Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems☆

Arnab Banerjee and Santanu Ray, Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan, India

© 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction 1
Geographical Information System 1
Historical Development of GIS 2
Error Problem of GIS 3
Multiscale Problem 4
Real-Time Problem of GIS 4
Direct Modeling Problem 4
GIS Data Type 5
Traditional Approaches 6
Some Recent Applications of Spatial Modeling 6
Transportation 7
Mangrove Ecosystem 7
Mapping and Extent 7
Species Composition 7
Leaf Area and Canopy Closure 7
Height and Biomass 8
Health Service Access 8
Summary 8
References 10

Introduction

Models are representation of investigated objects for purposes of description, explanation, simulation, or forecast. Spatial models
are complicated by the fact that they include information about position, possible topological connections and attributes of the
recorded objects. Spatial modeling of ecological phenomena has always been an important issue in ecology. The mutual influence
of patterns and processes of ecosystems are manifested in the spatial distribution of ecosystems at different scales, which has long
been the main component of spatial models. A spatial model is a mechanism for assembling spatial knowledge from a range of
sources and presenting conclusion based on that knowledge in readily used form. Spatial modeling is the process of constructing a
model incorporating space, which can be identified into areal interpolation and surface modeling.
Areal interpolation is the transformation of data between different sets of areal units. The set of zones, for which data are
available, are termed source zones. The second set of zones, for which estimates need to be derived, are termed target zones. The
third set of zones, for which auxiliary information can be incorporated in the interpolation process, are termed control zones. The
methods of areal interpolation based on alternative hypotheses include radially symmetric kernel functions, maximally smooth
estimation, piecewise approximation, uniform target-zone densities and uniform control-zone densities.
Surface modeling is the process of numerically representing a planetary surface (Earth or other planets) by grids with known
coordinates in an arbitrary coordinate system. Surface modeling is aimed at formulating an ecological object in a grid system, in
which each grid cell contains an estimate of the ecological object that is representative for that particular location. Representing data
in grid form have the following advantages: (1) regular grid can be easily reaggregated to any areal arrangement required; (2)
producing ecological data in grid form is one way of ensuring compatibility between heterogeneous data sets; (3) data in grid form
make multiresolution and multisource information fusion easier; and (4) converting data into grid form can provide a way of
avoiding some of the problems imposed by artificial political boundaries.
Spatial modeling occurred in the 1960s with general availability of computers, but the tools offered by current geographical
information systems (GIS) have appeared to be of little interest for spatial modeling because GIS has been restricted to producing
cartographic products rather than spatial models.

☆
Change History: April 2018. A Banerjee and S Ray updated this article. Figs. 1–4 are newly added, sections “Introduction, Geographical Information System,
Historical Development of GIS, Direct Modeling Problem, GIS Data Type, Summary (highly modified)”were updated and “Traditional Approaches, Some
Recent Applications of Spatial Modeling (and corresponding subsections), Further Reading” were new sections.

Encyclopedia of Ecology, 2nd Edition https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.11237-0 1

2 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems

Geographical Information System

There are many definitions of GIS. For instance, GIS can be defined as a powerful set of tools for collecting, storing, retrieving at will,
transforming and displaying spatial data from the real world (Burrough, 1986); as an information technology storing, analyzing,
and displaying both spatial and nonspatial data (Parker, 1988); a set of computer-based systems for managing geographic data and
using them to solve spatial problems (Lo and Yeung, 2003) and also GIS can be defined as a tool for performing operations on
geographic data that are too tedious or expensive or inaccurate if performed by hand (Longley et al., 2011). In general, GIS integrates
hardware and software to capture, organize, and display geographically referenced data thus allowing for inquiring, interpreting,
and imagining the data through visualization that helps in understanding relationships or patterns in the form of maps, charts, and
reports.

Historical Development of GIS

The origin of GIS as a computer-dependent application can be traced back to the 1940s and the 1950s when successful data storage,
management and processing techniques were successfully implemented. In the early 1960s, R. F. Tomlinson conceptualized the first
GIS—Canada GIS—to address the needs of land and resource information management of the federal government of Canada,
which became operational much later in 1971. In 1963, H. H. Fisher took advantage of computational techniques to make simple
maps by printing statistical values on a grid of plain paper including a set of modules for analyzing data, manipulating them to
produce choropleth or isoline interpolations, with the results displayed in many ways using overprinting of line-printer characters to
produce suitable gray scales. In spite of the adaptation to advanced computer techniques in 1960s, the cartographers were mostly
limited to automatic drafting of maps; fundamental attitudes of traditional cartography gained no evident benefits from the new
computer technology.
In the early 1970s, the Swedish Land Data Bank was developed to automate land and property registration; the Local Authority
Management Information System and the Joint Information System were developed in Britain and used by local governments to
control and monitor land use. By the late 1970s, there had been considerable investments in the development and application of
computer-assisted cartography, with hundreds of new computer programs and systems being developed for various mapping
applications. Parallel developments in automated data capture, data analysis and presentation in related fields have resulted in
emergence of general purpose GIS with the primary focus being map data processing while spatial analysis functionality was rather
limited.
Topological principles in cartography (Corbett, 1979)—a milestone of GIS development—by which geographical data can be
stored in a simple structure that is capable of representing structure (what they are), position (where they are) and spatial
association with one another. In 1982, the release of vector-based ArcInfo GIS software package by Environmental Systems Research
Institute, allowed storage of graphic data in topological structure and attributing the same in tabular structure. By the late 1980s,
many other GIS software packages were developed by using a similar data model.
In the 1990s, with advances in operating systems, computer graphics technology, data management, increased
computer–human interaction and improved graphical user interface design, GIS became multiplatform applications that could
be utilized on different classes of computers as stand-alone applications and as time-sharing systems. Development of Web GIS has
allowed expensive data and software to be shared. Standardization in interfaces between data programs and other programs has
made it much easier to provide the functionality for handling large amounts of data. GIS has been considerably developed in many
aspects. Much knowledge on how to set up computer mapping and GIS projects efficiently has emerged. The basic functionality
required for handling spatial data has been widely accepted. Although these advances have promoted the considerable development
of GIS and the development of GIS has entered the “age of geographical information infrastructure,” the basic spatial models used
in modern GIS are little different from those of 20 years ago.
Shifting of focus towards emerging conservation paradigms from single species to multispecies approaches all focus on
applications of interdisciplinary methodologies including the incorporation of GIS in ecological modeling. Various applications
of GIS technologies have shifted the traditional approaches and uses of this to a newer horizon.
The restrictive effects of space–time constraints (Kwan, 2001) on accessibility research originally proposed by (Hägerstraand,
1970) was later incorporated as space–time prisms (Lenntorp, 1976) mapping onto geographical space (Burns, 1979; Villoria,
1989; Dijst and Vidakovic, 2000). Development of space–time accessibility measures utilizing the GIS-based computational
strategies and techniques (Kim and Kwan, 2003; Kwan, 1999, 2010; Miller, 2010) and subsequently the development of action
space models and detailed examinations of spatial variation of opportunity based choice (Dijst et al., 2002) are two examples of
such applications of temporal-spatial framework.
Spatial autocorrelation in ecology is not infrequent and it serves as the base assumption for a multitude of ecological theories
and models (Legendre and Fortin, 1989) describing the positive autocorrelation in species abundance. Two different approaches
incorporate space into ecological analysis (Legendre, 1993) which are: “raw data approach” that describe the relation of a species
with its environment (partial regression—univariate when considering individual species) or “constrained ordination” for com-
munity analysis (multivariate case) (Borcard et al., 1992; Legendre and Legendre, 1998). A combination of ecological distances
between sampled data with spatial distribution (obtained through GIS technique interpolation) can be represented by a “matrix
approach” that combines the distribution of species with its environment and geographical distances and boundaries.
 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems 3

The crucial role of remote sensing in mapping the variations of areal extent and spatial patterns of mangroves has been observed
in the late 1990s and also in early 2000s (Heumann, 2011) allowing for detailed characterization of the same in order to understand
and contribute to proper management strategies. In spite of the vast applicability of remote sensing, it had been—in this case—
primarily targeted to map the areal extent and pattern change at a local scale. The potential for improved accuracy of classification of
land cover as well as characterization of various aspects including leaf/foliage area, canopy structure, species composition and
abundance were shown through wide scale applications of GIS in the late 2000s and early 2010s owing to the rapid development of
newer sensors and systems (Gillespie et al., 2008; Wooster, 2007).
New systems like LiDAR systems (IcsSAT/GLAS), satellite sensors like VHR systems (very high resolution), for example, Quick-
bird, IKONOS, GeoEye-1, Worldview-2, ALSO PRISM, and synthetic aperture radar satellites (ALOS PALSAR, ASAR ENVISAT, and
also Radarsar Satellites), hyper-spectral airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer (AVRIS), TOPSAR and AIRSAR (polymeric
SAR) as well as various commercial wave-form LiDAR systems, all have contributed to recent developments of remote sensing
technologies and applications. With the potential capability of improved accuracy of classification, species detection and estimation
of foliage arrangement (canopy height, leaf coverage, etc.) these newer techniques have contributed to the rapid development in the
field of GIS and its application in ecology (Heumann, 2011).
Recent advances in remote sensing techniques and sensor technologies and improved geographical imaging techniques have
demonstrated plausible and feasible accurate classification techniques that were previously unavailable with only the handful of
traditional techniques at the disposal of the researchers. Newer improved data types can now be gathered with these modern
approaches and they can be overlapped with some of the traditional findings in order to facilitate exploitation of various new alleys
that were otherwise previously limited to simple cartographical applications. While such data fusion has been achieved in relation
to mangrove ecology (Wang and Sousa, 2009) and some more recent implementation to map spatial patterns of carbon
metabolism and its relation to landscape indices (FRAC—fractional dimensional index) combining them with mathematical
statistics (Xia et al., 2017), these paths can be ventured into more deeply to gain further insight into additional elaborate uses of
GIS and relating that to answer an even broader spectrum of ecological problems. In spite of the advances and increase in free access
to imagery and data storage, over the recent years, intensive involvement, training and accessibility to required technological
infrastructure is required to enable this technology to be used and developed further to address more specific and intricate ecological
questions.

Error Problem of GIS

Errors are ubiquitous in current GIS. The word, error, can be used in a variety of senses. Unwin, 1995 defined it as the difference
between reality and representation of the reality. Defined in this way, error is related to accuracy. Accuracy is the degree with the
values or descriptions of the real-world features that they represent.
When field data are incorporated into a GIS, a common mistake is to assume that the error can be simply equated to the
measurement error at the sampled points and quoted as a simple global statement, which does not address the spatial variation.
Monckton, 1994 criticized that the spatially uniform error assumption was untenable. A complete specification of the error should
include not only the spatial field of its mean but also its variance and spatial dependence. The problems of error and uncertainty in
field models have been proved to be much hard-addressed in principle using well-developed theory.
The process of integrating remote sensing data into a GIS usually includes five steps, viz. data acquisition, data processing, data
analysis, error assessment, and final product presentation. Error may accumulate throughout the process in an additive or
multiplicative fashion. Data acquisition error may be from geometric aspects, sensor system, platforms, ground control, and/or
scene considerations. Data processing error may be caused by geometric rectification such as resampling and data conversion such
as from raster to vector format and from vector to raster format. Data analysis error may be from classification systems, data
generalization, and quantitative analysis of relationships between data variables and the subsequent inferences that may be
developed. Error of error assessment might be mainly produced by expression of locational accuracy, discrete multivariate and
reporting standards. Final product presentation error includes attribute error and spatial error that may be introduced through the
use of base maps with different scales, different national horizontal datum in the source materials and different minimum mapping
units which are then resampled to a final minimum mapping unit.
The errors can be distinguished into inherent ones and operational ones. The inherent error is the error present in source
documents. The operational error is accumulated through data capture and manipulation functions of a GIS. The inherent errors
include errors from sampling and attribute errors in data source. Operational errors include positional errors and identification
errors. Positional errors stem from inaccuracies in the horizontal placement of boundaries and identification errors occur when
there is a mislabeling of areas on thematic maps. Spatial models as simulations of the real world often simplify the complexity of the
real world and are therefore obviously open to errors. The inherent errors can be propagated through the simulation process and
become manifest in the final products. Although there are many types and sources of error and uncertainty in geographical data and
their processing, the problem is not simply technical and it arises from an evident inability of GIS. Integration of data from different
sources and indifferent formats, at different original scales, plus inherent errors, can yield a product of questionable accuracy.
Manipulation of thematic overlays within GIS to derive model variables are susceptible to inherent and operational errors, from
which results may have such error margins as to be useless for specific applications. Any decision based on such products would thus
be flawed.
4 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems

Multiscale Problem
Ecosystems are constantly changing, not only over space but also in time. The understanding of spatial and temporal processes and
their interrelations is central to the understanding of the complex behavior of real ecosystems. Relevant processes might span over
several temporal and spatial scales. Therefore, tools for modeling such processes should also be able to operate on diverse spatial
and temporal scales.
The issues of ecological modeling are involved at various scales. At each scale, a set of spatially explicit indicators needs to be
identified to characterize the extent, pressures, condition, trends and scenarios of ecosystem types and land-use patterns as well as
the underlying structural features of ecosystems. For any size patch of the Earth’s surface that we choose to define as an ecosystem,
there will be a set of factors external to the ecosystem that influence how it functions and in turn, there will be flows of material and
energy that extend beyond the ecosystem. The larger the scale, the more inclusive it is of these flows of material and energy.
However, studies undertaken at larger scales lose the site specificity that policymakers often need. In other words, there is no single
scale at which we can obtain a full understanding of ecosystems.
Scale issue is an inherent part of ecology. While in the early 1950s to the early 1970s, many ecologists tried to incorporate scale in
environmental biology in the early 1970s to the 1980s, many ecologists focused increasing attention on the problem of spatial scale.
In the 1990s, scale problem became the central problem in ecology, for unifying population biology and ecosystem science, and
marrying basic ecology and applied ecology.
The explosion of interest in scale has created many methods for scaling. For instance, interpolation brings multiple phenomena
measured at different resolutions into a common coordinate grid with a single size. Multiple-variable scaling method simulta-
neously examines each variable at different scales. Spatially explicit models are simply maps of actual or simulated phenomena to
demonstrate scale-sensitive issues. Fractal geometry is used to treat the dependence of various phenomena on scales. Resampling
techniques are used to frame samples within a hierarchical framework to assess how scale and sequence of assembly affect
ecosystem characteristics. Geostatistical techniques employ knowledge of the spatial covariance to produce a spatial model. Neural
models are developed to test scale effects resulting from changes in grain size and spatial structure. Hierarchy theory is employed to
address issues of spatial scale, which implies that an ecosystem is composed of interacting components and is itself a component of
a larger system. However, they are not generalized in GIS as module.

Real-Time Problem of GIS

Time can be characterized as the fourth dimension of the physical space–time continuum. From the human point of view, a concrete
system can move in any direction on the spatial dimension, but only forward on the temporal dimension. Static objects can be
defined as objects that do not change in a short time period. GIS systems generally deal with static information. However, in many
situations, the information in GIS applications does change dynamically. Quite often, it is desirable to combine static information
with dynamic information. Studies show that major impediments to the analysis of spatial data arise from a lack of well-
documented methods in terms of error accumulation; errors that may occur due to the static representation of dynamic ecosystem
components suggest that a real-time method must be developed. Methods of assessing the accuracy of dynamic images are also
inadequate and must be further researched.
Real time means momentary, that is, the same moment as it happens. In real-time systems, this implies momentary updates.
However, it is impossible to get momentary updates, there is always some delay. The acceptable delay length for a real-time system
depends on how dynamic the processes are and how time-critical the decisions are. Rapid development of computing technology in
recent years has enabled real-time spatial analysis and real-time data visualization to become realizable, although current GIS
software and interfaces do not encompass the set of technical and real-time functions.
GIS provides powerful functionality for spatial analysis, data overlay, and storage. These spatially oriented systems lack the
ability to represent temporal dynamics and their concepts of ecosystems are static. In other words, GIS prefers a static view and
generally lacks the representation of dynamics. The current generation of commercial GIS is unable to facilitate real-time decision
making without significant modifications or integration with external models.
In general, the technology of digital geographies has found that the representation of change in time is extremely hard to handle.
GIS today remains a technology for static data, which is a major impediment to its use in spatial modeling.

Direct Modeling Problem

Some researchers have noted that GIS has been restricted to producing cartographic products rather than spatial modeling. GIS was
conventionally developed using a hybrid approach that handled graphical and descriptive geographical data separately. This
georelational data model was the norm for GIS implementation until the late 1990s. GIS was usually used as means of overlaying
maps. Almost all mathematical models are too complex to be run directly from present state-of-the-art GIS. They often run outside
the GIS. In these cases, GIS is used to supply the input data at an appropriate resolution and to display the results graphically in
combination with other relevant spatial data.
Integration of GIS and simulation models can be categorized into loose coupling and deep coupling. Most integration is in
the loose coupling category that integrates GIS with simulation models through exchanging data files. This approach often
requires human intervention, which can become a barrier in automating the operation process. The deep coupling approach
 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems 5

links GIS and simulation models with a common user interface, in which GIS and simulation models can remain, in fact,
separate systems.
A management system of ecological modelbase (MSEM) with 3055 models has been developed in order to find a solution for
direct modeling problem. Usually, there are two ways to develop MSEM. One is the model management techniques, including
database approach, structured modeling approach, object-oriented approach, and knowledge-based approach. Another one is
model management in GIS software such as ModelBuilder in ArcGIS. The first way can efficiently manage the models, but requires
great code creation to handle spatial data. The second way can utilize GIS to manipulate spatial data, but it does not support
building complex mathematical models. Therefore, an object-oriented framework for MSEM is developed, in which models are
abstracted to model class and model instance. Model class and model instance are represented as objects. Spatial data and
mathematical equation are parsed by Model Engine that is composed of mathematical library and SMTS (Satellite Modem
Termination System) component. Integration of SMTS and MSEM would solve the direct modeling problem existing in current
GIS. SMTS finds solutions to the error problem, real-time problem, direct modeling problem, and multiscale problem of the current
GIS. However, SMTS involve huge computation cost and very slow computational speed because it must solve a partial differential
equation set for simulating each lattice of a surface, which has limited wider application of SMTS.

GIS Data Type

One aspect of GIS that is of utmost importance is the type of data that can be generated for the specific purpose that a study
demands. These data may be of topographical or topological nature. The topographical data or topography is generated through
digital elevation models (DEM) that can describe some spatial information and topological data or simply topology, that can use
terrain attributes for describing spatial distribution.
Fig. 1 below shows the representation of a contour map (structure above) that is used for describing the surface topology and
topography (structure below).
GIS data can be of the following types, viz. raster or grid based data, triangular irregular networks or vector- or contour-based line
networks. Fig. 2 below shows examples of (A) Grid and (B) TIN representation of topographical data.
The grid based approach utilizes grid cell or raster information and is made up of regularly spaced lines that represent a
collection of small rectangles containing dots that characterizes the central coordinate—based upon which, each of these rectangles
(area) are defined. An example of this is the raster-based GIS of the Geographic Resource Analysis Support System or GRASS
(Pentland and Cuthbert, 1971).
TIN or triangular irregular networks (Fig. 2 b) relies upon determination of significant peaks and valley points that are translated
into a collection of irregularly spaced points connected by lines producing a patchwork of triangles (planar facets) based on several
algorithms. Delaunay triangles are one of the most widely used techniques and ARCINFO is one of the most commonly used
commercial systems alongside ADAPT—Areal Design and Planning Tool (Grayman et al., 1975).

Fig. 1 Example of contour map showing topographic map and corresponding surface. Source: www.cita.utoronto.ca/
murray/GLG130/Exercises/EXE2html.html.
6 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems

Fig. 2 Representation of Grid (A) and TIN (B) (DeVantier and Feldman, 1993).

Fig. 3 Representation of vector-based or contour-based diagram (DeVantier and Feldman, 1993).

A contour- or vector-based line network diagram (Fig. 3 below) on the other hand uses digital representation of a point-to-point
set (vectors) that can be stored as a digital line graph or DLG. These require a greater magnitude of data as compared to the above
two methods but are useful in presenting inherent important attributes (Moore et al., 1991, 1988).

Traditional Approaches

Traditional approaches such as aerial photography (AP) and legacy high resolution systems like Landsat and SPOT are the most
commonly used approaches (Newton et al., 2009) for mapping and assessment of mangroves.
Fine grain AP can be successfully used to detect and map individual species as shown by the work of Dahdouh-Guebas et al.
(2006). Limited areal extent, relatively high costs of data acquisition over large geographic areas and the possible inconsistencies
seen in data collected such as uneven brightness and parallax distortion are the main limitations of using AP. However, these
drawbacks can be overcome by the use of satellite based remote sensing. In fact, high resolution satellite imagery (i.e., spatial
resolution between 5 and 100 m) such as Landsat (MSS, TM, or ETM þ), SPOT (HVR, HRVIR, or HRG), ASTER, or IRS (1C or 1D)
have been used by Béland et al. (2006), Benfield et al. (2005), Al Habshi et al. (2007), and so on.
Techniques such as visual interpretation, hybrid classification, unsupervised/supervised classification, and so on have been used
to detect and delineate mangroves.
Application of multispectral imagery that includes preprocessing steps such as spectral transformations such as principal
components analysis (PCA) or tassel-cap transformation (Crist and Cicone, 1984) or spectral vegetation indices such as normalized
difference vegetation index (NDVI) or simple ratio (SR) is another common approach for the classification of mangroves.
In recent times authors such as Gillespie et al. (2008) and Wooster (2007) developed new types of satellite sensors such as very
high resolution (VHR) systems (e.g., Quickbird, IKONOS, GeoEye-1 Worldview-2, and ALOS PRISM), synthetic aperture radar
systems (e.g., ALOS PALSAR, ASAR ENVISAT, and the Radarsat satellites), and LiDAR systems such as IceSAT/GLAS. Airborne
sensors like the hyperspectral airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer (AVIRIS), TOPSAR, and AIRSAR (Polarmetric SAR)
and various commercial wave-form LiDAR systems have been used to demonstrate the potential for satellite-based sensors. New
analysis techniques like the object-based image analysis (OBIA), and image texture metrics, such as lacunarity, use spatial
information to improve image classification that has applications in both modern and traditional remote sensing imagery.

Some Recent Applications of Spatial Modeling

Depending upon the capabilities of current GIS systems and owing to the vast availability of data, question arises as to how these are
to be represented while evaluating accessibility. Methodological progresses alongside the evolution of theoretical arguments relate
to acute perception and explanation of underlying dimensions about the investigated entity thus presenting refinements in the
 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems 7

analysis of spatial interactions and also various facets of its applications. With the increasing dissemination of GIS techniques and
advances in statistical methodologies, these advances are becoming more accessible to the common mass (Fischer and Reismann,
2002; Congdon, 2000).

Transportation
Several workers have dealt with applications of accessibility research in transportation and network analysis through the use of
matrices measuring connectivity. For example, evaluation of public transit by the use of location–allocation models alongside
coverage models focuses on ensuring increased coverage as well as time efficiency and spacing (Wirasinghe and Ghoneim, 1981;
Gleason, 1975). Such accessibility research delves in examining not only the geographical distribution and movement of individ-
uals, spatial interaction and population potential, but also patterns of friendship and transmission nets (Cohen and Barabási, 2002;
Kwan et al., 2003).

Mangrove Ecosystem
Remote sensing plays a crucial role in the study of mangrove ecology, its management and conservation through the mapping of
areal extent and recognizing pattern changes at local scales. Mangroves have unique features like wide dispersal, fast rates of growth,
where light acts as a limiting resource and the terrestrial trees have uniform crown shape and prolonged flowering period. These
systems provide an wide array of ecosystem services like carbon sequestration, biodiversity support, filtering out pollution and also
have the potential to reduce impacts of natural calamities like tsunamis and hurricanes (Alongi, 2002). Hence several studies over
the years have been dedicated towards the successful and proper understanding of such systems. Remote sensing plays a critical role
in tracking anthropogenic deforestation, impact of natural calamities, effects of conservation projects like reforestation initiatives
and also coastal dynamics (Giri et al. 2007; Doyle et al., 2009; Al Habshi et al. 2007; Sirikulchayanon et al., 2008; Lee and
Yeh, 2009).

Mapping and Extent

Newer types of imagery like VHR, Hyperspectral Imagery, SAR, etc. helps in overcoming the limitations of multispectral remote
sensing in terms of spatial resolution or spectral resolution of sensors, or the inability of optical sensors to penetrate cloud cover.

• VHR imagery like Quickbird or IKONOS is able to reduce the number of mixed pixels.
• Hyperspectral imagery such as HYPERION can potentially detect fine differences in spectral signatures.
• SAR imagery from sensors such as Radarsat or ASAR ENVISAT can penetrate cloud cover.

Even though VHR is capable of and has been used to map mangrove extent, authors such as Giri et al.(2007) and Howari et al.
(2009) have used less expensive and coarser resolution imagery over a large area and checked its accuracy using VHR to map a
smaller geographic area.
Approaches such as an object-based image analysis (OBIA) or a data fusion to integrate different types of data have been recently
developed to improve the accuracy of mapping the extent or detecting the changes over time of mangrove. As its name suggests
OBIA uses objects (a group of pixels) instead of individual pixels for image analysis. The pixels are grouped based on image
properties or GIS data through an image segmentation process.

Species Composition
Based on biotic and abiotic factors, species in a mangrove exhibit strong zonation patterns which can be used as indicators of
geomorphic and environmental changes (Souza Filho and Paradella, 2005). VHR and hyperspectral imagery are among a number of
other methods that has been used recently to map mangrove species. Sensors such as Quickbird and IKONOS are used almost
exclusively along with satellite-based VHR because of their long-mission life and substantial archived imagery. The spectral
information available from Quickbird and IKONOS is limited to the blue, green, red and near-infrared bands which is similar to
those of Landsat TM or ETM þ. However, due to the very high spatial resolution, the number and effect of mixed pixels may be
reduced, which will provide sufficient details for image structure analysis in order to determine canopy structure. Though both
sensors are useful for mapping species, IKONOS panchromatic and multispectral data outperformed Quickbird data for texture
analysis and MLC, respectively (Wang et al., 2004). Although field studies are limited, lab experiments by Vaiphasa et al. (2005,
2007) indicate that discrimination between multiple species is possible with the inclusion of a genetic algorithm to find the
hyperspectral channels that can differentiate between all the species present.

Leaf Area and Canopy Closure

Evapotranspiration, carbon cycling, habitat conditions and forest health can be assessed from bio physical parameters such as leaf
area and canopy closure (Kercher and Chambers, 2001; Kovacs et al., 2008). Empirical relationships between ground based
8 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems

measurements and VHR spectral vegetation indices or SAR backscatter has been utilized to estimate leaf area index (LAI). Kovacs
et al. (2004) found strong significant relationships between LAI of red and white mangroves and the simple ratio (SR) and the
normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) using IKONOS; both the indices produced similar results. Spectral vegetation
indices from Quickbird sensor produced results similar to the previous IKONOS studies (Kovacs et al., 2009). A stronger relation
was observed by Kovacs et al. (2008) between cross polarimetric C-band SAR data and LAI (r2 ¼ 0.82) than the VHR spectral
relationships from their earlier studies.

Height and Biomass

Tree and forest biomass estimates can provide a lot of information about the carbon storage and cycling in forests (Litton et al.,
2007). Biomass can be estimated

• Directly using PolSAR

• Indirectly using VHR, SAR Interferometry (InSAR), stereo imagery or LiDAR

Studies by authors such as Lucas et al. (2007), Mougin et al. (1999) demonstrate the potential of SAR to estimate canopy
characteristics.
The values and differences of horizontal, vertical and cross-polarizations are used as SAR signal by PolSAR methods to relate with
different forest components.
Best estimates of tree height and above ground biomass are given by P-band PolSAR; however, HV polarization of L-Band SAR
performs quite well.
Fatoyinbo et al. (2008) and Simard et al.(2008, 2006) demonstrated that Shuttle Topographic Radar Mission (SRTM)—a
globally available InSAR digital surface model, provides reasonable estimates of mangrove canopy heights. Though SRTM DSM can
be calibrated using field measurements (Fatoyinbo et al., 2008; Simard et al., 2008), vertical canopy structure can be better
characterized by air borne LiDAR (Simard et al., 2006) or space-borne LiDAR from IceSAT/GLAS (Simard et al., 2008).

Health Service Access

Extensive use of GIS has been focused on in the health sector for more than a couple of decades to acquire information on the spatial
patterns of disease and their correlation with environmental factors, patterns of health service provisions and planning new facilities
for making these services more available to the common mass, through various techniques like spatial clustering, and standard GIS
functionality like buffering, overlay analyses and network analyses (relying of catchment generation at physical distances of
providers and recipients and also the distribution of patients) (Higgs and Gould, 2001; Gatrell and Senior, 1999). Fig. 4 (Higgs,
2004) shows the regions of accessibility to healthcare facilities in Wales and is an example of how to use these kind of study data to
potentially improve management, utilization and proper upgradation of such services.

Summary

Simultaneous treatments of issues arising in the representation, selection of methodology and last but not the least—application of
GIS techniques have not yet been fully resolved and thus present some form or the other dependability issues that hinder a wider
acceptance and successful utilization of GIS technology.
Recent advances have demonstrated an improvement of accuracy with respect to classification, estimation, mapping and
measurements. Constant development of comparatively newer imagery techniques like, for example, VHR and SAR generates
newer types of data that can stand out on its own as well as play along nicely with some more orthodox traditional approaches. Like
VHR and SAR, another method that outperforms its predecessor is OBIA—generating much more accurate data rather than the pixel-
based, raster form classification of the past. Classification on the basis of hierarchical rule based systems can be used in conjunction
with this new methodology.
Advanced Land Imager (ALI) similar to Landsat TM and ETM sensors with additional blue, NIR and SWIR bands and also
HYPERION (hyperspectral HYPERION has 220 bands in the visible, NIR and SWIR spectra) on the EO-1 platform can produce
images that—though coarser—can be used in conjunction with Landsat-compatible sensors to detect changes, mapping individual
species, estimate photosynthetic activities of a forest and also determine its health.
A good number of traditional GIS methods for conventional ecosystem studies have yet to be explored more deeply in order to
expand the range of their usage; for example, spectral unmixing techniques that are used in terrestrial forest studies can be extended
to mangrove systems as well in order to get a better idea and explanation of the role of background members (soil and water).
Technological advancements have led to the launch of more than a few up-to-date cutting-edge sensors like ALOS PALSAR,
PRISM, Radersat-2, Worldview-2, and some others, that presents newer opportunities to map and present data with additional
resolution that allows a researcher to delve deep into newer frontiers that were previously unexplored due to lack of technology or
due to the excessive cost involved in such methodology.
 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems 9

Fig. 4 Potential accessibility to healthcare services in Wales. From Higgs, G. (2004). A literature review of the use of GIS-based measures of access to health care
services. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 5(2), 119–139.

Similarly, newer and advanced VHR sensors like GeoEye-1, having four multispectral bands and higher resolutions provides
fresher perspectives and improved opportunities allow further investigation into ecosystems using image texture.
Climate change models has seen the development and use of STMS and YUE-HASM techniques that have considerably reduced
computational time and have also improved accuracy and this might be advanced to meet the real time problems of direct modeling
and also multiscale problems.
These technological advancements coupled with improved data integration techniques has improved classification accuracy
though further in-depth research should be focused in these directions so as to eliminate erroneous occurrences and also to increase
efficiency in storing, processing data and analyzing the outputs. Further improved model building strategies and rigorous
application of the same is required to expand the horizon on this frontier of research.
10 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems

References
Al Habshi A, et al. (2007) New mangrove ecosystem data along the UAE coast using remote sensing. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management. 10: 309–319. Available at: http://
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14634980701512525.
Alongi DM (2002) Present state and future of the world’s mangrove forests. Environmental Conservation 29(3): 331–349.
Béland M, et al. (2006) Assessment of land-cover changes related to shrimp aquaculture using remote sensing data: A case study in the Giao Thuy District, Vietnam. International
Journal of Remote Sensing 27(8): 1491–1510. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01431160500406888.
Benfield SL, Guzman HM, and Mair JM (2005) Temporal mangrove dynamics in relation to coastal development in Pacific Panama. Journal of Environmental Management 76(3):
263–276. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301479705001027.
Borcard D, Legendre P, and Drapeau P (1992) Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73(3): 1045–1055.
Burns LD (1979) Transportation, temporal, and spatial components of accessibility. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Burrough PA (1986) Principles of geographical information systems for land resources assessment. Geocarto International 1(3): 54.
Cohen EA and Barabási A-L (2002) Linked: The new science of networks. Foreign Affairs 81(5): 204. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/20033300?origin¼crossref.
Congdon P (2000) A Bayesian approach to prediction using the gravity model, with an application to patient flow modeling. Geographical Analysis 32(3): 205–224.
Corbett, J.P., 1979. Topological principles in cartography, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
Crist EP and Cicone RC (1984) Application of the tasseled cap concept to simulated thematic mapper data. Photogrammetric Engineering Remote Sensing 50(3): 343–352.
Dahdouh-Guebas F, et al. (2006) Capacity building in tropical coastal resource monitoring in developing countries: A re-appreciation of the oldest remote sensing method. International
Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 13(1): 62–76. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504500609469662.
DeVantier BA and Feldman AD (1993) Review of GIS applications in hydrologic modeling. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 119(2): 246–261.
Dijst M and Vidakovic V (2000) Travel time ratio: The key factor of spatial reach. Transportation 27(2): 179–199.
Dijst M, de Jong T, and van Eck JR (2002) Opportunities for transport mode change: An exploration of a disaggregated approach. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design
29(3): 413–430.
Doyle TW, Krauss KW, and Wells CJ (2009) Landscape analysis and pattern of hurricane impact and circulation on mangrove forests of the Everglades. Wetlands 29(1): 44–53.
Fatoyinbo, T.E. et al., 2008. Landscape-scale extent, height, biomass, and carbon estimation of Mozambique’s mangrove forests with Landsat ETM þ and shuttle radar topography
mission elevation data. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 113(G2), p.n/a-n/a. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1029/2007JG000551.
Fischer MM and Reismann M (2002) A methodology for neural spatial interaction modeling. Geographical Analysis 34(3): 207–228. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1538-
4632.2002.tb01085.x.
Gatrell A and Senior M (1999) Health and health care applications. In: Geographic information systems: Principles and applications, pp. 925–938. London: Wiley.
Gillespie TW, et al. (2008) Measuring and modelling biodiversity from space. Progress in Physical Geography 32(2): 203–221. Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.
1177/0309133308093606.
Giri C, et al. (2007) Monitoring mangrove forest dynamics of the Sundarbans in Bangladesh and India using multi-temporal satellite data from 1973 to 2000. Estuarine, Coastal and
Shelf Science 73(1–2): 91–100. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0272771407000029.
Gleason JM (1975) A set covering approach to bus stop location. Omega 3(5): 605–608.
Grayman WM, et al. (1975) Land-based modeling system for water quality management studies. Journal of the Hydraulics Division 101(5): 567–580.
Hägerstraand T (1970) What about people in regional science? Papers in Regional Science 24(1): 7–24.
Heumann BW (2011) Satellite remote sensing of mangrove forests: Recent advances and future opportunities. Progress in Physical Geography 35(1): 87–108. Available at: http://
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0309133310385371.
Higgs G (2004) A literature review of the use of GIS-based measures of access to health care services. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology 5(2): 119–139.
Higgs G and Gould M (2001) Is there a role for GIS in the “new NHS”? Health and Place 7(3): 247–259.
Howari FM, et al. (2009) Field and remote-sensing assessment of mangrove forests and seagrass beds in the northwestern part of the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Coastal
Research 251: 48–56. Available at: http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.2112/07-0867.1.
Kercher J and Chambers J (2001) Parameter estimation for a global model of terrestrial biogeochemical cycling by an iterative method. Ecological Modelling 139(2–3): 137–175.
Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0304380001002344.
Kim HM and Kwan MP (2003) Space-time accessibility measures: A geocomputational algorithm with a focus on the feasible opportunity set and possible activity duration. Journal of
Geographical Systems 5(1): 71–91.
Kovacs JM, et al. (2004) Estimating leaf area index of a degraded mangrove forest using high spatial resolution satellite data. Aquatic Botany 80(1): 13–22. Available at: http://
linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0304377004000841.
Kovacs, J.M. et al., 2008. The use of multipolarized spaceborne SAR backscatter for monitoring the health of a degraded mangrove Forest. Journal of Coastal Research, 241,
pp.248–254. Available at: www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.2112/06-0660.1.
Kovacs JM, et al. (2009) Evaluating the condition of a mangrove forest of the Mexican Pacific based on an estimated leaf area index mapping approach. Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment 157(1–4): 137–149. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10661-008-0523-z.
Kwan MP (1999) Gender and individual access to urban opportunities: A study using space–time measures. The Professional Geographer 51(2): 211–227.
Kwan MP (2001) Cyberspatial cognition and individual access to information: The behavioral foundation of cybergeography. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 28(1):
21–37.
Kwan MP (2010) Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: A comparative analysis using a point-based framework. Geographical Analysis 30(3): 191–216.
Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1998.tb00396.x.
Kwan MP, et al. (2003) Recent advances in accessibility research: Representation, methodology and applications. Journal of Geographical Systems 5(1): 129–138.
Lee TM and Yeh HC (2009) Applying remote sensing techniques to monitor shifting wetland vegetation: A case study of Danshui River estuary mangrove communities, Taiwan.
Ecological Engineering 35(4): 487–496.
Legendre P (1993) Spatial autocorrelation: Trouble or new paradigm? Ecology 74(6): 1659–1673.
Legendre P and Fortin MJ (1989) Spatial pattern and ecological analysis. Vegetatio 80(2): 107–138.
Legendre, P. & Legendre, L., 1998. Numerical ecology, 2nd edn. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/B9780444538680500162%0Ahttp://biol09.biol.umontreal.
ca/PLcourses/Statistical_tests.pdf.
Lenntorp B (1976) Paths in space-time environments: A time-geographic study of movement possibilities of individuals. Environment and Planning A 9: 961–972.
Litton CM, Raich JW, and Ryan MG (2007) Carbon allocation in forest ecosystems. Global Change Biology 13(10): 2089–2109. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1365-
2486.2007.01420.x.
Lo CP and Yeung AKW (2003) Concepts and techniques in geographic information systems: Laboratory manual. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Longley PA, et al. (2011) Geographical information systems and science. New York: Wiley. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/215736?origin¼crossref.
Lucas RM, et al. (2007) The potential of L-band SAR for quantifying mangrove characteristics and change: Case studies from the tropics. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater
Ecosystems 17(3): 245–264. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/aqc.833.
Miller HJ (2010) Measuring space-time accessibility benefits within transportation networks: Basic theory and computational procedures. Geographical Analysis 31(1): 1–26. Available
at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1999.tb00408.x.
 Spatial Models and Geographic Information Systems 11

Monckton CG (1994) An investigation into the spatial structure of error in digital elevation data. Innovations in GIS 1: 201–211.
Moore ID, O’Loughlin EM, and Burch GJ (1988) A contour-based topographic model for hydrological and ecological applications. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 13(4):
305–320.
Moore ID, Grayson RB, and Ladson AR (1991) Digital terrain modelling: A review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrological Processes 5(1): 3–30.
Mougin E, et al. (1999) Multifrequency and multipolarization radar backscattering from mangrove forests. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 37(1): 94–102.
Available at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/739128/.
Newton AC, et al. (2009) Remote sensing and the future of landscape ecology. Progress in Physical Geography 33(4): 528–546. Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.
1177/0309133309346882.
Parker HD (1988) The unique qualities of a geographic information system: A commentary. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54(11): 1547–1549.
Pentland RL and Cuthbert DR (1971) Operational hydrology for Ungaged streams by the Grid Square technique. Water Resources Research 7(2): 283–291.
Simard M, et al. (2006) Mapping height and biomass of mangrove forests in Everglades National Park with SRTM elevation data. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing
72(3): 299–311. Available at: http://openurl.ingenta.com/content/xref?genre¼article&issn¼0099-1112&volume¼72&issue¼3&spage¼299.
Simard M, et al. (2008) A systematic method for 3D mapping of mangrove forests based on shuttle radar topography mission elevation data, ICEsat/GLAS waveforms and field data:
Application to Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta, Colombia. Remote Sensing of Environment 112(5): 2131–2144. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/
S0034425708000357.
Sirikulchayanon P, Sun W, and Oyana TJ (2008) Assessing the impact of the 2004 tsunami on mangroves using remote sensing and GIS techniques. International Journal of Remote
Sensing 29(12): 3553–3576. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01431160701646332.
Souza Filho PWM and Paradella WR (2005) Use of RADARSAT-1 fine mode and Landsat-5 TM selective principal component analysis for geomorphological mapping in a macrotidal
mangrove coast in the Amazon region. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 31(3): 214–224. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.5589/m05-009.
Unwin DJ (1995) Geographical information systems and the problem of “error and uncertainty” Progress in Human Geography 19(4): 549–558. Available at: http://www.scopus.com/
inward/record.url?eid¼2-s2.0-0029518803&partnerID¼40&md5¼08f5962e94ccb2bfff1ec6b55edee768.
Vaiphasa C, et al. (2005) Tropical mangrove species discrimination using hyperspectral data: A laboratory study. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 65(1–2): 371–379. Available at:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0272771405002179.
Vaiphasa C, et al. (2007) A hyperspectral band selector for plant species discrimination. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 62(3): 225–235. Available at: http://
linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0924271607000512.
Villoria OG (1989) An operational measure of individual accessibility for use in the study of travel-activity patterns. The Ohio State University.
Wang L and Sousa WP (2009) Distinguishing mangrove species with laboratory measurements of hyperspectral leaf reflectance. International Journal of Remote Sensing 30(5):
1267–1281.
Wang L, et al. (2004) Comparison of IKONOS and QuickBird images for mapping mangrove species on the Caribbean coast of Panama. Remote Sensing of Environment 91(3–4):
432–440. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0034425704001129.
Wirasinghe SC and Ghoneim NS (1981) Spacing of bus-stops for many to many travel demand. Transportation Science 15(3): 210–221.
Wooster M (2007) Remote sensing: Sensors and systems. Progress in Physical Geography 31(1): 95–100. Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.
1177/0309133307073889.
Xia L, et al. (2017) Analyzing the spatial pattern of carbon metabolism and its response to change of urban form. Ecological Modelling 355: 105–115. Available at: http://linkinghub.
elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0304380016307591.