. Annu.
Rev. Environ. Resour. 32, 345–373.
Small, C., 2004. Global population distribution and urban land use in geophysical
parameter space. Earth Interact. 8, 1–18.
Stephenson, J., Newman, K., Mayhew, S., 2010. Population dynamics and climate
change: what are the links? Journal of Public Health 32, 150–156.
Tronin, A.A., 2010. Satellite remote sensing in seismology. A review. Rem. Sens. 2,
124–150.
United Nations, 2019. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division.
World Population Prospects 2019: Highlights. ST/ESA/SER.A/423.
Veraverbeke, S., Verstraeten, W.W., Lhermitte, S., De Kerchove, R.V., Goossens, R., 2012.
Assessment of post-fire changes in land surface temperature and surface albedo, and
their relation with fire-burn severity using multitemporal MODIS imagery. Int. J.
Wildland Fire 21, 243–256.
Viassova, L., Perez-Cabello, F., Mimbrero, M.R., Lloveria, R.M., Garcia-Martin, A., 2014.
Analysis of the relationship between land surface temperature and wildfire severity
in a series of Landsat images. Rem. Sens. 6, 6136–6162.
Wan, Z., 2014. New refinements and validation of the collection-6 MODIS land-surface
temperature/emissivity product. Remote Sensing of Environment 140, 36–45.
Wan, Z., Hook, S., Hulley, G., 2015. MOD11C3 MODIS/Terra Land Surface Temperature/
Emissivity Monthly L3 Global 0.05Deg CMG V006 [Data Set]. NASA EOSDIS Land
Processes DAAC. https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MOD11C3.006. (Accessed 18
October 2018).
Wang, C., Li, Y., Myint, S.W., Zhao, Q., Wentz, E.A., 2019. Impacts of spatial clustering of
urban land cover on land surface temperature across Koppen climate zones in the
contiguous United States. Landsc. Urban Plann. 192, 103668.
Wang, H., Zhang, Y., Tsou, J.Y., Li, Y., 2017. Surface urban heat island analysis of
Shanghai (China) based on the change of land use and land cover. Sustainability 9,
1538.
Weber, H., Sciubba, J.D., 2019. The effect of population growth on the environment:
evidence from European regions. Eur. J. Popul. 35, 379–402.
Weng, Q., Lu, D., Schubring, J., 2004. Estimation of land surface temperature-vegetation
abundance relationship for urban heat island studies. Remote Sensing of
Environment 89, 467–483.
Wu, X., Li, B., Li, M., Guo, M., Zang, S., Zhang, S., 2019. Examining the relationship
between spatial configurations of urban impervious surfaces and land surface
temperature. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 29, 568–578.
Xiao, H., Kopecka, M., Guo, S., Guan, Y., Cai, D., Zhang, C., Zhang, X., Yao, W., 2018.
Responses of urban land surface temperature on land cover: a comparative study of
Vienna and Madrid. Sustainability 10, 260.
Xiao, R., Weng, Q., Ouyang, Z., Li, W., Schienke, E.W., Zhang, Z., 2008. Land surface
temperature variation and major factors in Beijing, China. Photogramm. Eng. Rem.
Sens. 74, 451–461.
Xu, m., Cohen, J.E., 2019. Analyzing and interpreting spatial and temporal variability of
the United States county population distributions using Taylor’s law. PloS One 14,
e0226096.
Yuan, F., Bauer, M.E., 2007. Comparison of impervious surface area and normalized
difference vegetation index as indicators of surface urban heat island effects in
Landsat imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment 106, 375–386.
Zhang, J., Zhu, Y., 2011. The population spatial distribution model based on the spatial
statistics in Shandong Province, China. IEEE 19th International Conference On
Geoinformatics. 24-26 June 2011, Shanghai, China.
Zoran, M., Savastru, R., Savastru, D., 2016. Earthquake anomalies recognition through
satellite and in-situ monitoring data. European Journal of Remote Sensing 49,
1011–1032.