Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GIS-PEAT 2 V
GIS-PEAT 2 V
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293821145
CITATIONS READS
0 1,037
4 authors, including:
SEE PROFILE
Yiyi Sulaeman
Indonesian Agency for Agricultural Research …
24 PUBLICATIONS 104 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Yiyi Sulaeman on 11 February 2016.
81
Wahyunto et al.
I. INTRODUCTION
Reducing emissions from peatland has been one of the main focus of Indonesian
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation Program (REDD+). The closest
estimate of peatland area to the existing and real condition is essential as it avoids „hot air‟
of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from peat. Spatial distribution of peatland area
estimate has varied from 14 to 26 million ha since 1952 until present (Subagjo H, 2002
and Wahyunto et al., 2005). The estimate of 20.8 million ha (Mha) is one of the most
widely referred wide since it provide a digital shapefile data (Shp) that can be used for the
analysis of land use change trajectories. This peatland map was generated mostly based on
satellite data analysis up until 2002 acquisition dates, with limited ground verification
and input data is known to vary in quality. Since then updated by a number of field
82
Indonesian Peatland Map: Method, Certainty, and Uses
validation (ground truth) have been conducted and the number of observation points of
what was considered as peatland as of 2.409 site. These have increased our confidence in
the estimate of peatland area and our current best estimate is 14.9 Million ha with overall
accuracy 87,9% followed by Kappa coeficient 0,68. The main reduction, reaching 28,3%
from the earlier Indonesia Peatland of 20,8 Mha to the current as amount of 14,9 Mha.The
eirlier estimates for Papua was 7,8 Mha, to the current estimate as amount of 3,7 Mha,
where past soil survey was hindered by location remoteness. We still lack ground truth
data in the remote peatland areas and thus further refinement will be made as more soil
survey data are accumulated. This current estimate implies that past GHG analyses have
been inflated and using this current more robust estimate will form a more logical basis
for GHG emission reduction as well as sustainable peatland management plans.
Henceforth, Indonesia has voluminous legacy soil data in form of legacy soil
observations ( in the form of soil profile, soil minipit, and/or soil laboratory analysis data)
and poligon data including legacy soil map with legends. Legacy soil data based, soil
map and field observations data resulted from soil surveys up to now have been used to
assess and update peatland distribution for the whole country. Old estimate spatial data of
peatland (Wahyunto et al., 2003, 2004 and 2005) were mostly based on satellite images
interpretation supported with land unit and soil maps (Center for Soil and Agroclimate
Research and Developmnet, 1999), including Land system maps (RePPPRoT, 1999) with
very limited ground data/field observations. Especially for Papua, where past soil survey
still lack ground truth data, because lack of accessibility. Therefore, field assessments are
required to identify and reclassify any sites that may have been misclassified during the
desktop analysis. A large number representative soil sampling and ground truth can
83
Wahyunto et al.
provide better estimates of any tipe of peatland, however, collecting field data can be time
consuming and costly .
Newer estimate of peatland areas was validation of peatland old map based on
ground truth (soil survey data) including legacy soil data. Gap still exist on areas with low
accessibility, and these areas are subject to further verification. Updating ICALRD
peatland map (Ritung et al., 2011), conducted by using the combination the result of
more recent soil surveys, legacy soil data and auxiliary information (e.g digital elevation
model, geology map, agroclimate map). Overlaying among“existing soil observation
maps the result of soil surveys” with “old version of peatmap” and “latest satellite images
acquisitions dates” may help in priotizing next soil observations and soil samplings
strategy. The next soil (peat) observations can be directed to the site/area that low
reliability and no soil observations yet. If planned soil observations cannot be observed
due to several reasons, then soil observations may be selected based on priority level. The
high priority is site with low or lack information on peat characteristics. Spatial and
atribute data were used to generate and upadte peatland maps is presented in Figure 1 and
formula to evaluate accuracy assessment peatland mapping are as follows.
84
Indonesian Peatland Map: Method, Certainty, and Uses
I I
Kappa Coef = N ∑ Xii - ∑ X i + Xi+i
i=1 i=1
____________________ ................................................................... (1)
I
N2- ∑ X i + Xi+i
I=1
Xii = Total true classes of site sample at diagonal of confussion matrix table
For practical application of the legacy soil profile observations could also be used
as a benchmark for soil properties monitoring and assessment purposes. Armed with
global positioning system (GPS) receiver, map and assisted by Google Map that informs
direction to location from a given landmark. Soil profile observations and soil samples
may re-taken at same location. Then, measured soil properties data can be compared with
previous one. As a result, the extent of existing peatland, soil properties change (peat
thickness, peat maturity etc) can be determined. This technique can be exercised for others
85
Wahyunto et al.
legacy soil profiles data. Hence, existing peatland and soil properties change can be
mapped easily by interpolation techniques.
The benefit of new and advances on remote sensing and GIS including geo-spatial
technologies by means physiographic approach, the intensity of the field observations
(ground truth) can be reduced, limited to representative areas, but it is still absolutely
necessary. Thus, the combination of digital technology, geo-spatial and land surveying
"ground-based method" is the way forward to be implemented for land resource inventory
includes peatland mapping. Center for Agricultural Land Resources Research and
Dvelopment (ICALRD) conducted peatland maps of Sumatra, Kalimantan and Papua
86
Indonesian Peatland Map: Method, Certainty, and Uses
87
Wahyunto et al.
88
Indonesian Peatland Map: Method, Certainty, and Uses
The latest spatial data of peatland in Indonesia was about of 14.9 M ha. The most
extensive peatland found in 3 islands, namely Sumatra, follo wed by Kalimantan, and
Papua (Irian Jaya). Spatial distribution of peatland is presented in Table 1 and Figure 5.
In Sumatra, the widest peat are developedalong east coast including Riau, South Sumatra,
Jambi and Aceh provinces. In the west coast of Sumatra peatland are situated in West
Sumatra province (Pesisir Selatan district) and Bengkulu province (Muko-muko district).
In Kalimantan wide spread peat situated along west coast West Kalimantan
province, especially in Pontianak/Kubu raya, Ketapang and Sambas District. Inland peat,
are found in a swampy area at the upper Kapuas River basin (Kapuas Hulu District). At
the south coastal area, peatland situated in the South Kalimantan and Central Kalimantan
provinces, there are a vast peat among Sebangau, Kahayan, Kapuas and Barito rivers. In
the East Kalimantan province, a quite wide peatland is situated in the backswamp of
upper Mahakam river basin, northwest of Samarinda). Most of the coastal plain in the
form of peat, spread over the coastal plain west of Tarakan, Bulungan/Nunukan district.
In Papua, peatland are widely found along the south coastal plain of Agats, Mappi,
Mimika and a part of Fak-fak districts and peatland also found at swampy areas of Nabire
and Paniai districts, coastal marshes and plains east of the city of Nabire, Paniai district.
Fresh water peatland are found at backswamp of the middle Mamberamo river basin with
altitude of about 100 m above sea level.
Table 1. The latest spatial data of peatland in Indonesia
Agreage
Province/ Island
Hectares Percentage
Aceh 215,704 3.35
North Sumatera 261,234 4.06
West Sumatera 100,687 1.56
Riau 3,867,413 60.08
Riau islands 8,186 0.13
Jambi 621,089 9.65
Bengkulu 8,052 0.13
South Sumatera 1,262,385 19.61
Bangka Belitung 42,568 0.66
Lampung 49,331 0.77
SUMATERA 6,436,649 100.00
West Kalimantan 1,680,135 35.16
Central Kalimantan 2,659,234 55.66
South Kalimantan 106,271 2.22
East kalimantan 332,265 6.96
KALIMANTAN 4,777,905 100.00
Papua 2,644,438 71,65
89
Wahyunto et al.
Agreage
Province/ Island
Hectares Percentage
West Papua 1,046,483 28,35
PAPUA 3,690,921 100,00
TOTAL 14,905,475 100,00
Source: Ritung et al., 2011 (Modified)
To explore the existing and present landuse/land cover on peatland was conducted
by overlaying both map at 1:250.000 scale of latest peatland map (Ritung et al., 2011)
and land use (also called land cover map) (Ministry of Forestry, 2011). Landuse map was
generated based on satellite images analysis of 2010-2011 acquistion dates. Landuse/on
peatland is presented in Table 2.
Peatland in three large islands of Indonesia which still covered by: (i) forested
areas (mangrove, swamp forest, and plantation forest ) as amounts of 7,7 Mha or 52% of
Indonesia peatland, (ii) amounts of 3,23 Mha (21.7%) covered by bushes,(iii) other
peatland has been used for agriculture and settlements. In Sumatra, which is still
dominated by peatland forest areas and bushes as amounts of 2,352,342 ha (32.6%) and
1,526,825 ha (23.7%) respectively. Peatland was used for plantation, annual crops and
vegetables farming, and paddy field are:as amounts of 1,26 Mha (19.6%); 0,499 Mha
(7.4%) and 0,212 Mha (3.3%). The other peatland was used for settlements as amounts of
40 199 ha (0.6%).
90
Indonesian Peatland Map: Method, Certainty, and Uses
(28.6%) repectively. Mangrove forests, peat swamps are generally found on the west
coast, the south coast and the east coast (down stream of Mahakam and Sesayap rivers)
East Kalimantan. Peatland was used for agriculture these are: plantation, farmland (food
and horticulture crops) and paddy field are as amounts of 298 156ha (6.2%), 255 835 ha
(5.3%) and 127 781ha (2.7%) respectively. Peatland has been used for settlement as
amounts of 20,966 ha (0.6%).
In Papua peatlands are still dominated forest (mangrove and swampy forest) and
bushes as amounts of 2,98 Mha (81.5%) and 0,33 Mha (9.2%). Papua peatlands,
especially on the south coast of Papua and surrounding Mamberamo river basin been
used for farming, farmland (food and horticulture) and paddy field both mostly as
amounts of 26 933 ha (0.7%).
Tabel 2. Landuse/land cover on peatland for Sumatra, Kalimantan and Papua Islands, Indonesia
Landuse/ Sumatera Kalimantan Papua Grand Total
Land cover ha % ha % ha % ha %
Primary mangrove
1,147 0.0 1,801 0.0 229,206 6.3 232,154 1.6
Forest
Secondary mangrove
29,909 0.5 10,024 0.2 48,868 1.3 88,802 0.6
forest
Primary swamp forest 255,051 4.0 53,254 1.1 2,228,114 60.8 2,536,424 17.0
Secondary swamp forest 1,324,743 20.6 2,182,402 48.6 481,091 13.1 4,143,044 27.8
Forest plantation 741,499 11.5 148 0.0 453 0.0 742,113 5.0
Shurbs and bushes 233,282 3.6 80,566 1.7 88,496 2.4 402,349 2.7
Bushes 1,293,543 20.1 1,293,097 26.9 249,533 6.8 2,836,221 19.0
Plantation 1,262,530 19.6 298,156 6.2 1,723 0.0 1,562,436 10.5
Settlements 40,199 0.6 20,966 0.4 3,586 0.1 64,752 0.4
Bare lands 378,551 5.9 187,447 3.9 13,905 0.4 579,913 3.9
Mining - 0.0 2,065 0.0 495 0.0 2,560 0.0
Cloud cover 1,275 0.0 - - 2,882 0.1 4,157 0.0
Savana 89,143 1.4 2 - 66,921 1.8 156,068 1.0
Water body 5,043 0.1 5,466 0.1 73,205 2.0 83,714 0.6
Swampy areas 50.457 0.8 128,972 2.7 150,793 4.1 330,225 2.2
Annual Agric. Crops 237,937 3.7 81,045 1.7 4,481 0.1 323,469 2.2
Mixed graden (tree crops) 261,882 4.1 174,790 3.6 20,185 0.6 456,864 3.1
Paddy field 212,690 3.3 127,781 2.7 644 0.0 341,122 2.3
Fish pond 14,529 0.2 133 0.0 139 0.0 14,801 0.1
Air port/sea port 106 0.0 - - 94 0.0 201 0.0
Transmigration 147,920 2,3 2,253 0.0 2,129 0.1 4,383 0.0
GRAND TOTAL 6,551,557 100.0 4,687,075 100.0 3,666,946 100.0 14,905,872 100.0
Sources: Peatland map (Ritung et al., 2011); landusemap (Ministry of Forestry, 2011)
91
Wahyunto et al.
conjuction with it, test the accuracy of peatland map was s based on class type of
landuse/land cover on peatland. Focus accuracy testing performed on peatland areas with
class landuse/land cover these are: forested, shurbs and bushes, plantations, annual
agricultural crops, mixed garden/tree crops, and paddy fields.
The accuracy or uncertainties include some errors known and unknown, variation
or ambiguity in the database and decision-making rules. Dempster-Shaffer Theory (DST)
is designed to cope with varying degrees of accuracy in determining the information that
there are built using various assumptions. DST also take into account about the
"uncertainty" of the system to respond to the information that is less clear. Each source
(such as imagery, maps and field data/ground truth) is considered a proof (evidence) the
existence of a fact. Confusion matrix was made to compare the class that is considered
correct/right with the class the results super-imposed multiple layers of data and analysis
are automatically processed in a computer (digital analysis) (Also calculated by the
method of approach "discrete multivariate technique called "Kappa analysis" used in the
Kappa statistic to measure the suitability/accuracy (agreement) with the reference data are
considered true (Cohen, 1960; Curran 1986; Skidmore, 1999). If Kappa coefficient value
is 1orclose to 1it is assumed that the level of precision/accuracy is also high between
classes of data analysis results with benchmark/reference data (De Wit and Clever, 2004).
The data used for reference are considered true in this assessment is the result of field
observation data (ground truth).
92
Indonesian Peatland Map: Method, Certainty, and Uses
1 and 2 (Jensen, 1966; Richard and Jia, 2006). Error Matrix showing percentage
correspondence of validation points with Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis
classified of 2011 peatland map and ground validation during 2012-2014 presented in
Table 3. Table 3 shows that estimated overall accuracy for peatland map (Ritung et al.,
2011) is 87,96% with Kappa Coefficient 0,68.
Table 3. Error Matrix showing percentage correspondence of validation points with Geographic
Information System (GIS) analysis classified of 2011 peatland map and ground validation during
2012-2013
Landuse/land cover field verification through Landuse/land cover on peat land Total total Overall Agree-
No. on peatland based 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 site Omission Accura- ment -1
on GIS analysis Rubber an.crop paddy f pineap Tree cr Oilplm Bush Setlm cconut Horti Frspltn Forest shurbs Site cy (%) (%)
1 Rubber 581 31 22 2 8 644 63 90,2
2 Annual crops 2 215 11 9 3 3 243 28 88,5
3 Paddy field 7 52 4 2 1 66 14 78,8
4 Pineapple 41 3 8 52 3 94,2
5 Bushes 11 3 1 363 42 2 2 424 61 85,6
6 Oilpalm 11 4 2 344 12 3 376 29 92,3
7 Tree crops (Fruits) 25 3 6 21 223 1 279 31 88,9
8 Settlements 2 10 86 1 99 13 86,9
9 Coconut 5 45 50 0 100,0
10 Horticulture 7 65 72 0 100,0
11 Forest plantation 8 8 0 100,0
12 Forested areas 42 42 0 100,0
13 Shurbs (Fen) 54 54 0 100,0
Total site 630 241 64 49 446 366 238 136 47 68 8 42 74 2409 242 87,9618
Total Comission (site) 24 19 12 8 78 22 15 50 2 3 0 0 0 233
Agreement-2 (%) 96,2 92,1 81,3 83,7 82,5 94,0 93,7 63,2 95,7 95,6 100,0 100,0 100,0
Note : Agreement-1 (%) = producer‟s accuracy:indicates how the training site of a classis
Classified :
93
Wahyunto et al.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
By applying of remote sensing, GIS technogies and soil survey data up to the year
2011 as well as legacy data, we have updated the peatland map. The latest and most
reliable estimate of Indonesian peatland area is about of 14.85 Mha, mainly distributed in
Sumatra, Kalimantan and Papua. This is a dynamic the data, especially for the remote
areas of Papua where ground truth data are scanty. This newly produced maps have been
used for nationally/locally appropriate mitigation actions (RAN/RAD-GRK).
This research has shown the benefits of combining soil survey and remote sensing
satellite images in the GIS technique for generating and updating peatland maps.
Field verification (ground truthing) has no substitute in data accuracy while the
remote sensing technique increase the speed of mapping. The estimated overall accuracy
of our peatland map is about 88% with Kappa coeffisient of 0,68. Ground survey for areas
in Papua will increase the map accuracy.
REFERENCES
Agus F., I G.M. Subiksa. 2008. Lahan Gambut: Potensi untuk Pertanian dan Aspek
Lingkungan. Balai Penelitian Tanah. Bogor.
Agus, F., E.Runtunuwu, T. June, E.Susanti, H. Komara, H. Syahabudin, I. Las and M.van
Noorwijk. 2009. Carbon budget in landuse transitions plantation. Indonesian
Agricultural Research and Development Development Journal. 29(4):119-126.
Center for Soil and Agroclimate Research. 2000. Indonesian Soil Exploration Maps at
scale 1:1.000.000 Maps. Center For Soil and Agroclimate Research. , AARD.
Bogor.
Cohen,J.1960. A Coefficient of Agreement nominal scales.Educational and psychological
measurement, 20 (1), 37-46.
Jensen, J.R.1966. Introductory to Digital Image Processing: An Introductory Perspective
(second edition). Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River. New Yersey.
Kementerian Kehutanan. 2011. Penutupan Lahan di Indonesia. Kementerian Kehutanan.
Jakarta.
Lillesand T.M. and R.W.Keifer and J. W. Chipman.2004. Remote Sensing and Image
Interpretation (Fifth Edition). John Willey and Sons. New York.
Center for Soil and Agroclimate Research and Development (CSARD). 2000. Atlas
Sumberdaya Tanah Eksplorasi Indonesia, skala 1:1.000.000. Puslitbangtanak,
Badan Litbang Pertanian. Bogor.
Richard, J.A. and Jia, X. 2006.Remote Sensing Digital Image Analysis: An Introduction
(Fourth Edition). Springer-Verleg.Berlin.
94
Indonesian Peatland Map: Method, Certainty, and Uses
95
Wahyunto et al.
Curran, P.J. and Williamson, H.D. 1986. Sample size for ground and remotely sensed
data. Remote Sensing Environment, 20 :31-41.
De wit a.j. and Clevers JGPW. 2004. Efficiency and accuracy of per field classification
for operational crop mapping. International Journal of Remote Sensing 68 (11):
1155-1161.
96