Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science of the Total Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv

Urban heat island (UHI) intensity and magnitude estimations:

A systematic literature review
Se Woong Kim ⁎, Robert D. Brown
Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• Review intensity, magnitude estima-

tion, and analysis of UHIs using an SLR
framework.
• Lack of general protocols to establish
UHI classification criteria to efficiently
estimate and analyze UHIs.
• Need to develop a UHI estimation and
analysis model considering a 3-D form
of a city.
• Need for further research to develop a
model focusing on the intensity and
magnitude of UHIs

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The severity of urban heat islands (UHIs) is increasing due to global and urban climate change. The damage
Received 25 January 2021 caused by UHIs is also increasing. To establish a plan to improve the deteriorating thermal environment in cities
Received in revised form 26 February 2021 due to UHIs and to minimize the damage, further research is needed to accurately estimate and analyze the in-
Accepted 7 March 2021
tensity and magnitude of UHIs. This systematic literature review (SLR) is an in-depth review of 51 studies ob-
Available online 17 March 2021
tained through a five-step filtering process focusing on their analysis of the spatial extent of UHIs, the UHI
Editor: Martin Drews concept that was used for UHI estimation, and the UHI estimation and analysis methods. This SLR confirmed
the need for accurate UHI intensity and magnitude estimation and analysis to reset the existing UHI classification
based on the variety of vertical and horizontal ranges where UHIs occur. The results also indicated that the

Abbreviations: SLR, Systematic Literature Review; UHI, Urban Heat Island; UHISurf, Surface Heat Island; UHIUCL, Canopy Layer Heat Island; UHIUBL, Boundary Layer Heat Island; UBL,
Urban Boundary Layer; BCL, Building Canopy Layer; UCL, Urban Canopy Layer; LSL, Land Surface Layer; LST, Land Surface Temperature; SEB, Surface Energy Balance; UEB, Urban
Energy Balance; TEB, Town Energy Budget; BEM, Building Energy Model; UHII, Urban Heat Island Intensity; SUHII, Surface Urban Heat Island Intensity; URI, Urban Heat Island Ratio
Index; SVF, Sky View Factor; AWSs, Automatic Weather Stations; MODIS, Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer; ASTER, Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and
Reflection Radiometer; OLI, Operational Land Imager; AVHRR, Advanced Very High-Resolution Radiometer; LANDSAT, Land Remote-Sensing Satellite; NDVI, Normalized Different
Vegetation Index; LULC, Land Use and Land Cover; ISA, Impervious Surface Area; NDBI, Normalized Different Built-up Index; EVI, Enhanced Vegetation Index; FAR, Floor Average Ratio;
BCR, Building Coverage Ratio; AHE, Anthropogenic Heat Emissions; CFD, Computational Fluid Dynamics; CAT, Canyon Air Temperature; UCMap, Urban Climate Map; AATSR, Advanced
Along-Track Scanning Radiometer; OLS, Ordinary Least Squares; GWR, Geographically Weighted Regression; ARD, Automatic Relevance Determinant; TVX, Temperature/Vegetation
Index; NOAH, National Oceanic and Atmospheric; SAR, Spatial Lag Regression; GSM, General Spatial Model; LCZ, Local Climate Zone; WUDAPT, World Urban Database and Access
Portal Tools; ARW, Advanced Research Weather; WRF, Weather Research and Forecasting; ANOVA, Analysis of Variance; LSMA, Linear Spectral Mixture Analysis; SLM, Spatial Lag
Model; SEM, Spatial Error Model; PET, Physiological Equivalent Temperature; RTA, Regression Tree Analysis; RF, Random Forest; BCI, Biophysical Composition Index; GIS, Geographic
Information System; UHIC, Urban Heat Island Curves; LHI, Local Heat Island; MHI, Micro Heat Island; TSF, Total Site Factor; TVF, Tree View Factor; GPR, Green Plot Ratio; GCR, Green
Coverage Ratio; GSA, Ground Surface Albedo.
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: sewoongkim@tamu.edu (S.W. Kim), robert.brown@tamu.edu (R.D. Brown).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146389
0048-9697/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389

Keywords: existing UHI energy concepts for estimating UHIs need to be modified and developed to reflect the three-
Urban heat island (UHI) dimensional physical form of the city. Finally, this SLR clarifies the need to develop an optimized analysis method
Systematic literature review (SLR) for UHI research. The review results of this SLR will inform future studies and be the cornerstone for establishing
Intensity
policies and plans that can accurately predict and respond to the damage caused by UHIs.
Magnitude
Estimation
© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Urban climate
Urban climate change

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Search and selection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Literature screening and inclusion criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2.1. General screening process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2.2. Final screening and methodology analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Overview of UHI magnitude estimation research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Spatial ranges and locations of UHIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Main UHI energy concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3.1. Urban heat island intensity (UHII) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3.2. Energy balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.4. UHI magnitude estimation and analysis studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.4.1. Empirical studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.4.2. Experimental studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1. Criteria for the physical range of UHI studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.2. Recognizing and addressing the problems of the existing UHI energy concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.3. Criteria for selecting an optimized UHI study method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.4. Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Funding sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Declaration of competing interest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

1. Introduction
Urbanization has led to changes in the physical environment of cit-
ies, which has rapidly changed due to economic development and in-
creased concentration of the population. These changes in the physical
environment of cities have contributed to urban climate change. These
changes have also affected the seriousness of urban climate change as
urbanization continues to expand cities and increase the density of the
physical forms of cities. Urban climate change caused by urbanization
has affected the urban thermal environment more directly than global
climate change (Tam et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2010).
Urban heating is especially a concern in cities where urban climate
change has caused extreme heat events aggravated by urban climate
change (Santamouris, 2014). Several factors contribute to and magnify
the ambient temperature rise caused by urban climate change including
the high thermal mass emitted by concrete and asphalt roads, the low
ventilation capacity of urban canyons formed by high-rise buildings,
and the combined effect of heat released from vehicles on streets and
air conditioners (Akbari et al., 2016). The urban heat island (UHI) is a
representative phenomenon of urban climate change based on specific
numerical indicators, particularly an increase in air temperature in spe-
cific areas within cities (Santamouris, 2018).
Although most studies on the impact of UHI effects have been con-
ducted in the context of global climate change, they have verified that
the two phenomena (UHIs and climate change) affect each other. Global
climate change and UHIs interact, especially producing heatwaves dur-
ing extreme heat event days in the summer, changing the thermal envi-
ronment in the city and exposing people to heat stress (Luber and
McGeehin, 2008).
Problems arising directly from the combination of UHIs and extreme
heat events in cities include increased mortality and morbidity due to
the extremely high air temperature. Other issues from severely high
urban temperatures include increased urban infrastructure failure
caused by overheating, decreased air quality, and low quality of life for
urban dwellers due to a lower outdoor thermal comfort level (Stone
Jr. et al., 2013). Recent studies have shown that socially and economi-
cally vulnerable elderly and low-income residents are more likely to
live in areas with severe UHIs, and the vulnerability of these groups to
heat is a particularly severe problem (Bradford et al., 2015). Especially
urban infrastructure failure (e.g., grid failure) due to urban overheating
will lead to loss of water and power, resulting in more severe social costs
if it causes energy shortages in the city (Santamouris, 2014, 2018). For
this reason, city officials often establish and implement climate action
plans to mitigate UHIs in cities as an adaptation factor.
The relationship between the degree of exposure to extreme ther-
mal environments and the resulting damage can also be determined
by identifying the actual mortality or morbidity rates during heatwaves.
These efforts can help reduce the number of deaths caused by heat-
related illnesses in the future (Anderson and Bell Michelle, 2011). How-
ever, without an accurate understanding of the causes or concrete basis
for estimating fatal heat events, officials will end up with only a rough
guess of the potential damage and deaths. Adapting to climate change
requires communities to develop heat-related public health policies
and improve the physical environment of cities to mitigate the damage
caused by UHIs (H. Kim et al., 2019; Oke, 1987; Stone et al., 2010).
Several studies have suggested a potential synergy effect between
urban climate change and UHIs in a city (Santamouris et al., 2015).
However, few studies have attempted to identify and explain the possi-
ble synergy effects and the corresponding mechanisms that drive them
forward (Darmanto et al., 2019). From a practical point of view, urban
designs without adequately considering urban climate change could
make the thermal environment worse for residents. For these reasons,

2
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown
the potential interaction between global and urban climate change and
UHIs is still an open scientific question, and further research is needed.
An urban design methodology reflecting these findings needs to be de-
veloped and reflected in practice.
Therefore, an analysis and prediction of the magnitude of UHIs is a
critical study to prepare for potential UHI damage. In addition, the re-
sults of such an analysis and prediction will provide essential evidence
to minimize the damage caused by UHIs by reflecting accurate plans
and policies in areas where urban planners and city officials expect
that high-intensity UHIs will develop. However, existing studies have
applied a different UHI intensity estimation model and analysis range
to each study. Considering that the shape of the city affects the magni-
tude and severity of UHIs and the magnitude of damage in each region,
it is necessary to take a closer look at the UHI analysis framework used
by existing studies. Therefore, this SLR was conducted to provide an in-
depth understanding of UHI magnitude estimation and analysis
methods used by existing studies.
This synthesis reveals the relationship between the methods used in
actual UHI research and the necessary factors for more specific and accu-
rate UHI estimation and analysis by finding answers to the following
three questions: 1) What is the urban energy concept used to explain
UHIs in existing studies? 2) What estimation models and analysis tools
are suitable for accurately understanding UHIs? and 3) What is the verti-
cal and horizontal range of UHIs in an accurate UHI prediction model?
2. Methods
2.1. Search and selection criteria
The literature search process for this study aimed to generate a list of
base-level studies that provide answers related to the research ques-
tions for this review. The literature was identified using a thorough sam-
pling strategy that applies different combinations of keywords to form
unique query strings for the titles, abstract, and keywords of indexed
studies (Booth et al., 2016). To generate keywords for the literature
search, we set “urban heat island” as the consistent base and then in-
cluded “magnitude,” “intensity,” “estimation,” and “calculation,” to ex-
pand the search. Each combination was then expanded to words with
similar meanings or functions. The literature search was conducted on
June 1, 2019 using three research literature sources, ScienceDirect,
Scopus, and Springer, to find peer-reviewed papers. After several search
attempts, we changed the keyword combination to find as much peer-
review literature as possible. Among the selected studies, conference
proceedings were excluded, and studies were restricted to English.
The initial data set included 356 publications: 226 from ScienceDirect,
122 from Scopus, and 9 from Springer (Table 1).
Table 1
Keyword combinations for urban heat magnitude estimations SLR.
Keywords K1: urban heat island K 2: assessinga
K 3: estimate
K 4: calculate
K 5: analysis
K 6: quantify
Combinations C1: K1 and K2
C2: K1 and K2 and K7 and K16
C3: K1 and K5 and (K7 or K8) and (K9 or K11 or K14) and K16
C4: K1 and (K3 or K6) and (K7 or K8) and (K13 or K14) and (K15 or K16) and (K17 or K18)
C5: K1 and (K2 or K3 or K4 or K6) and (K7 or K8) and (K12 or K13) and (K15 or K16) and K19
C6: K1 and (K2 or K3 or K4 or K5 or K6) and (K7 or K8) and (K9 or K10 or K11 or K12 or K13 or K14) and (K15 or K16) and (K17 or K18 or K19)
TITLE-ABS-KEY ((“urban heat island”) AND (assessinga OR estimate OR calculate OR analysis OR quantify) AND (heat OR energy) AND (intensity OR volume
OR capacity OR balance OR budget OR magnitude) AND (city OR urban) AND (form OR geometry OR morphology)) AND (LIMIT-TO
(LANGUAGE,”English”))
Results from databases - Scopus: 122
(~ 06.01.2019) - ScienceDirect.com: 226
- Springer: 9
a
Table format adapted and modified from Velásquez et al. (2018).
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
2.2. Literature screening and inclusion criteria
2.2.1. General screening process
Fifty-six duplicate peer-reviewed articles were excluded from the
dataset of 356 initial articles leaving 300 articles. The dataset was fur-
ther reduced to 195 after reviewing the keywords and abstracts of
each study. Each article was then scanned to determine if the study
was directly related to the magnitude and intensity of UHIs, leaving
only 104 studies for review. Each article was carefully read and analyzed
in-depth resulting in 73 articles.
2.2.2. Final screening and methodology analysis
As a final step, the 73 studies went through an in-depth confirmation
process to ensure that they met the research objectives of this SLR. Since
the ultimate goal of this SLR is to understand the methodology used to
estimate and analyze UHIs, the authors identified the selected UHI esti-
mation and analysis methods for each study. They also examined the
following two additional factors and included them in the literature
for the final analysis phase: (1) criteria for distinguishing the spatial lo-
cation and extent of the UHI focus in each study; and (2) the UHI energy
concepts used in the analysis process.
In the final filtering step, (i.e., reading in-depth and classifying the
studies), the authors focused on the methodology section of each
study. The spatial locations and ranges in which the UHIs occurred
also directly related to meteorological data collection methods for UHI
estimation. Specifically, the location and range of weather stations
used for data collection could affect the location and range of the UHIs
covered in each study. In addition, the characteristics of the data col-
lected through weather stations and satellite data could influence the
determination of the UHI energy concept used in each study to estimate
the UHIs. After further investigation, 22 studies were additionally ex-
cluded, which narrowed the final sample to 51 peer-reviewed arti-
cles to be included in this study. This SLR focused on the process of
checking the methodology sections in detail, which explained each
study's UHIs estimation, analysis methods used, and the two factors
(i.e., special location and UHI energy concepts used). The reasons for
excluding studies in the final stage were because they were (1) liter-
ature review studies; (2) studies in which the data collection method
and scope were inconsistent with the types of UHIs selected for the
study; or (3) studies in which the type and characteristics of the
data used for UHI estimation were inconsistent with the selected
UHI energy concepts.
The 51 selected peer-reviewed articles were included using key
variables to synthesize the results based on two UHI estimation types: lin-
ear and multi-dimensional variables. The four key variables are as follows:
1) UHI assessment tools, 2) the physical study range (horizontal range
K 7: heat K 9: intensity K15: city K17: form
K 8: energy K10: volume K16: urban K18: geometry
K11: capacity K19: morphology
K12: balance
K13: budget
K14: magnitude
3
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown
and vertical location), 3) the main energy concept of UHIs, and 4) param-
eters for UHI magnitude calculation (Fig. 1).
3. Results
3.1. Overview of UHI magnitude estimation research
The 51 studies selected for this SLR were analyzed focusing on their
in-depth literature review, analysis, and classification related to UHI
magnitude and intensity estimation and analysis. The articles were an-
alyzed from the following three perspectives: 1) the spatial range of
UHI estimation and analysis, 2) main energy concept for UHI intensity
and magnitude, and 3) UHI estimation and analysis methods (Table 3).
UHI magnitude analysis studies date back to 1972 but have been
more active since 2012 (Fig. 2). Of the 51 reviewed studies, 42 (79%)
Fig. 1. Flow chart and results of UHI magnitude estimations and analyses SLR (~06.01.2019).
4
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
were conducted during this period, with the number of studies increas-
ing rapidly, especially since 2015. An analysis by country of the cities
used as the research targets revealed that many studies were conducted
in cities in China, the United States, and Canada. Of the 51 studies
reviewed, 14 studies (26%) were conducted in Chinese cities, which is
a high percentage of all studies (Fig. 3). In addition, seven studies did
not study UHIs occurring in actual cities or regions but were conducted
arbitrarily by setting a virtual area to estimate the intensity and magni-
tude of UHIs occurring under certain conditions. In addition, three stud-
ies (Cantelli et al., 2015; Nazarian and Kleissl, 2015; Suter et al., 2017)
using town energy balance (TEB) set up a virtual research area. For
these studies, an experimental method was used and centered on sim-
ulation. Nazarian and Kleissl (2015) used CFD as the primary simulation
tool. In the course of the research, a virtual site was set as the research
area to control and reduce the number of geometric variables utilized
 Table 3
Summary of the studies reviewed.

# Reference Study location (city, country) UHI energy Types of UHI Vertical Horizontal Research Period/Time Frame UHI estimation
concept layer range methods

1 Bonacquisti et al. (2006) Rome, Italy SEB UHIUCL UCL Meso A year/hourly Experimental
2 Giannaros et al. (2018) The greater Athena Area, Greece SUHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 3 days (July 24–26, 2009)/hourly Experimental
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown

3 Chow et al. (2014) Phoenix, AZ, U.S. SEB UHIUCL UCL Local & Meso 56 days (June 15- Aug. 132,012)/hourly Empirical
4 Suter et al. (2017) Ideal study area TEB UHISurf & UHIUCL LSL & BCL Micro A day/hourly Experimental
5 Li et al. (2018) Berlin, Germany SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso A year/4 times per day Empirical
6 Liang et al. (2018) Ideal study area UHII UHIUCL UCL Local 3 days/hourly Experimental
7 Liu et al. (2017a) Shenzhen, China UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 35 days from July to August/hourly Experimental
8 Memon et al. (2009) Hongkong, China UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso A year/hourly Empirical
9 Grimmond et al. (1991) Vancouver, Canada SEB UHIUCL UCL Local April–October 1986 and January–June 1987/hourly Empirical
10 Liu et al. (2017a) Shenzhen, China UHII UHIUCL BCL Local Aug. 18 to Aug. 20, 2015 and Jan. 16 to Jan. 18, 2016/every 2 h Experimental
(9:00,11:00,13:00,15:00)
11 Lauwaet et al. (2016) Brussels, Belgium UHII UHIUBL UBL Meso 10 years (2000–2009)/hourly Experimental
12 Nazarian and Kleissl (2015) Ideal study area TEB UHIUCL BCL Local N/A/hourly Experimental
13 Touchaei and Wang (2015) Montreal, Canada UHII UHIUCL BCL Local July 14, 2005/hourly Experimental
14 Oke (1973) St. Lawrence Lowland region, Canada UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 16 days (March 22, 1969 - June 12, 1971)/10 min Empirical
15 Salvati et al. (2019) Rome, Italy Barcelona, Spain TEB UHIUCL BCL Local 2013, 2003/hourly Experimental
16 Sheng et al. (2017) Hangzhou, China UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 6 years (2006 to 2011)/daily Empirical
17 Oke and Fuggle (1972) Montreal, Canada UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 12 days (Aug. 12, 1969 - June 28, 1970)/0.5 s Empirical
18 Kim and Baik (2004) Seoul, Incheon, Daejeon, Daegu, Gwangju, UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 1971–2001/daily Empirical
and Busan, Korea
19 Yang and Li (2013) Ideal study area SEB UHIUCL BCL Micro N/A/hourly Experimental
20 Morris et al. (2016) Putrajaya, Malaysia UHII UHIUCL BCL Meso 2 days/hourly Experimental
21 Lin et al. (2017) Hongkong, China UHII UHIUCL BCL Local 3 days for each site/5 s Empirical
22 Shirani-bidabadi et al. (2019) Isfahan, Iran SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso 4 years (1999, 2006, 2013 and 2016)/yearly Experimental
23 Kotharkar and Bagade (2018) Nagpur city, India UHII BCL Meso 22 and 23 December 2015 and 1, 2, 3 of February 2016/1 s Empirical

5
UHIUCL
24 Sun et al. (2018) Shanghai, China SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso 8 days (Jan 2015–Dec 2015)/hourly Empirical
25 Lin et al. (2019) Tainan city, Taiwan UHII UHIUCL BCL Meso A year (April 1, 2016–March 31, 2017)/hourly Empirical
26 Fan et al. (2017) Ideal study area UHII UHIUBL UBL Meso N/A/hourly Experimental
27 Coseo and Larsen (2014) Chicago, IL, U.S. UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 32 days July 1 to August 31, 2010/5 min Empirical
28 Keramitsoglou et al. (2011) The greater Athena Area, Greece SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso 9 years (1085 daytime)/hourly Empirical
29 Zhou and Chen (2018) Wuhan, China UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 1966–2008/hourly Experimental
30 Mathew et al. (2017) Jaipur, India UHII UHISurf LSL Meso 13 years (from 2003 to 2015)/yearly Empirical
31 Middel et al. (2012) Phoenix, AZ, and Portland, OR, U.S. SEB UHIUCL UCL Local 11 years (1999–2009) for June (Phoenix) and July (Portland)/hourly Experimental
32 Giridharan et al. (2008) Hongkong, China UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Five months (Mid-June 2003 to October 2003)/hourly Empirical
33 Grawe et al. (2013) Greater London area, U.K. UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso A year (2000)/hourly Experimental
34 Quan et al. (2014) Beijing, China UHII UHISurf LSL Meso 3 years (2000 to 2012)/monthly Experimental
35 Cantelli et al. (2015) Ideal study area TEB UHIUCL BCL Local N/A/hourly Experimental
36 Li et al. (2019) Berlin, Germany UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 21 June to 3 July 2010/daily Experimental
37 Ryu and Baik (2012) Ideal study area UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso June 20, 2008/hourly Experimental
38 Bernabé et al. (2015) Nantes and Lyon, France SEB UHIUCL UCL Local N/A Experimental
39 Zhou et al. (2018) Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration, China SUHII UHIUCL UCL Meso A year (2015)/monthly Empirical
40 Jandaghian et al. (2018) Montreal, Canada UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 4 days (09–11 August 2009)/hourly Experimental
41 Giannaros and Melas (2012) Thessaloniki, Greece UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso & Macro A year (March 2008 to February 2009)/hourly Empirical
42 Yang et al. (2010) Shanghai, China UHII UHIUCL BCL Local 3 days (July 23, 24 and 26, 2008)/hourly Empirical
43 Kim et al. (2017) Ulsan, Korea UHII UHIUCL BCL Meso A year (2016)/hourly Empirical
44 Eastin et al. (2018) Charlotte, NC, U.S. UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 5 years/hourly Empirical
45 Tian et al. (2019) Beijing, China UHII UHIUCL BCL Local 19 days from Aug. 17, 2014 to Sept. 4, 2014/10 min Empirical
46 Thom et al. (2016) Adelaide, Australia UHII UHIUCL UCL Micro 9 to 19 Feb. 2011 and 13 to 17 Feb. 2011/30 min Experimental
47 Klok et al. (2012) Rotterdam, Netherlands SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso 1984 to 2007 (June, July and August)/daily Empirical
48 Nakata-Osaki et al. (2018) São José do Rio Preto and Bauru, Brazil UHII UHIUCL UCL Local June 2013 and October. 2012 (São José do Rio Preto), June and July Experimental
2005 (Bauru)/hourly
49 Yang et al. (2011) Shanghai, China UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso 30 days in July and August/hourly Empirical
50 Hardin et al. (2018) Boston, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New UHII UHIUCL UCL Macro 8 years/monthly Experimental
York City, U.S.
51 Rajasekar and Weng (2009) Indianapolis, IN, U.S. SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso 94 days (2005)/hourly Experimental
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389

12 11

10

Number of Pblications
8
8

(n=51) 6 5
4 4
4 3 3
2 2 2
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

0
1972 1973 1991 2004 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Year Publishied

Fig. 2. Reviewed studies by year of publication.

in the simulation process. Even if the research was not conducted at a Therefore, before setting up an accurate analysis method, it is necessary
specific study site, the data from an actual city was partially utilized to analyze each UHI case and confirm whether there is a difference in
for research. For example, X. Yang and Li (2013) developed a UHI pre- the parameters reflected in the analysis. As a first step to understand
diction model and conducted a simulation process, and then used the UHI research in this SLR, the authors classified the type of UHI in each
weather data directly measured and collected in Vancouver, Canada in study.
1992 in the validation process. Ryu and Baik (2012) also used data col- In this SLR, the UHI types were classified to establish a basic frame to
lected from the Gyeong-In region of South Korea, which was previously distinguish the vertical and horizontal range of UHI research (Table 4).
used in other studies, for the anthropogenic heat value among simula- This SLR classified studies into three broad categories based on the
tion input values. type of UHI in each study. Using conventional UHI classification types,
this study classified the 51 studies into one of three categories: surface
3.2. Spatial ranges and locations of UHIs heat island (UHISurf), canopy layer heat island (UHIUCL), and boundary
layer heat island (UHIUBL) (Oke et al., 2017; Matthias Roth, 2013). In ad-
In general, most public policies are divided into short-, medium-, and dition, each UHI was re-classified and analyzed again according to the
long-term plans depending on the degree of urgency and importance of horizontal range and vertical positions in which they occurred.
the policy. After planning the policy, an appropriate budget and work- (Table 4). The four horizontal ranges of UHIs selected for this SLR in-
force are established (Wang et al., 2016). To respond to UHIs, a detailed cluded micro-, local-, meso-, and macro-scales. In addition, to differen-
analysis of each scale of the policy is needed to help establish public tiate the vertical layers of UHI, the reviewed studies were analyzed by
health policies for urban residents and to build a methodology for categorizing the vertical locations where the UHIs occurred in the stud-
urban planning and urban design that is appropriate for each scale. For ies into four layers: urban boundary layer (UBL), urban canopy layer
example, people on the street are directly affected by micro-scale heat (UCL), building canopy layer (BCL), and surface layer (LSL) (Bailey
events rather than a mesoscale perspective, so a micro-scale is used to et al., 1997).
identify the variability of UHIs and heatwaves during the summer. These classifications are based on the vertical position in which UHIs
In this context a basic premise of the studies was to understand the occur, and the scope and definitions of most UHI studies have been clas-
distinction between the location and range of UHIs, to predict and ana- sified as such. Specifically, UBL refers to the lower layer of the planetary
lyze the size, and determine how to prevent damage caused by UHIs. boundary layer that is directly affected by the characteristics of urban

China 13
U.S. 6
Canada 5
Ideal study area 7
Greece 3
Korea 2
Study Area (Country)

India 2
Germany 2
Brazil 1
Belgium 1
Australia 1
U.K. 1
Taiwan 1
Netherlands 1
Malaysia 1
Italy& Spain 1
Italy 1
Iran 1
France 1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Number of Publications (n=51)

Fig. 3. Reviewed studies by study area (country).

6
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389

Table 4
The classification of heat islands (Oke, 1987; Oke et al., 2017).

Type of heat islands Horizontal ranges Vertical layers Urban unit Data time scale Data collection methods

Boundary layer Macro Urban boundary layer (UBL) Urban region Hours–days Historical weather data, remote sensing
Heat Island (100 s km <) (250–2500 m)
(UHIUBL) Meso A city Hours–1 day
(10s -100 s km)
Canopy layer Local Urban canopy layer (UCL) A neighborhood, blocks Minutes–hours Stationary weather stations, temporarily fixed
Heat Island (0.5 - 10s km) (25–250 m) weather stations,
(UHIUCL) mobile measurements with weather station
mounted on mobile platforms
MICRO BUILDING CANOPY LAYER (BCL) Buildings, street canyon Seconds–minutes Temporarily fixed weather stations,
(100 S M - 0.5 KM) (10S M - 100 S M) mobile measurements with weather station
Surface Heat Island LAND SURFACE LAYER (LSL) mounted on mobile platforms, thermal imaging
(UHISurf) (<10S M) camera, remote sensing

areas. The UBL concept is used to explain UHIs that occur within the
meso-scale range (Oke, 1976). UCL refers to a layer formed at the height
of a building's roof in a city, usually defined based on the average height
calculated by connecting the rooflines of the buildings. Therefore, UCL is
mainly used to study the direct effect of morphological characteristics
on UHIs including the height and density of buildings and blocks within
the urban boundary (Oke, 1988a; Oke et al., 2017). However, UCL is a rel-
atively high-level layer for the estimation and analysis of outdoor thermal
comfort levels that affect people in street canyons UHIs. To compensate
for these limitations, a layer that is closer to the ground surface — a
layer that can cover the height of people between the land surface and
the UCL — is defined as BCL and is used in UHI research. LSL conditions
are also used simultaneously in analyzing the thermal environments in
which UHIs affect people. Thermal environment studies in LSL mainly
use land surface temperature (LST). LST data is extracted using remote
sensing methods that analyze satellite images, or the researcher directly
measures LST using a portable thermal imaging camera. LST data collected
using these methods are used as the primary data source to analyze the
surface heat island (UHISurf) (Matthias Roth, 2013).
This step confirmed that each study's spatial scope according to the
type of UHI was not clearly distinguished. For a canopy layer heat island
(UHIUCL), 14 (26.42%) of the 51 studies used a meteorological data col-
lection process for UHI analysis. In most of these cases, the researchers
installed a temporary weather station to collect the data. However,
this method is limited by the permission or location selection for
installing the equipment and thus limited the data spatial coverage of
the data collection to the type of UHI examined. In addition, the classifi-
cation of existing UHI types was mostly based on the vertical position at
which a UHI occurs. This analysis reveals that it is necessary to establish
a UHI-type classification method that considers both the data collection
method and the corresponding spatial scope setting. Since a UHI is a
unique phenomenon that occurs only in cities and that simultaneously
reflects the physical form and characteristics of cities, it is necessary to
reflect both the vertical and horizontal areas at the same time.
More than half of the reviewed studies (n = 33) measured and an-
alyzed the magnitude and intensity of UHIs at a meso-scale. This num-
ber confirmed that it is essential to check the impact of UHIs on the
entire city but many studies set the scope of the study as a meso-scale
covering the urban boundaries. Although a relatively small number of
studies (n = 3) analyzed UHIs at a micro-scale (Suter et al., 2017;
Thom et al., 2016; X. Yang and Li, 2013), all three studies considered
the urban geometry directly related to the building or block form within
the study site that affects the UHI at a micro-scale. Analyzing UHIs from
a micro-scale perspective demonstrates the need to consider the urban
geometry, especially building configuration, aspect ratio, and street ori-
entation, which directly affects microclimate conditions and micro-
scale UHI intensity.
The horizontal scope of the UHI studies included UCL (n = 27) and
BCL (n = 13), accounting for the majority (78.43%) of the studies
reviewed in this SLR. These results also showed a direct relationship
with the method of obtaining the data. Most of the researchers focused
on UCL and BCL due to the limitations of the equipment or the location
of existing weather stations. When researchers installed a weather sta-
tion to collect meteorological data, it was usually installed on street-
lights (M. Kim et al., 2017) or on the roofs of buildings (Chow et al.,
2014) in the research area. In these cases, the vertical weather informa-
tion that could be observed by the weather stations was limited to UCL
and BCL. In the end, determining the horizontal range and vertical posi-
tion of the UHI to be studied directly affected the type and quality of me-
teorological data that was utilized to estimate the intensity of UHI.
Surface heat island (UHISurf) studies mainly utilized LST data ex-
tracted using a remote sensing tool. Eight of the studies included in this
SLR were conducted in the meso-scale horizontal range (Keramitsoglou
et al., 2011; Klok et al., 2012; H. Li et al., 2018; Mathew et al., 2017;
Quan et al., 2014; Rajasekar and Weng, 2009; Shirani-bidabadi et al.,
2019; Sun et al., 2018). These results were also related to the charac-
teristics of the resolution of LST data extracted by remote sensing
(30 m) (Holderness et al., 2013; Mathew et al., 2017; Shirani-
bidabadi et al., 2019) and the characteristics of geometrical data
reflected in the UHI intensity analysis. All eight of these studies on
UHISurf used geometrical data obtained by a remote sensing method
(e.g., NDVI, LULC).
3.3. Main UHI energy concepts
Of the studies reviewed in this SLR, the highest proportion (n = 32,
ratio = 62.74%) utilized urban heat island intensity (UHII), which is the
most commonly used method to estimate UHIs (Table 5). It is also a
model that was the basis for the basic concept of UHI (Howard, 1833).
The second most used heat island concept was surface urban heat island
intensity (SUHII). Most studies focusing on surface heat islands used LST
extracted from satellite images using remote sensing tools as the pri-
mary data. This process is quite different in terms of fundamental char-
acteristics and methods of obtaining data from UHIs using the air
temperature difference and primary meteorological data. However,
SUHII is also a method to calculate the LST difference between two or
more observation points and has been used to analyze and estimate
UHISurf magnitude.
A relatively small percentage (n = 10, ratio = 19.60%) of the studies
used the energy balance concept (e.g., UEB, SEB, TEB), which is a
Table 5
Summary of the UHI energy concepts of the reviewed studies.
Type of UHI Number of UHI analysis spatial Final Ratio
energy concept studies dimensions output unit (%)
UHII 32 Two-Dimension (Linear) °C 62.75
SUHII 8 Two-Dimension (Linear) °C 15.69
SEB 6 Two-Dimension (Planar) W/m2 11.76
UEB 1 Two-Dimension (Planar) W/m2 1.96
TEB 4 Two-Dimension (Planar) W/m2 7.84

7
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown
different approach from UHII and SUHII. The UHI concepts using energy
balance are based on a method of estimating and analyzing the magni-
tude and intensity of UHIs by calculating the heat flux (W/m2) of the
study area rather than using the air temperature (°C) at the measure-
ment point. In this process, solar radiation was commonly used as the
critical meteorological data.
3.3.1. Urban heat island intensity (UHII)
UHII is a crucial indicator of the size of UHIs in urbanized areas and
explains the intensity of UHIs most used by the studies reviewed in
this SLR. UHII, a conventional method to evaluate UHIs, is determined
by comparing the average and maximum air temperature between an
urban (Tu) and rural area (Tr) (Oke, 1973).
UHII ¼ ΔT u−r ¼ T u −T r ð1Þ
In particular, an urban heat island is influenced by various physical
and meteorological elements in the urban area, so there are limitations
in calculating the variations of UHIs in a linear and two-dimensional
analysis (Demuzere et al., 2017; Groleau and Mestayer, 2012; Oke,
1988b; Xu et al., 2017). Some researchers have used a different ap-
proach to calculate UHII based on different temperature sources from
the air temperature. For example, they have used a variety of versatile
techniques to assess UHII such as in-situ measurements using stationary
and mobile traverse instruments, as well as simulations and modeling
using various scales (Kourtidis et al., 2015; Yuanyuan Wang et al.,
2018).
UHII depends entirely on the air temperature value and does not re-
flect other meteorological data. Data other than air temperature ob-
tained by using weather station measurements in the research process
were not directly used to calculate the UHI size but were mostly used
to confirm the correlation with the nature of UHIs or trends of changes.
Studies using SUHII also showed similar research trends to these stud-
ies. However, SUHII, which analyzes UHISurf in a similar way to UHII,
has the advantage of extracting LST from satellite images and securing
data that can cover the meso-scale research range. For studies using
UHII, data must be collected through weather stations already installed
in the area to be studied or installed by researchers. These studies are
limited in that it is impossible to obtain comprehensive data of the de-
sired area due to cost and spatial constraints. However, SUHII has the
advantage of being able to select an LST at the desired location based
on a wide range of LST image data. Therefore, for research using SUHII,
it is possible to analyze many points (C. Giannaros et al., 2018).
Oke (1973) and Coseo and Larsen (2014) selected several points
within the urban boundary and calculated UHII. In particular, Coseo
and Larsen (2014) used this method to understand the correlation
and analysis of different sizes of UHIs occurring in a metropolitan area
(Chicago). Liu, Lin, Liu, et al. (2017) calculated UHII by comparing the
average air temperature within the urban area (a block) of the study
site and the average air temperature around the city without directly
comparing the observation results of the two measurement points.
3.3.2. Energy balance
Another concept used to describe UHI magnitude and intensity is en-
ergy balance (Oke et al., 2017; Matthias Roth, 2013). Unlike UHII, which
depends entirely on the air temperature value, the energy balance con-
cept calculates and analyzes the types and sizes of heat fluxes generated
within the study area, and their influence on UHIs. Among the studies
reviewed in this SLR, a relatively small percentage (19.61%) used the en-
ergy balance concept compared to UHII. In particular, studies using sur-
face energy balance (SEB) (n = 5) and down energy balance (TEB) (n =
4) accounted for a larger proportion of the studies using the energy bal-
ance concept (n = 9).
Detailed calculations and analyses are possible for each heat source
applied to the energy balance calculation to account for UHI phenom-
ena, especially at a local-scale and micro-scale. Therefore, it is sufficient
8
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
to describe urban climate change as an essential element to understand
the influence on the UHI phenomenon from both meso-scale and micro-
scale perspectives (Chow et al., 2014). UHIs are based on the energy bal-
ance differences between urban and rural areas, and this energy balance
is explained by the atmospheric state in each area. While UHII and SUHII
are mainly used for meso-scale UHI analysis, the energy balance concept
is used to analyze a smaller and more detailed range of UHIs. For re-
searchers who want to use a more detailed approach, SEB seems to be
mainly used to quantify the heat generated and contained in the re-
search area among the models reflecting the energy balance concept
(Oke, 1988b).
SEB is defined using several sources of heat flux (Oke, 1987; Oke
et al., 2017; Matthias Roth, 2013):


Q ⁎ þ Q F ¼ Q H þ Q E þ ΔQ S þ ΔQ A W=m2 ð2Þ
where Q ∗is the net all-wave radiation flux, QF is the anthropogenic
heat flux from heat released due to human activities (e.g., living, work,
and traffic, and combustion from these activities), QH is the turbulent
sensible heat flux, QE is the latent heat flux, ΔQS is the net uptake or re-
lease of energy by a sensible heat change in the urban ground-canopy-
air volume, and ΔQA is the net horizontal advective heat flux. Among
the elements that describe SEB, it is especially important to note that
the QF and ΔQS factors are affected by urban geometry (Chow et al.,
2014; Oke et al., 2017).
QF, anthropogenic heat flux, occurs mainly in the process of produc-
ing energy for human activity and lives in a city. To estimate this heat
flux, specific energy consumption indicators are used for each typical
urban ecosystem element, such as buildings, vehicles, and people
(Oke, 1987; Oke et al., 2017). ΔQS, storage heat flux, refers to the
coupled heat uptake. It leads to a sensible heat change in the urban
ground-canopy-air volume from physical elements that influence the
SEB such as air, soil, water, and building materials. This heat flux can
be estimated based on the amount of incoming solar radiation, types
of surface materials, roughness from urban height and density, and gen-
eral weather data such as air temperature, relative humidity, wind ve-
locity, wind direction, and air pressure (Oke, 1987, 1988b; Matthias
Roth, 2013; M. Roth and Chow, 2012). These two elements are affected
by changes in the urban built environment, and these heat fluxes are the
major causes of the magnitude and intensity of UHIs (Chow et al., 2014).
TEB is a modified SEB model and is used to study the intensity and
change trend of UHIs by calculating the heat flux generated in the build-
ing canopy layer (BCL). Four studies (Cantelli et al., 2015; Nazarian and
Kleissl, 2015; Salvati et al., 2019; Suter et al., 2017) using TEB were con-
ducted on virtual spaces but they were used differently. Among the four
studies, Nazarian and Kleissl (2015) used CFD differently from the other
three studies, focusing on the ground surface material's albedo consti-
tuting the urban space. Cantelli et al. (2015) used TEB to analyze the
spatial and temporal evolution of UHIs in street canyons. Salvati et al.
(2019) used the urban weather generator (UWG) model developed
based on the TEB concept and used weather data measured in Rome
and Barcelona to validate the results. As such, this review demonstrates
that TEB could be used when conducting research considering micro-
scale urban geometry.
From a modeling point of view, the SEB perspectives to understand
the energy balance and budget of a city ideally need to be parameterized
with urban geometry. The complexity and specificity of this process ex-
plain why researchers have focused on the parameterization and
modeling process in describing a city's SEB (Oke, 1988b; Matthias
Roth, 2013). Therefore, various approaches chosen for modeling are
presented in the studies and need to be examined to determine how
to compare them with other models (Cantelli et al., 2015; Suter et al.,
2017). For research in the urban climate field, predicting the tendency
and direction of change in the future is also a crucial task to analyze
and understand past and present conditions (Masson, 2006; Oke et al.,
2017).
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown
3.4. UHI magnitude estimation and analysis studies
The studies we reviewed have applied various methods to estimate
and analyze the magnitude and intensity of UHIs. In this SLR, we classi-
fied UHI studies into empirical and experimental studies. The number of
empirical studies and experimental studies were 24 (47.06%) and 27
(52.94%), respectively, indicating similar proportions for the studies
reviewed in this SLR. This result explains that the trend of methods
that researchers have used to study UHI magnitude and intensity are
not biased toward a specific method. Experimental studies were also
conducted simultaneously as a complementary method to empirical
methods to validate the research results. In particular, studies using
simulation were commonly selected to validate regression analysis
and make prediction models. The primary energy concept for UHI anal-
ysis seemed to influence the choice of the research method. In this SLR,
among 11 studies based on the energy balance concept, nine studies se-
lected experimental methods, with the exceptions of Chow et al. (2014)
and Grimmond et al. (1991).
3.4.1. Empirical studies
Empirical modeling is based on observations of the components that
make up UHI characteristics (Table 6). The goal of this model is to repro-
duce the energy of the canopy using statistical relationships derived
from the observations. Many statistical models have been actively uti-
lized in UHI research, citing their strengths as their simplicity and ease
of use. These models also generally have the advantage of working
well in cities with a limited range of atmospheric conditions (Masson,
2006; Oke et al., 2017). Empirical models describe phenomena based
on empirical knowledge and the statistical relationships between mete-
orological and geometrical variables obtained from observations of
physical analysis (Matthias Roth, 2013). To build this statistical frame-
work, researchers need to use data from many measurement sites to de-
velop relationships (Oke, 1988b). As a result, there are limitations in
obtaining the necessary information based on the data obtained from
on-site observations and measurements, which make it physically chal-
lenging during the research process. Insights from these models for di-
agnosis purposes are also limited, but studies can have descriptive and
real value because they provide quick results. Many of these models
take the form of regression or correlation analyses (Oke, 1988b; Oke
et al., 2017; Matthias Roth, 2013).
Regression analysis was the most used method among the empirical
studies in this SLR. In terms of the direct relationship between UHII and
weather data or urban geometry and building prediction models, eight
(ratio = 33.33%) studies utilized bivariate regression analysis among
the 24 categorized as empirical studies. Correlation analysis (n = 5,
ratio = 20.83%) was mainly used to analyze and understand the direct
correlation between UHII or solar radiation intensity with other factors
(e.g., time, air temperature, geometry). A multiple regression analysis
method was also used to estimate and understand the significant UHI
intensity and magnitude. Multiple regression analysis helps researchers
identify which factors affecting UHIs are the most or least sensitive to
UHI estimation. To this end, researchers in this SLR used various meteo-
rological parameters and urban geometry parameters as input data for
multiple regression analysis (Giridharan et al., 2008; Y. H. Kim and
Baik, 2004; F.-Y. Lin et al., 2019; Tian et al., 2019; F. Yang et al., 2011).
In particular, in reflecting meteorological data, there was a difference
between the data type and the timeframe based on the method the re-
searchers used to obtain the data. D. Zhou et al. (2018) and Tian et al.
(2019) used a stepwise regression model to identify and predict factors
influencing air temperature changes by two- and three-dimensional
morphology indicators. In the process, as many types of morphological
indicators as possible were utilized as independent variables.
In addition, the characteristics of urban geometry factors reflected in
the studies varied depending on the data source. For instance, two
studies (Sun et al., 2018; D. Zhou et al., 2018) based on the SUHII con-
cept used LST and geometrical data (e.g., NDVI, NDBI, LULC, ISA)
9
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
obtained by remote sensing for analysis. This process could reduce
errors in analysis and increase the reliability of the results through
the unification of data sources. In both studies, LST was derived
from MODIS, but Sun et al. (2018) and D. Zhou et al. (2018) extracted
geometrical factors, which were independent variables from MODIS
and OLI data, respectively, and used them for analysis. Therefore,
there was a big difference in the nature, type, and number of geomet-
rical factors in the studies.
3.4.2. Experimental studies
Unlike other research techniques, experimental methods in UHI re-
search differs in that it can be simulated and thus reflect more complex
and diverse conditions (Table 7). Experimental methods has been used
mainly to reflect the changes in urban geometries (Oke et al., 2017). Ex-
perimental studies are significant in that they can help overcome the
limitations of the scale and range of empirical studies. The experimental
study methods identified in this SLR can be categorized into three type
of simulations: 1) simulation with atmospheric numerical models,
2) simulation with computer programming, and 3) simulation with
physical scale models.
Simulation using the atmospheric numerical model accounted for
the largest proportion with 12 (46.15%) out of 26 studies classified as
experimental studies. The most used methods were the Weather Re-
search and Forecasting Model (WRF) and the Urban Canopy Model
(UCM). WRF, developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Re-
search, is one of the most advanced and widely used numerical weather
prediction models to understand and forecast meso-scale weather con-
ditions (H. Li et al., 2019). UCM is a single-layer model that considers
different heating (building roof, building side, road surface) and radia-
tion blocking by city buildings. This model is based on assumptions
about building shape components (building height, area ratio), urban
form, and anthropogenic heat emissions (Kusaka and Kimura, 2004).
Studies using these two models generally combine the two models
and use them simultaneously (Jandaghian et al., 2018). Ryu and Baik
(2012) used the Seoul National University Urban Canopy Model
(SNUUCM) as the basis for multiple-layer model that is applicable to
the physical shape of street canyons.
The sophistication of the computational simulation methods and re-
sults have continued to develop. In the early stages, one building or one
street canyon could be simulated, and the analysis was mostly done
with two-dimensional rather than three-dimensional modeling, even
if the modeling range was extended (Matthias Roth, 2013). However,
three-dimensional analysis became more common with the develop-
ment of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) programs and the in-
creased utilization of enhanced simulation programs such as Ansys
Fluent, SimFlow, OpenFOAM and ENVI-met (Ambrosini et al., 2014;
Nazarian and Kleissl, 2015). CFD has been frequently applied in UHI
studies to study the modeling of energy in a street-scale environment
(Liang et al., 2018; Nazarian and Kleissl, 2015). In recent years, consid-
erable effort and remarkable progress have also been made in modeling
airflow and energy balance CFD simulations at the street canyon scale,
and many researchers have actively used them in UHI research (X.-X.
Li et al., 2006). Therefore, the results obtained through CFD can help ex-
plain UHIs based on physical processes within urban areas varying in
magnitude and intensity.
Simulation using physical scale modeling is another simulation re-
search method that has been used for a long time. The most common
method is to perform a simulation reflecting the climatic conditions of
the study area in a wind tunnel test facility using models to reduce the
actual scale. Physical scale modeling methods have limitations in mea-
suring thermal environments and energy balance directly from the
models. Research using this modeling method is effective in obtaining
results from indoor or outdoor installations reflecting only one or two
limited variables (Matthias Roth, 2013). Researchers have also con-
ducted studies with these modeling methods to study energy balance,
which measures the air temperature change of UHIs at night, or the
 Table 6
Summary of empirical studies reviewed.

# Reference Main UHI energy Types of Vertical Horizontal range Empirical study methods Variables
concept UHI layer
Dependent variable Independent variable

1 Chow et al. (2014) SEB UHIUCL UCL Local & Meso Two-way ANOVA, Mean daily air Mean daily latent heat (QF)
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown

OLS regression temperature

2 Li et al. (2018) SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso Bivariate linear regression mean LST (°C) ISA with Kernel Density Estimation method
(ISAKDE)
3 Memon et al. (2009) UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Bivariate linear regression UHII Relative humidity
4 Grimmond et al. (1991) SEB UHIUCL UCL Local Bivariate linear regression Stored heat flux Time (hour)
(Qs)
5 Oke (1973) UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Stepwise multiple regression average UHII Population
6 Sheng et al. (2017) UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Pearson correlation analysis UHII Time (day of year)
7 Oke and Fuggle (1972) UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Empirical equations to calculate counter-radiation value UHII Solar radiation
8 Kim and Baik (2004) UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Spectral analysis, UHII Time (year)
Multiple linear regression,
Multidimensional scaling analysis,
Cluster analysis
9 Lin et al. (2017) UHII UHIUCL BCL Local Bivariate linear regression UHII FAR
Building density
land greenery coverage ratio
10 Kotharkar and Bagade UHII UHIUCL BCL Meso Outlier analysis, UHII Local climate zone (LCZ)
(2018) Pearson correlation analysis
11 Sun et al. (2018) SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso OLS regression, Average daytime NDVI
Spatial lag model (SLM), LST ISA
Spatial error model (SEM). NDBI
Percentage cover of built-up (PBU)
Percentage cover of vegetation (PVG)

10
12 Lin et al. (2019)
13 Coseo and Larsen (2014)
Percentage cover of waterbody (PWB)
Built-up_LSI
Built-up_GYR
Vegetation_LSI
Vegetation_GYR
Water_LPI
Water_LSI
Water_GYR
Patch density (PD)
Continuity index (CONTAG)
Aggregation index (AI)
Nighttime light intensity (NTLI)
Road density (RD)
UHII UHIUCL BCL Meso Multiple linear regression ΔTm, αTm, and building area (B),
αRHm area of green spaces (G),
area of vacant spaces (V),
road area (R),
population size (P),
average building height (H)
UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Bivariate linear regression, UHII Percentage impervious
OLS regression Percentage roof cover
Percentage tree canopy
Aspect ratio
Avg. building height
SVF
Street orientation
Percentage upwind tree canopy
Avg. upwind building height (m)
Distance to lake (km)
Distance to downtown (km)
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
 Distance to nearby upwind industrial (km)
Distance to nearby upwind freeway (km)
Distance to nearby upwind park (km)
Percentage of total impervious that was roof
14 Keramitsoglou et al. (2011) SUHII UHISurf LSL Meso Spearman's correlation analysis LST intensity Area (m2)
15 Mathew et al. (2017) UHII UHISurf LSL Meso Linear spectral mixture analysis (LSMA) LST intensity normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI)
enhanced vegetation index (EVI)
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown

impervious surface area (ISA)

normalized different built-up index (NDBI)
16 Giridharan et al. (2008) UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Multiple linear regression UHII surface albedo, SVF, altitude, shrub cover,
tree cover, average height, FAR
17 Zhou et al. (2018) SUHII UHIUCL UCL Meso Stepwise linear regression SUHII enhanced vegetation index (EVI)
white sky albedo (WSA)
Forest/Non-Forest (FNF)
Built-up intensity
Urban area size (UAS)
18 Giannaros and Melas (2012) UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso & Macro Bivariate linear regression UHII water vapor pressure differences (Δe)
between the urban
sites and the reference site
19 Yang et al. (2010) UHII UHIUCL BCL Local Descriptive statistical analysis, UHII Sky view factor
Bivariate and multiple linear regression Total site factor
Tree view factor
Green plot ratio
Green cover ratio
Ground surface albedo
Wind velocity
FAR
Green ratio
Solar radiation on site
20 Kim et al. (2017) UHII UHIUCL BCL Meso Descriptive statistical analysis, UHII Road context

11
21 Eastin et al. (2018)
22 Tian et al. (2019)
A random effect GLS regression model Urban core
Coast
River
Green building surface fraction
Road width
Sky view factor
Road orientation
Relative humidity
Wind velocity
Cloud cover
UHII UHIUCL UCL Meso The Mann–Kendall trend test, Spearman's correlation analysis, UHII relative humidity (RH)
The Wilcoxon Mann–Whitney test wind speed (WS)
wind direction (WD)
cloud cover (CLC)
cloud base (CLB)
net solar radiation (SR)
NO2, the weather factor (WXF)
Pasquill–Gifford–Turner stability index (STB),
*WXF=WS 20:5 (12 km2)
UHII UHIUCL BCL Local Spearman's correlation analysis, Stepwise regression model, UHII (BCR) Building coverage ratio
Multiple linear regression (GCR) Percent cover of vegetation
(NEAR) Mean distance among adjacent
buildings
(FLD) Dispersion degree of building patches
(EW/NS) Buildings length ratio of east–west
to north–south
(L/W) Length to width ratio of buildings
(Height) Average building height
(H_max) Maximum height of buildings
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389

(continued on next page)

S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389

degree to which urban geometry directly affects the urban energy bal-

(H_std) Standard deviation of building height

ance change and the trends of the change. These studies have been con-

(VV2BV) Ratio of vegetation volume to

ducted under ideal weather and time conditions (Oke et al., 2017). That
is, this model has been utilized in studies on the premise that they limit

nighttime wind velocity (WVN)

(CI) Ratio of building volume to
other variables or neglect the influence of other factors. This ideal pre-

daytime wind velocity (WVD),

ground surface albedo (GSA),
mise also applies to studies using electronic modeling (Nunez and
(BA) Building aggregation

green cover ratio (GCR),

Oke, 1977; Oke, 1988b). However, in this modeling method, prototype

green plot ratio (GPR),

tree view factor (TVF),
sky view factor (SVF),
total site factor (TSF),
Independent variable

neighborhood area models are mostly used, which means that researchers cannot perform
simulations that reflect various urban forms while modifying the scale
building volume

air temperature (Oke et al., 2017; Matthias Roth, 2013). Liang et al. (2018) installed a
street canyon mock-up model outdoors and measured air temperature
(FAR)

and wind velocity at each measurement location when the mock-up

(SVF)

model was directly exposed to the climatic conditions of the study

area. The measurement results were compared with the CFD simulation
Dependent variable

results to explain the correlation between the in-situ measurement re-

sult and the computer simulation result. In this SLR, Liang et al.'s study
was the only one to use CFD simulation and physical mock-up models
Variables

together.
UHII
LST

4. Discussion

The initial goal of this SLR was to understand the trends of existing
studies related to the magnitude and intensity estimation of UHIs and
to perform an in-depth analysis of the physical research range-setting
criteria, basic energy concept for understanding UHIs, and estimation
and analysis methods used by each study. This SLR classified 51 studies
into three detailed categories using five filtering steps. The results reveal
that there are several limitations of existing studies for each category.
Suggestions to supplement these limitations and questions for future
research are presented based on three key questions:
Bivariate linear regression,
Bivariate linear regression

Multiple linear regression

Horizontal range Empirical study methods

1) How can we determine the range of the physical occurrence for each
UHI personality to complement the existing UHI classification
criteria?
2) What is needed to establish a UHI estimation method that analyzes
and reflects the three-dimensional form of a city and the character-
istics of the urban geometry?
3) How can we set up a method to estimate the UHI magnitude and in-
tensity optimized for each UHI occurrence range, location, and
characteristics?

4.1. Criteria for the physical range of UHI studies

Meso
Meso

This in-depth review of the 51 studies in this SLR confirms that the
Vertical

numerical criteria associated with the vertical and horizontal ranges

layer

UCL

and locations in which UHIs occur, described by the conventional UHI

LSL

classification frame, do not match the physical ranges utilized as criteria

Types of

in some UHI studies. This SLR confirmed that these limitations along
UHISurf
UHIUCL

with the constraints of the meteorological data collection method

UHI

have limited the conditions for the studies of UHI estimation and analy-
sis. The reason for this limitation is the installation of weather data
Main UHI energy

collecting equipment to estimate and analyze UHIs in a region and the

desired range and criteria describing the existing UHI classification
concept

frame (i.e., UHISurf, UHIUCL, UHIUBL) because the spatial ranges in

SUHII
UHII

which the data were collected do not match. The results of this SLR
also revealed that the horizontal range in which UHIs occur is mostly
at the meso-scale, while the vertical position is concentrated on the
UCL and BCL, which explains the limitations of existing UHI analysis
studies. Therefore, researchers should prioritize matching the spatial
24 Yang et al. (2011)
23 Klok et al. (2012)

range of meteorological data collected for UHI estimation and analysis

studies and the UHI category to be studied. However, follow-up studies
Table 6 (continued)

Reference

are needed to complement the current UHI classification method. To

this end, it is necessary to establish clear criteria describing the spatial
extent to which each UHI is classified. In addition, for research on how
to collect the necessary data for research using UHIs classified through
#

such a process, understanding the installation criteria for measurement

12
 Table 7
Summary of the experimental studies reviewed.

# Reference Main UHI energy Types of UHI Experimental study methods Validation tools Parameters for experiments
concept
Meteorological Urban geometry parameters
parameters

1 Bonacquisti et al. (2006) SEB UHSM (Urban Heat Storage Model) N/A Air temperature Urban density
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown

UHIUCL
Relative humidity GSA
Atmospheric pressure
Wind velocity
Cloud cover
2 Giannaros et al. (2018) SUHII UHIUCL WFM model with sensitivity analysis N/A LST LULC,
Urban density,
Building configuration, Urban block
configuration,
Road width
3 Suter et al. (2017) TEB UHISurf & Modified Town Energy Budget (MTEB) N/A Air temperature Building configuration
UHIUCL Solar radiation Road width
Wind velocity NDVI
4 Liang et al. (2018) UHII UHIUCL CFD, Linear regression Air temperature, Aspect ratio
Physical mock up model simulation Wind velocity,
Wind direction,
LST
5 Liu et al. (2017b) UHII UHIUCL SET (standard effective temperature), GIS GIS-aid geo-environmental Air temperature, Building configuration
evaluations and spatial sensitivity Wind velocity, Urban block configuration
analysis Specific humidity,
Global solar radiation
6 Liu et al. (2017a) UHII UHIUCL GIS based interpolation/zonal statistics Local-UHII (LUHII) Air temperature SVF
relative humidity Building configuration

13
GCR
7 Lauwaet et al. (2016) UHII UHIUBL Simulation with urban boundary layer climate model Linear regression Air temperature N/A
UrbClim Solar radiation
Wind velocity
Relative humidity
Precipitation
8 Nazarian and Kleissl (2015) TEB UHIUCL CFD simulation Linear regression Air temperature Aspect ratio
Wind velocity GSA
Wind direction
9 Touchaei and Wang (2015) UHII UHIUCL Simulation with building energy model (BEM), Linear regression Air temperature SVF
urban canopy models (UCMs), the weather
research and forecasting model (WRF)
10 Salvati et al. (2019) UHII UHIUCL Simulation with the ‘Urban Weather Generator’ Multiple linear regression analysis Air temperature Building configuration
(UWG) model Site coverage ratio
Façade-to-site ratio
Anthropogenic heat (traffic)
GCR, GSA
11 Yang and Li (2013) SEB UHIUCL Town energy budget model Model for Urban Surface Temperature Solar radiation, Building configuration
(MUST) Air temperature Block configuration
12 Morris et al. (2016) UHII UHIUCL Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model Linear regression Air temperature, Land cover type
coupled with Urban Canopy Model (UCM) Relative humidity Land use
13 Shirani-bidabadi et al. (2019) SUHII UHISurf Urban heat island Ratio Index (URI) Correlation analysis LST NDVI
14 Fan et al. (2017) UHII UHIUBL CFD simulation Linear regression Air temperature The size of a city, Urban diameter
15 Zhou and Chen (2018) UHII UHIUCL Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF) Correlation analysis Air temperature LULC
Relative humidity Land cover type
Wind speed Building density
Wind velocity Building configuration
Plot ratio
GCR

(continued on next page)

Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
 Table 7 (continued)

# Reference Main UHI energy Types of UHI Experimental study methods Validation tools Parameters for experiments
concept
Meteorological Urban geometry parameters
parameters

16 Middel et al. (2012) SEB UHIUCL Local-Scale Urban Meteorological Parameterization Sensitivity analysis Air temperature BCR
Scheme Relative humidity ISA
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown

(LUMPS) model Solar radiation Land cover type

Precipitation
Air pressure
17 Grawe et al. (2013) UHII UHIUCL Non-hydrostatic mesoscale meteorological model Correlation analysis Air temperature Land cover type
(METRAS) Wind velocity
coupled with the sophisticated multi-layer urban Wind direction
canopy scheme
BEP
18 Quan et al. (2014) UHII UHISurf Gaussian volume model Trend analysis LST NDVI, GSA
19 Cantelli et al. (2015) TEB UHIUCL Numerical weather prediction (NWP) model couple Sensitivity analysis Air temperature SVF
with Relative humidity Aspect ratio
RAMS model Wind velocity Building configuration
20 Li et al. (2019) UHII UHIUCL Weather Research and Forecasting Model coupled Linear regression Air temperature Road width, Building configuration, GCR, ISA,
with AHE, GSA
Urban Canopy Model (WRF/UCM)
21 Ryu and Baik (2012) UHII UHIUCL The Seoul National University Urban Canopy Model Sensitivity analysis Air temperature Built-up area,
(SNUUCM) Building configuration,
Street orientation, Aspect ratio,
Emissivity,
Heat capacity,
Thermal conductivity
GSA, GCR

14
22 Bernabé et al. (2015) SOLENE UHIUCL Solar radiation modeling and inter-reflections Linear regression Solar radiation Aspect ratio, SVF, GSA
computation
are performed with SOLENE
23 Jandaghian et al. (2018) UHII UHIUCL Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model for N/A Air temperature GSA
urban Solar radiation
climate simulations Wind velocity
Relative humidity
precipitation
24 Thom et al. (2016) UHII UHIUCL The Solar and Longwave Environmental Irradiance Correlation analysis Air temperature Aspect ratio
Geometry (SOLWEIG) model Relative humidity Street orientation
Wind velocity Placement in the street
Solar radiation GCR
Global solar
radiation
25 Nakata-Osaki et al. (2018) UHII UHIUCL Tool for Heat Island Simulation (THIS) Correlation analysis Air temperature Aspect ratio
26 Hardin et al. (2018) UHII UHIUCL GIS interpolation (air temperature)/ N/A Air temperature NDVI
Random forest-based regression kriging (RFRK) Relative humidity Proximity to heat sink (water body)
Air pressure Brightness of nighttime lights
Precipitation
Wind velocity
Wind direction
27 Rajasekar and Weng (2009) SUHII UHISurf Kernel convolution/exploratory data analysis N/A LST LULC
(EDA)/3-D mesh model
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown
equipment, and how to classify meteorological data to be used for UHI
estimation and analysis should be carefully considered together. In ad-
dition, future studies to address these problems need to propose a UHI
classification method that considers more three-dimensional urban
geometry elements both horizontally and vertically in the three-
dimensional urban space where UHIs occur.
4.2. Recognizing and addressing the problems of the existing UHI energy
concept
UHII has mostly been used to describe UHIs. In addition, most
researchers have analyzed UHIs by obtaining air temperature data
from weather stations. However, since the air temperature identified
at each measurement point is caused by the interaction of various
meteorological data and urban geometries, estimating the intensity
and magnitude of UHIs using only air temperature is the fundamen-
tal cause of misunderstanding UHI occurrences. Such a narrow
perspective limits researchers' in-depth analysis and thus their
ability to find solutions.
The energy balance concepts (e.g., SEB, TEB, UEB) that estimate and
analyze UHIs by calculating heat fluxes, consider the influence of vari-
ous heat sources and heat flux generated from that place compared to
UHII. However, the SLR results indicated that these energy balance con-
cepts are not being used more actively than UHII. Like the conventional
UHI classification method, the shape of a three-dimensional city is not
usually considered to calculate the heat flux. To address these limita-
tions and modify the existing research methods, a multi-faceted analy-
sis of the city where UHIs occur is needed to establish the heat source
factors that affect the intensity and magnitude of UHIs along with a
method to quantify the measurements. For example, most of the energy
balance concepts used in the reviewed studies calculated heat flux
based on the surface area (m2). However, future researchers could
study the interpretation based on the volume (m3) of the urban form.
Given that the city is a complex three-dimensional form and organism
and that the amount of heat the city emits affects the magnitude and in-
tensity of UHIs, studies are needed to review this approach and develop
and propose a new UHI model.
4.3. Criteria for selecting an optimized UHI study method
This SLR also revealed that studies using UHII that depend entirely
on the air temperature data are focused on statistical analysis methods
or research methods using weather research models. Research trends
are so skewed to particular methods of analysis because of the lack of
specific analytical models in existing studies. However, researchers
could choose an analytical method that is optimized for the characteris-
tics of the UHI that they want to specifically focus on. These conclusions
are well-founded based on the studies reviewed in this SLR.
Various weather models have been used for UHI research, but this
SLR found that no model has focused on UHI research. For instance,
UCM, an existing weather research model like SNUUCM, which has
been developed and utilized in UHI research, more accurately reflects
the city's physical conditions (Ryu and Baik, 2012). However, in this
SLR, only one study modified and utilized such a model. Most of the
studies simply modified and utilized the models used by previous stud-
ies. Therefore, the process of selecting the optimal estimation and anal-
ysis methods for specific conditions has been limited including selecting
the characteristics of the UHI and the extent of the physical space that
the researcher wants to focus on.
The limited research environment of this research selection method
has a direct relationship with the accuracy and reliability of the results
of estimating and analyzing UHIs targeted by the researchers. Based
on the results of this SLR, researchers should continue to find an optimal
analysis method for the UHI study's purpose to overcome the limita-
tions of the existing studies. If follow-up studies are successful, UHI re-
search methods will be the cornerstone in establishing a plan to
15
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
minimize the damage caused by UHIs, including the increasing intensity
and magnitude of UHIs due to global climate change and urban climate
change.
4.4. Limitations
For this SLR, it was necessary to identify which variables play a cru-
cial role in estimating the magnitude of UHIs considering the three-
dimensional form of the city and to examine what units should be
used to explain the estimated values. However, there are two limitation.
First, for the parameters utilized in estimating UHI intensity and magni-
tude, this study conducted no detailed analysis of the physical elements
(i.e., the specific elements of the city's three-dimensional space) that af-
fected the UHI estimate analysis results for each study method. The clas-
sification and analysis of the meteorological and geometric parameters
utilized by each method and model were presented in the section that
describes the analysis results of the utilization trends of the UHI estima-
tion methods and the characteristics of each method. However, there
was no review of the correlation between each geometric parameter
and the UHI, the importance of each model, or the chemical parameters
identified in estimating the UHI intensity and magnitude. Further in-
depth and detailed reviews should be done to review these aspects.
The reasons each study chose the UHI estimation model and the advan-
tages and disadvantages should also be identified.
Second, in this SLR, the section reviewing the primary energy con-
cept describing UHIs distinguished the energy unit of each outcome,
but we did not follow up with a more in-depth literature analysis, in
which two distinct units were derived and used in the process. This lim-
itation is due to the lack of a review of parameters utilized in the estima-
tion. The UHI energy concept chosen by each study is a relationship that
interacts with the UHI estimation methods choice, in which the re-
searchers determine the meteorological and geometric elements to be
collected and analyzed for the study. Therefore, future work should con-
duct a review of the parameters used in each study and verify the deri-
vation process and utility of the units describing the values of the UHI
intensity and magnitude estimated by the studies. Thus, this SLR is a
foundation for further systematic literature review projects, and the re-
sults will help researchers gain more detailed knowledge of UHI
evaluation-related research.
5. Conclusion
It is necessary to review how existing studies estimate and analyze
the magnitude and intensity of UHIs to understand the spatial and tem-
poral changes and severity of UHIs. These changes have a significant im-
pact on the urban thermal environment, making it necessary to
accurately and effectively calculate and predict the effects of UHIs. To
meet this need, the goals of this SLR were (1) to estimate the magnitude
and intensity of UHIs, to identify the location, range, and process of
UHIs, (2) to determine the basic energy concept for UHI calculation
and analysis, and (3) to review the current analysis methods.
The literature reviewed in this SLR, however, is limited. In particular,
current studies do not focus on detailed categorized factors that directly
affect UHI characteristics. In addition, few in-depth studies have
attempted to explain how UHIs change and move around during the
day based on the urban geometry using an analysis method based on
a three-dimensional interpretation of the city's energy budget. Most of
the studies only focused on meso-scale urban heat island phenomena
and depended on existing data (weather data or satellite image) with
two-dimensional (plain) analysis tools. Further research is needed on
how to assess and describe the volume of UHIs and a city's urban energy
budget using a three-dimensional spatial analysis instead of conven-
tional linear UHI estimation tools. In addition, the studies in this SLR
did do not recommend an alternative UHI assessment model incorpo-
rating experiential data analysis to support active policy measures that
could improve a city's physical environment.
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown
The limitations of existing studies revealed in this SLR highlighting
the need for further studies may be useful to other researchers. Future
studies will help expand research techniques and the scope to develop
deep-learning techniques that have not yet been applied to UHI estima-
tion studies. Advancing UHI research will also help researchers develop
a research method to further analyze, estimate, and predict the tempo-
ral and spatial variability of UHIs. This analysis of the problems and
limitations of the most common UHI estimation methods lays the
foundation for estimating and understanding UHI variation. This SLR
will help urban planners and public officials understand and utilize
the results of existing UHI studies to establish policies and plans to pre-
dict and appropriately cope with the damage and levels caused by UHIs.
It can also help set the criteria for filtering existing studies to provide ev-
idence and recommend approaches to establish effective policy.
Funding sources
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agen-
cies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
References
Akbari, H., Cartalis, C., Kolokotsa, D., Muscio, A., Pisello, A.L., Rossi, F., ... Zinzi, M., 2016. Local
climate change and urban heat island mitigation techniques – the state of the art. J. Civ.
Eng. Manag. 22 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2015.1111934.
Ambrosini, D., Galli, G., Mancini, B., Nardi, I., Sfarra, S., 2014. Evaluating mitigation effects
of urban Heat Islands in a historical small center with the ENVI-met® climate model.
Sustainability 6 (10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su6107013.
Anderson, G.B., Bell Michelle, L., 2011. Heat waves in the United States: mortality risk dur-
ing heat waves and effect modification by heat wave characteristics in 43 U.S. com-
munities. Environ. Health Perspect. 119 (2), 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1289/
ehp.1002313.
Bailey, W.G., Oke, T.R., Rouse, W.R., 1997. The surface climates of Canada: McGill-Queen’s
University Press.
Bernabé, A., Musy, M., Andrieu, H., Calmet, I., 2015. Radiative properties of the urban fab-
ric derived from surface form analysis: a simplified solar balance model. Sol. Energy
122, 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.08.031.
Bonacquisti, V., Casale, G.R., Palmieri, S., Siani, A.M., 2006. A canopy layer model and its
application to Rome. Sci. Total Environ. 364 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2005.09.097.
Booth, A., Sutton, A., Papaioannou, D., 2016. In: Booth, Andrew, Sutton, Anthea,
Papaioannou, Diana (Eds.), Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review,
Second edition Sage second edition. Ed.
Bradford, K., Abrahams, L., Hegglin, M., Klima, K., 2015. A heat vulnerability index and ad-
aptation solutions for Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49 (19),
11303–11311. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03127.
Cantelli, A., Monti, P., Leuzzi, G., 2015. Numerical study of the urban geometrical represen-
tation impact in a surface energy budget model. Environ. Fluid Mech. 15 (2),
251–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-013-9309-0.
Chow, W.T.L., Salamanca, F., Georgescu, M., Mahalov, A., Milne, J.M., Ruddell, B.L., 2014. A
multi-method and multi-scale approach for estimating city-wide anthropogenic heat
fluxes. Atmos. Environ. 99, 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.09.053.
Coseo, P., Larsen, L., 2014. How factors of land use/land cover, building configuration, and
adjacent heat sources and sinks explain urban Heat Islands in Chicago. Landsc. Urban
Plan. 125, 117–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.019.
Darmanto, N.S., Varquez, A.C.G., Kawano, N., Kanda, M., 2019. Future urban climate pro-
jection in a tropical megacity based on global climate change and local urbanization
scenarios. Urban Clim. 29, 100482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2019.100482.
Demuzere, M., Harshan, S., Järvi, L., Roth, M., Grimmond, C.S.B., Masson, V., ... Wouters, H.,
2017. Impact of urban canopy models and external parameters on the modelled
urban energy balance in a tropical city. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 143 (704),
1581–1596. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3028.
Eastin, M.D., Baber, M., Boucher, A., Di Bari, S., Hubler, R., Stimac-Spalding, B., Winesett, T.,
2018. Temporal variability of the Charlotte (sub)urban Heat Island. J. Appl. Meteorol.
Climatol. 57 (1), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-17-0099.1.
Fan, Y., Li, Y., Wang, Y., Yang, A.X., 2017. Horizontal extent of the urban heat dome flow.
Sci. Rep. 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09917-4.
Giannaros, C., Nenes, A., Giannaros, T.M., Kourtidis, K., Melas, D., 2018. A comprehensive
approach for the simulation of the urban Heat Island effect with the WRF/SLUCM
modeling system: the case of Athens (Greece). Atmos. Res. 201, 86–101. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2017.10.015.
16
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
Giannaros, T.M., Melas, D., 2012. Study of the urban heat island in a coastal Mediterranean
City: the case study of Thessaloniki, Greece. Atmos. Res. 118, 103–120. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2012.06.006.
Giridharan, R., Lau, S.S.Y., Ganesan, S., Givoni, B., 2008. Lowering the outdoor temperature
in high-rise high-density residential developments of coastal Hong Kong: the vegeta-
tion influence. Build. Environ. 43 (10), 1583–1595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2007.10.003.
Grawe, D., Thompson, H.L., Salmond, J.A., Cai, X.-M., Schlünzen, K.H., 2013. Modelling the
impact of urbanisation on regional climate in the greater London area. Int. J. Climatol.
33 (10), 2388–2401. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3589.
Grimmond, C.S.B., Cleugh, H.A., Oke, T.R., 1991. An objective urban heat storage model
and its comparison with other schemes. Atmospheric Environment. Part B. Urban At-
mosphere 25 (3), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/0957-1272(91)90003-W.
Groleau, D., Mestayer, P.G., 2012. Urban morphology influence on urban albedo: a revisit
with the Solene model. Bound.-Layer Meteorol. 147 (2), 301–327. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10546-012-9786-6.
Hardin, A.W., Liu, Y., Cao, G., Vanos, J.K., 2018. Urban heat island intensity and spatial var-
iability by synoptic weather type in the northeast U.S. Urban Clim. 24, 747–762.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2017.09.001.
Holderness, T., Barr, S., Dawson, R., Hall, J., 2013. An evaluation of thermal earth observation
for characterizing urban heatwave event dynamics using the urban heat island intensity
metric. Int. J. Remote Sens. 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2012.714505.
Howard, L., 1833. The Climate of London Deduced From Meteorological Observations
Made in the Metropolis and at Various Places Around it. 2nd ed. Harvey and Darton,
London, p. 1833.
Jandaghian, Z., Touchaei, A.G., Akbari, H., 2018. Sensitivity analysis of physical parameter-
izations in WRF for urban climate simulations and heat island mitigation in Montreal.
Urban Clim. 24, 577–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2017.10.004.
Keramitsoglou, I., Kiranoudis, C.T., Ceriola, G., Weng, Q., Rajasekar, U., 2011. Identification
and analysis of urban surface temperature patterns in greater Athens, Greece, using
MODIS imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 115 (12), 3080–3090. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rse.2011.06.014.
Kim, H., Jung, Y., Oh, J.I., 2019. Transformation of urban heat island in the three-center city
of Seoul, South Korea: the role of master plans. Land Use Policy 86, 328–338. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.05.016.
Kim, M., Lee, K., Cho, G.-H., 2017. Temporal and spatial variability of urban heat island by
geographical location: a case study of Ulsan, Korea. Build. Environ. 126, 471–482.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.10.023.
Kim, Y.H., Baik, J.J., 2004. Daily maximum urban heat island intensity in large cities of
Korea. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 79 (3), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-004-
0070-7.
Klok, L., Zwart, S., Verhagen, H., Mauri, E., 2012. The surface heat island of Rotterdam and
its relationship with urban surface characteristics. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 64, 23–29.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.01.009.
Kotharkar, R., Bagade, A., 2018. Evaluating urban heat island in the critical local climate
zones of an Indian city. Landsc. Urban Plan. 169, 92–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2017.08.009.
Kourtidis, K., Georgoulias, A.K., Rapsomanikis, S., Amiridis, V., Keramitsoglou, I.,
Hooyberghs, H., ... Melas, D., 2015. A study of the hourly variability of the urban
heat island effect in the greater Athens area during summer. Sci. Total Environ. 517,
162–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.02.062.
Kusaka, H., Kimura, F., 2004. Coupling a single-layer urban canopy model with a simple
atmospheric model: impact on urban Heat Island simulation for an idealized case.
Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan Ser. II 82 (1), 67–80. https://doi.org/
10.2151/jmsj.82.67.
Lauwaet, D., De Ridder, K., Saeed, S., Brisson, E., Chatterjee, F., van Lipzig, N.P.M., ...
Hooyberghs, H., 2016. Assessing the current and future urban heat island of Brussels.
Urban Clim. 15, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.11.008.
Li, H., Zhou, Y., Li, X., Meng, L., Wang, X., Wu, S., Sodoudi, S., 2018. A new method to quan-
tify surface urban heat island intensity. Sci. Total Environ. 624, 262–272. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.360.
Li, H., Zhou, Y., Wang, X., Zhou, X., Zhang, H., Sodoudi, S., 2019. Quantifying urban heat is-
land intensity and its physical mechanism using WRF/UCM. Sci. Total Environ. 650,
3110–3119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.025.
Li, X.-X., Liu, C.-H., Leung, D.Y.C., Lam, K.M., 2006. Recent progress in CFD modelling of
wind field and pollutant transport in street canyons. Atmos. Environ. 40 (29),
5640–5658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.04.055.
Liang, W., Huang, J., Jones, P., Wang, Q., Hang, J., 2018. A zonal model for assessing street
canyon air temperature of high-density cities. Build. Environ. 132, 160–169. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.035.
Lin, F.-Y., Huang, K.-T., Lin, T.-P., Hwang, R.-L., 2019. Generating hourly local weather data
with high spatially resolution and the applications in bioclimatic performance. Sci.
Total Environ. 653, 1262–1271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.433.
Lin, P., Lau, S.S.Y., Qin, H., Gou, Z., 2017. Effects of urban planning indicators on urban heat
island: a case study of pocket parks in high-rise high-density environment. Landsc.
Urban Plan. 168, 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.09.024.
Liu, L., Lin, Y., Liu, J., Wang, L., Wang, D., Shui, T., ... Wu, Q., 2017a. Analysis of local-scale
urban heat island characteristics using an integrated method of mobile measurement
and GIS-based spatial interpolation. Build. Environ. 117, 191–207. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.03.013.
Liu, L., Lin, Y., Wang, L., Cao, J., Wang, D., Xue, P., Liu, J., 2017b. An integrated local climatic
evaluation system for green sustainable eco-city construction: a case study in Shenzhen,
China. Build. Environ. 114, 82–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.12.018.
Luber, G., McGeehin, M., 2008. Climate change and extreme heat events. Am. J. Prev. Med.
35 (5), 429–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.021.
S.W. Kim and R.D. Brown
Masson, V., 2006. Urban surface modeling and the meso-scale impact of cities. Theor.
Appl. Climatol. 84 (1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-005-0142-3.
Mathew, A., Khandelwal, S., Kaul, N., 2017. Investigating spatial and seasonal variations of
urban heat island effect over Jaipur city and its relationship with vegetation, urbani-
zation and elevation parameters. Sustain. Cities Soc. 35, 157–177. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scs.2017.07.013.
Memon, R.A., Leung, D.Y.C., Liu, C.-H., 2009. An investigation of urban heat island intensity
(UHII) as an indicator of urban heating. Atmos. Res. 94 (3), 491–500. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.atmosres.2009.07.006.
Middel, A., Brazel, A.J., Gober, P., Myint, S.W., Chang, H., Duh, J.-D., 2012. Land cover, cli-
mate, and the summer surface energy balance in Phoenix, AZ, and Portland, OR. Int.
J. Climatol. 32 (13), 2020–2032. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2408.
Morris, K.I., Chan, A., Ooi, M.C., Oozeer, M.Y., Abakr, Y.A., Morris, K.J.K., 2016. Effect of veg-
etation and waterbody on the garden city concept: an evaluation study using a newly
developed city, Putrajaya, Malaysia. Comput. Environ. Urban. Syst. 58, 39–51. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2016.03.005.
Nakata-Osaki, C.M., Souza, L.C.L., Rodrigues, D.S., 2018. THIS – tool for Heat Island simula-
tion: a GIS extension model to calculate urban heat island intensity based on urban
geometry. Comput. Environ. Urban. Syst. 67, 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compenvurbsys.2017.09.007.
Nazarian, N., Kleissl, J., 2015. CFD simulation of an idealized urban environment: thermal
effects of geometrical characteristics and surface materials. Urban Clim. 12, 141–159.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.03.002.
Nunez, M., Oke, T.R., 1977. The energy balance of an urban canyon. J. Appl. Meteorol. 16
(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1977)016<0011:Teboau>2.0.Co;2.
Oke, T.R., 1973. City size and the urban heat island. Atmospheric Environment (1967) 7
(8), 769–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(73)90140-6.
Oke, T.R., 1976. The distinction between canopy and boundary-layer urban heat islands.
Atmosphere 14 (4), 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/00046973.1976.9648422.
Oke, T.R., 1987. Boundary Layer Climates. 2nd ed. 1987. Methuen, London; New York.
Oke, T.R., 1988a. Street design and urban canopy layer climate. Energy and Buildings 11
(1), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-7788(88)90026-6.
Oke, T.R., 1988b. The urban energy balance. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and
Environment 12 (4), 471–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913338801200401.
Oke, T.R., Fuggle, R.F., 1972. Comparison of urban/rural counter and net radiation at night.
Bound.-Layer Meteorol. 2 (3), 290–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02184771.
Oke, T.R., Mills, G., Christen, A., Voogt, J.A., 2017. Urban Climates: Cambridge University
Press.
Quan, J., Chen, Y., Zhan, W., Wang, J., Voogt, J., Wang, M., 2014. Multi-temporal trajectory
of the urban heat island centroid in Beijing, China based on a Gaussian volume model.
Remote Sens. Environ. 149, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.03.037.
Rajasekar, U., Weng, Q., 2009. Urban heat island monitoring and analysis using a non-
parametric model: a case study of Indianapolis. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens.
64 (1), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2008.05.002.
Roth, M., 2013. Urban heat islands. In: Fernando, H.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Environmental
Fluid Dynamics. In: Fernando, H.J.S. (Ed.) Vol. 2. Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, Fla.,
p. 2013.
Roth, M., Chow, W.T., 2012. A historical review and assessment of urban heat island re-
search in Singapore. Singap. J. Trop. Geogr. 33 (3), 381–397.
Ryu, Y.-H., Baik, J.-J., 2012. Quantitative analysis of factors contributing to urban Heat Is-
land intensity. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 51 (5), 842–854. https://doi.org/10.1175/
JAMC-D-11-098.1.
Salvati, A., Monti, P., Coch Roura, H., Cecere, C., 2019. Climatic performance of urban tex-
tures: analysis tools for a Mediterranean urban context. Energy and Buildings 185,
162–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.12.024.
Santamouris, M., 2014. On the energy impact of urban heat island and global
warming on buildings. Energy and Buildings 82, 100–113. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.07.022.
Santamouris, M., 2018. Minimizing Energy Consumption, Energy Poverty and Global and
Local Climate Change in the Built Environment: Innovating to Zero. Elsevier, Saint
Louis, United States.
Santamouris, M., Cartalis, C., Synnefa, A., 2015. Local urban warming, possible impacts and
a resilience plan to climate change for the historical center of Athens, Greece. Sustain.
Cities Soc. 19, 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.02.001.
17
Science of the Total Environment 779 (2021) 146389
Sheng, L., Tang, X., You, H., Gu, Q., Hu, H., 2017. Comparison of the urban heat island intensity
quantified by using air temperature and Landsat land surface temperature in Hangzhou,
China. Ecol. Indic. 72, 738–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.09.009.
Shirani-bidabadi, N., Nasrabadi, T., Faryadi, S., Larijani, A., Shadman Roodposhti, M., 2019.
Evaluating the spatial distribution and the intensity of urban heat island using remote
sensing, case study of Isfahan city in Iran. Sustainable Cities and Society 45, 686–692.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.12.005.
Stone, B., Hess, J.J., Frumkin, H., 2010. Urban form and extreme heat events: are sprawling
cities more vulnerable to climate change than compact cities? Environ. Health
Perspect. 118 (10), 1425–1428. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0901879.
Stone Jr., B., Vargo, J., Liu, P., Hu, Y., Russell, A., 2013. Climate change adaptation through
urban heat management in Atlanta, Georgia. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47 (14),
7780–7786. https://doi.org/10.1021/es304352e.
Sun, Y., Gao, C., Li, J., Li, W., Ma, R., 2018. Examining urban thermal environment dynamics
and relations to biophysical composition and configuration and socio-economic fac-
tors: a case study of the Shanghai metropolitan region. Sustain. Cities Soc. 40,
284–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.12.004.
Suter, I., Maksimović, Č., van Reeuwijk, M., 2017. A neighbourhood-scale estimate for the
cooling potential of green roofs. Urban Clim. 20, 33–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
uclim.2017.02.007.
Tam, B.Y., Gough, W.A., Mohsin, T., 2015. The impact of urbanization and the urban heat
island effect on day to day temperature variation. Urban Clim. 12, 1–10. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.uclim.2014.12.004.
Thom, J.K., Coutts, A.M., Broadbent, A.M., Tapper, N.J., 2016. The influence of increasing
tree cover on mean radiant temperature across a mixed development suburb in Ad-
elaide, Australia. Urban For. Urban Green. 20, 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ufug.2016.08.016.
Tian, Y., Zhou, W., Qian, Y., Zheng, Z., Yan, J., 2019. The effect of urban 2D and 3D morphol-
ogy on air temperature in residential neighborhoods. Landsc. Ecol. 34 (5),
1161–1178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00834-7.
Touchaei, A.G., Wang, Y., 2015. Characterizing urban heat island in Montreal (Canada)—
effect of urban morphology. Sustain. Cities Soc. 19, 395–402. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scs.2015.03.005.
Velásquez, I., Caro, A., Rodríguez, A., 2018. Authentication schemes and methods: a sys-
tematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 94, 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
infsof.2017.09.012.
Wang, Y., Akbari, H., Chen, B., 2016. Urban geometry and environmental urban policy de-
velopment. Procedia Engineering 169, 308–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proeng.2016.10.038.
Wang, Y., Du, H., Xu, Y., Lu, D., Wang, X., Guo, Z., 2018. Temporal and spatial variation re-
lationship and influence factors on surface urban heat island and ozone pollution in
the Yangtze River Delta, China. Sci. Total Environ. 631-632, 921–933. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.050.
Xu, Y., Ren, C., Ma, P., Ho, J., Wang, W., Lau, K.K.-L., ... Ng, E., 2017. Urban morphology de-
tection and computation for urban climate research. Landsc. Urban Plan. 167,
212–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.06.018.
Yang, F., Lau, S.S.Y., Qian, F., 2010. Summertime heat island intensities in three high-rise
housing quarters in inner-city Shanghai China: building layout, density and greenery.
Build. Environ. 45 (1), 115–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.05.010.
Yang, F., Lau, S.S.Y., Qian, F., 2011. Urban design to lower summertime outdoor tempera-
tures: an empirical study on high-rise housing in Shanghai. Build. Environ. 46 (3),
769–785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.10.010.
Yang, X., Li, Y., 2013. Development of a three-dimensional urban energy model for
predicting and understanding surface temperature distribution. Bound.-Layer
Meteorol. 149 (2), 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-013-9842-x.
Zhang, K., Wang, R., Shen, C., Da, L., 2010. Temporal and spatial characteristics of the
urban heat island during rapid urbanization in Shanghai, China. Environ. Monit. As-
sess. 169 (1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-009-1154-8.
Zhou, D., Bonafoni, S., Zhang, L., Wang, R., 2018. Remote sensing of the urban heat island
effect in a highly populated urban agglomeration area in East China. Sci. Total Envi-
ron. 628-629, 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.02.074.
Zhou, X., Chen, H., 2018. Impact of urbanization-related land use land cover changes and
urban morphology changes on the urban heat island phenomenon. Sci. Total Environ.
635, 1467–1476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.091.