Geocarto International

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgei20

Simulating land surface temperature using

biophysical variables related to building density
and height in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania

Olipa Simon, Nestory Yamungu & James Lyimo

To cite this article: Olipa Simon, Nestory Yamungu & James Lyimo (2022): Simulating land
surface temperature using biophysical variables related to building density and height in Dar Es
Salaam, Tanzania, Geocarto International, DOI: 10.1080/10106049.2022.2142971

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2022.2142971

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.

Published online: 21 Nov 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tgei20
GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL
https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2022.2142971

Simulating land surface temperature using biophysical

variables related to building density and height in Dar Es
Salaam, Tanzania
Olipa Simona, Nestory Yamungub and James Lyimoa
a
Institute of Resource Assessment, University of Dar es Salaam, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania;
b
Department of Geography, University of Dar es Salaam, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Land use and land cover dynamics are pivotal to communicating Received 5 August 2022
land surface temperature (LST) scenarios. This study characterises Accepted 28 October 2022
the influence of biophysical variables on LSTs in the Dar es Salaam
KEYWORDS
Metropolitan City (DMC). Landsat images were analysed using geo-
biophysical variable;
graphically weighted regression (GWR) and ordinary least square geographically weighted
(OLS) models to determine biophysical variables (soil adjusted vege- regression; land surface
tation index, normalized difference built-up index, and normalised temperature; ordinary least
difference bareness index) and LST relationships. The GWR analysis square; urbanisation
resultsrevealed that LST had a weak to strong negative correlation
with the soil adjusted vegetation index, a moderate positive correl-
ation with normalized difference built-up index, and a low positive
correlation with the normalised difference bareness index. GWR pre-
dicted LST better than OLS, with coefficient of determination -R2
values of 55%, 80%, and 62% for 1995, 2009, and 2017, respect-
ively. In addition, higher model residuals values were observed in
high building density compared to low building density areas. This
study provides a broad understanding of the biophysical variables’
impact on LST in DMC and provides reference for site-specific urban
land-use planning and designing strategies for LST mitigation.

Introduction
Urbanisation, the process of a population being concentrated in cities or urban areas, is a
socio-economic, political, and environmental phenomenon, and represents a pressing
challenge at national and global levels (Fonseka et al. 2019; Peter and Yang 2019).
Urbanisation is often associated with the expansion of built-up areas for settlements,
industries, and road infrastructure (Gu 2019). Globally, several regions have experienced
unprecedented urbanisation growth rates during the last century, with little sign of decel-
eration (Alhowaish 2015; Afrakhteh et al. 2016). Over the past few decades, the propor-
tion of urban land area to the Earth’s total surface has increased from 0.22% in 1992 to
0.69% in 2020 (Zhao et al. 2022). Although it comprises a small percentage of the global

CONTACT Olipa Simon olipasimon@gmail.com

ß 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
2 O. SIMON ET AL.

land surface, urban land has significant implications for the environment and socio-eco-
nomic systems and thus necessitates immediate action in the form of nature-based solu-
tions that promote climate resilience and address inclusive urban regeneration to meet
social and environmental problems (Lafortezza and Sanesi 2019). In developed and devel-
oping countries, rapid urbanisation complicates the pursuit of the United Nation’s
Sustainable Development Goals for creating more sustainable cities and communities
(Fonseka et al. 2019). Furthermore, urbanisation alters land use and land cover (LULC),
impacting local and regional climates and, consequently, land surface temperature (LST)
(Orimoloye et al. 2018). Remotely sensed LSTs can be calculated from the measured
irradiance (Livesey 2014) and represent a key parameter governing the Earth’s physical,
chemical, and biological processes (Firozjaei et al. 2019; Sekertekin and Arslan 2019).
LULC alterations correlated with rising urbanisation rates are most commonly driven
by the growing population’s demand for industries, roads, settlements, and recreational
infrastructural spaces (Manyama et al. 2020). Accordingly, supporting an increased popu-
lation has led to an ongoing increase in built-up areas, fragmented natural spaces, and
complex urban landscapes with declining liveability in cities (Manyama et al. 2020).
Studies have demonstrated that LULC changes in densely populated areas significantly
affect LST (Esha and Ahmed 2018; Kafy et al. 2020; Gohain et al. 2021). Similarly, the
spatial composition and configuration of LULC have a profound impact on LST (Peng
et al. 2016; Nanjing et al. 2020; Wang et al. 2020); thus, monitoring changes in LULC
across multiple spatiotemporal scales is essential for assessing landscape dynamics.
Generally, urban areas are complex dynamic systems composed of varied LULC classes,
including water bodies (rivers, ponds, wetlands, and oceans), bare land (sand-exposed soil
and unvegetated areas), vegetation (forests, shrublands, agricultural), and built-up areas (
buildings, roads, and any other impervious surfaces; Guha et al. 2020; Gohain et al. 2021 ).
These LULC classes, collectively referred to as biophysical variables, are influenced by
urbanisation and are thus critical factors potentially influencing urban LSTs. For example, a
study in Eastern China revealed that biophysical variables, including land cover, water
bodies, building densities, and vegetation, significantly influence city surface temperatures,
weather, and climatic patterns (Chen et al. 2021). Similarly, Nasir et al. (2022) highlighted
that LULC, such as vegetative cover, as well as shade, moisture, and urban geometry, includ-
ing building dimensions and shapes, were critical drivers of LSTs. Additionally, other fac-
tors, such as natural feature reductions, urban area development (building density), and the
intensity of human activities, accelerate heat absorption and contribute to a considerable
increase in LSTs (Esha and Ahmed 2018; Kafy et al. 2020; Zhi et al. 2020; Gohain et al.
2021). Moreover, wind speeds, precipitation, and daylight duration have strong secondary
effects on LSTs (Zhi et al. 2020; Zhou et al. 2020), suggesting that LULC plays a decisive
role in influencing LSTs. Accordingly, further monitoring of LULC changes across various
spatiotemporal scales is essential for establishing landscape-scale dynamic patterns.
Several studies have explored the elements driving LST, primarily focusing on meteoro-
logical aspects, terrain features, remote sensing spectral information, land use types, and
urban morphology (Zhi et al. 2020). Additionally, Deilami et al. (2016) suggested that the
majority of studies that investigated the effects of underlying components (such as bio-
physical variables or factors) on LST employed conventional statistics, such as ordinary
least squares (OLS); whereas others explored such relationships using geographically
weighted regression ( GWR; Zhao et al. 2018; Alibakhshi et al. 2020; Zhi et al. 2020 ).
However, it has been proved that OLS is not an effective analytical tool when spatial data
are combined with highly correlated independent variables, leading to multicollinearity
effects. Under multicollinearity, the OLS estimator and correlation coefficient (R2) remain
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 3

unbiased, increasing the variances of the collinear variables. Significant variables appear
insignificant due to the inflated variances; thus, high predictor correlations render inde-
pendent coefficient interpretations invalid (Fan et al. 2017). Therefore, GWR is often the
preferred analytical tool for examining the spatiotemporal relationship between LULC and
LST (Zhao et al. 2018; Alibakhshi et al. 2020).
In Dar es Salaam Metropolitan City (DMC), Tanzania, several studies have been con-
ducted on LST and urban heat island analysis ( Kabanda 2019; Mzava et al. 2019) and on
LULC with focuses on ecosystem services, agriculture, water resources, and transportation
(Mkalawa and Haixiao 2014; Malekela and Nyomora 2019; Mzava et al. 2019; Manyama
et al. 2020). However, limited research is available regarding LST variability due to biophys-
ical variables in DMC. Similarly, biophysical variable assessment via GWR and OLS meth-
odologies for communicating LST dynamics for DMC are absent from the literature. To
better evaluate the possibility for land-use regulations to reduce the UHI effect, this study
will examine the relationship between biophysical variables (normalised difference vegetation
index, NDVI; normalized difference built-up index, NDBI; normalised difference bareness
index, NDBaI; and soil adjusted vegetation index, SAVI) and LST in DMC. The primary
goals of this study are to respond to the following questions:

i. How do biophysical variables affect LST in DMC according to GWR and OLS models?
ii. What is the best spatial technique for LST modelling in DMC?

The current study can inform important urban stakeholders on the decision-making
process during urban planning and environmental management, which can assist in alle-
viating the harmful consequences of LST.

Materials and methods

Study area context
DMC is located in the sub-Saharan region of Africa, on the East African coastline, centred
on 6
480 S and 39
170 E (Figure 1; (URT 2013b). DMC is subdivided into three major
development strategies: Central Business District (CBD), Existing City, and Future City.
The CBD is the commercial and business centre of a city. The existing city serves as the
foundation for the expansion of the new city and its boundary is a new ring road taking
transient traffic from the port to Bagamoyo Road, representing a core structure for the
growth of the future city. The Future City is an area for urban development of the metro-
politan area in the future (URT 2018). It is the largest city in Tanzania, covering
1,493 km2 (576 mi2), with a population of 6 million. Secondly, its urban population is
growing at 5.67% annually, demonstrating remarkable recent urbanisation (Peter and
Yang 2019). The local population density was estimated at 3,133 personskm2 and is
expected to reach 9.7 million by 2030 and 15.6 million by 2050 (URT 2013a). The city
experiences a modified tropical climate because of its proximity to the equator and the
warm Indian Ocean. Annual mean maximum and minimum temperatures range from
29–32
C (December–March) and 19–25
C (June–September), respectively. Relative
humidity remains high throughout the year and typically varies from 55 to 100% (aver-
age, 75%; Baruti et al. 2020), with morning and afternoon levels peaking at 96% and
67%, respectively (Kibassa and Shemdoe 2016). The city experiences bimodal rain patterns
ranging from 800 to 1,300 mmyr1 (average, 1,000 mmyr1). There are two rainy sea-
sons: “long rains" and "short rains," with the former usually occurring between April and
May and the latter between November and December.
4 O. SIMON ET AL.

Figure 1. Location of the study area within a) Africa b) Tanzania, and c) Dar es Salaam Metropolitan City.

Table 1. Details of Landsat satellite imagery.

Sensor Path Raw Date of Acquired
Landsat 5 (TM) 166 65 25 June 1995
Landsat 5 (TM) 166 65 01 July 2009
Landsat 8 (OLI) 166 65 25 June 2017

Economically, DMC is Tanzania’s port hub, commercial capital, and national centre of
business, education, and culture. Continuous urban development has been associated with
considerable LULC changes since the 1990s (Mkalawa 2016; Peter and Yang 2019). In add-
ition, from 1998 to 2014, 17.55% of the city was transformed into high-and medium/low-
density built-up areas (Mzava et al. 2019), largely driven by population expansion, economic
growth, and greater infrastructural demand (Mkalawa and Haixiao 2014). Likewise, Tanzania
marked a significant milestone in July 2020, when it formally moved from low-income to
lower-middle-income country status after two decades of sustained progress. Tanzania’s suc-
cess can be attributed to the country’s long-term financial stability, which has fuelled pros-
perity, as well as the country’s abundant natural resources and strategic geographic location
(https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/tanzania/overview). Therefore, the abundant eco-
nomic resources will likely be translated into urban infrastructure in its Metropolitan City.

Data collection and pre-processing

Two images from Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM; 1995 and 2009) and one from
Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI; 2017) were used to assess the relationships
between LST and biophysical variables (NDBI, NDBaI, and SAVI) (Table 1). All images
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 5

were acquired from the United States Geological Survey (https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov)

for June and July. Images from the same month and interval could not be obtained due
to heavy cloud cover.
Image pre-processing was implemented using Google Earth Engine open source code
function for cloud, shadow, snow masking for Landsat 5 images (Ermida et al. 2020). The
pre-processing includes stacking individual bands, cloud masking (for the 1995 image),
radiometric correction, and clipping the stack to the study areas. Namely, cloud masking
and gap-filling were completed using the Quality Assessment bands. The final images
were exported to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system Zone 37
South, Spheroid Clarke 1880 and Datum Arc1960, specific for East Africa. Band math in
ArcGIS v.10.8 was used to calculate LST and the derived spectral indices.

Variables extraction
LST
LST was estimated by applying structured mathematical algorithms reliant upon the ther-
mal infrared bands and their respective mean differences in land surface emissivity
(Rongali et al. 2018). LST extraction involved two steps: conversion to at-sensor spectral
radiance and changing the spectral value of radians to the at-satellite brightness tempera-
ture. Achieving a standard radiometric scale required calculating the at-sensor spectral
radiance. Further calibrations were essential for all Landsat images acquired from all sen-
sors and were achieved by converting raw digital numbers (DNs) from satellites to digital
numbers with the same radiometric scaling (Chander et al. 2009). For Level 1 Landsat
products, the calibrated digital number (QC) was converted to the at-sensor spectral radi-
ance (Lk) using Eq. 1 (Kashki et al. 2021):
LmaxkLmink
Lk ¼ ðQCal  QCalminÞ þ Lmink (1)
QCalmax  QCalmin
where Lk is the spectral radiance at the sensor’s aperture (Wm2sr1lm1), QCal is the
quantified calibrated pixel value (DN), Qcalmin is the minimum quantised calibrated pixel
value corresponding to Lmink (DN), Qcalmax is the maximum quantised calibrated pixel
value corresponding to Lmaxk (DN), Lmink is the spectral at-sensor radiance scaled to
Qcalmin (Wm2sr1lm1), and Lmaxk is the spectral at-sensor radiance scaled to
Qcalmax (Wm2sr1lm1).
The second step involved changing the spectral value of radians to the at-sensor
brightness temperature (Tb;
C) after converting DNs to spectral radiance (Eq. 2):
K
b¼

2   273:15 (2)
ln K1
Lk þ1

where K1 and K2 are the calibration constants of thermal bands.

The differences in Earth’s surface conditions can be attributed to large-scale thermal
fluctuations of the land surface properties, where variations in vegetation coverage, surface
wetness, roughness, and viewing angles contribute to differences in land surface emissivity
(Yu et al. 2014). Accordingly, the land surface temperature was further modified using the
land surface emissivity (ek ; Zhao et al. 2018) via Eq. (4):

Tb
Ts ¼     (3)
1þ kBT=p lnek c

6 O. SIMON ET AL.

Table 2. Derivation of spectral index explanatory variables from Landsat data.

Spectral Index Expression Reference
NDBaI (SWIR1-TIRS)/(SWIR1þTIRS) (Zhao and Chen 2005)
SAVI ((NIR-RED)/(NIR þ RED))(1þL) (Huete 1988)
NDBI (SWIR1-NIR)/(SWIR1þNIR) (Zha et al. 2003)

where Ts is the LST (
C); Tb is the at-sensor temperature (
C); k is the effective wave-
length of emitted radiance (11.5 lm), equal to hc/r ¼ 1.438  102 mK,here, r is the
Boltzmann constant (1.38  1023 JK1), h is Planck’s constant (6.626  1034 Js), and c
is the speed of light (2.998  108 ms1); and ek is the emissivity, as calculated by Barsi
et al. (2014) using Eq. 4:
e ¼ 0: 004  PV þ 0: 986 (4)
where PV is the proportion of vegetation, as calculated via Eq. 5:

2
NDVINDVI min
Pv ¼ (5)
NDVI max  NDVI min
where NDVI is the normalised difference vegetation index calculated from the red and
near-infrared bands of Landsat images.

Variable selection and derivation

LST is affected by various variables, including topographic conditions, climatic and atmos-
pheric factors, and vegetation (Kashki et al. 2021). Here, three biophysical variables repre-
senting vegetation (agricultural land, shrubland, forest, and grassland), bare soil, and
built-up areas (buildings, roads, and other impervious surfaces) were selected based on
prior LULC knowledge of the region. Accordingly, three indices: SAVI, NDBaI, and
NDBI, were generated as explanatory variables for assessing the modelling of biophysical
variables and land surface temperatures across DMC (Table 2).

Normalised difference bareness index (NDBaI)

NDBaI was chosen to represent bare land areas, which often display considerable vari-
ation in thermal characteristics (Sun et al. 2012). The index was estimated using the
reflectance of the middle infrared (band 5 for Landsat 5 and 7 and band 6 for Landsat 8)
and thermal infrared (band 6 for Landsat 5 and 7 and bands 10 and 11 for Landsat 8)
bands according to Eq. 6: (Zhao and Chen 2005)
MIRTIR
NDBaI ¼ : (6)
MIR þ TIR

Soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI)

SAVI employs a soil-brightness correction factor for minimising the influence of soil
brightness and was calculated via Eq. 7 (Huete 1988):

NIRRED ,
SAVI : ¼ ð1 þ LÞ (7)
NIR þ RED
where NIR, RED, and L represent the near-infrared band, red band, and L-correlation
factor, respectively. Notably, non-vegetated urban areas often produce abundant soil
reflectance values (Hidayati et al. 2018). The L-correlation factor varied depending on
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 7

the density of vegetation cover, where low and high densities produced an L value of 1
and 0.25, respectively. As low- to high-density vegetation cover in observed across the
study area, a correction factor of L ¼ 0.5 was applied (Huete 1988; Kaspersen
et al. 2015).

Normalised difference built-up index (NDBI)

NDBI was developed to identify urban built-up areas and produces values from 1 to 1;
where a negative NDBI represents water bodies and higher values represent built-up areas
via Eq. 8 (Zha et al. 2003):

SWIR1 NIR :
NDBI : ¼ (8)
SWIR1 þ NIR
where SWIR is the short-wave infrared and NIR is the near-infrared band.

Spatial sampling data

All dependent variables and predictors were initially raster layers with a spatial resolution
of 30 m; therefore, the rasters were entirely transformed into vector and tabular data, as
required by the R-based GWR, according to the following steps: first, considering the size
of the original data as well as the reduction of spatial autocorrelation, 1  1 km regular
grids were created within the study region based on descriptive studies at the megacity
level (Li et al. 2010; Zhao et al. 2018) in ArcGIS. Next, values for the original dependent
and explanatory variables in raster format were extracted from each grid and exported to
a spreadsheet. After removing the incomplete data, 1600 data points remained for use
in the GWR model.

Ordinary least square and geographically weighted regression models

Ordinary least square (OLS)
OLS is based on the assumption that the sample regression model is closest to the obser-
vations. In OLS spatial modelling, the coefficients or statistical model parameters are
assumed constant; thus, this model estimated a similar value for dependent variables
across the entire research area, a notable limitation during spatial modelling (Deilami
et al. 2016). The OLS coefficient matrix was calculated according to Eq. 9:
y ¼ Xb þ e (9)
where y is the estimated dependent variable, x is the estimator, and e is the model error
or deviation when estimating b or model coefficients (Kashki et al. 2021).

Geographically weighted regression (GWR)

GWR is a nonstationary local regression technique that calculates the relationship between
a dependent variable and its explanatory variables at each sample point (Kashki et al.
2021). Unlike a conventional (global) regression model, GWR adds one or more geo-
graphic parameters to traditional global regression (Ahmadi et al. 2018), enabling it to
model spatial variation. The GWR model was calculated according to Eq. 10:

Xn
yi ¼ b0 u0 , vi þ b ð u , v Þ x þ Hi ,
I¼1 n i i in
(10)

where yi is the observed variable; b0 (ui, vi) is the regression constant of the sample point
8 O. SIMON ET AL.

at (ui, vi); Bn (ui, vi) is the regression parameter, and is a function of the geographic loca-
tion of variable n at the sample point; n is the number of factors; xin is the value of the
independent variable xn at the sample point; and hi is the random error.
Observations were weighted according to their geographic distance to specific point i
(i.e. the distance between an observation and point i determined its weight). To estimate
the parameters in Eq. 11, the matrix equations were solved as follows:
 
b^ ðui vi Þ ¼ X T Wðui , vi ÞX  1 X T Wðui , vi Þy, (11)
where X is the matrix of the independent variables with a column of 1 s for the intercept;
y is the dependent variable vector; bi ¼ ðbi0 . . . :bim ÞT is the vector of m þ 1 local regres-
sion coefficients; Wi is the diagonal matrix denoting the geographical weighting of each
observed data for regression point I; and W(ui, vi) is the weighting matrix, ensuring that
observations closer to a given location maintain more weight than more distant locations.
Further, this study utilised the Gaussian weighted kernel function (Eq. 12):

dij2
wij ¼ exp b 2 (12)
b
where dij is the Euclidean distance between regression point i and nearby observation j
and b denotes the basal width of the kernel function (i.e. bandwidth). If j corresponds to
i in Eq. 11, the weighting value of the data at that location was set to 1; whereas wij
decreased with increasing distance according to a Gaussian curve (Brunsdon et al. 1996;
Shi et al. 2006).

Coefficient of determination (R2)

The coefficient of determination (R2) was used to assess the model fit and was derived
by comparing estimated and observed values. Here, R2 values vary from 0 to 1, where
higher values indicate a more perfect fit, as it denotes the proportion of variance in the
dependent variable explained by the independent variable(s) (Li et al. 2010; Luo and
Peng 2016).

Akaike information criterion (AIC)

The Akaike information criterion (AIC) is a mathematical technique used in statistics to
determine model fit by creating a compromise between model accuracy and complexity,
where a low value suggests that the model’s predicted value is closer to the observed value
or reality (Li et al. 2010; Kashki et al. 2021).

Spatial autocorrelation by global Moran’s I index

The global Moran’s I index was used to check whether the explanatory variables were
independent of each other (i.e. not spatially autocorrelated). Moran’s I can be classified as
positive, negative, or without spatial autocorrelation. Here, positive autocorrelation occurs
when similar values are clustered together in space and negative spatial autocorrelation
when similar values are dispersed. 0 values represent perfect randomness.

OLS and GWR statistical analyses

Using the OLS and GWR models, the spatial relationships between LST and LULC bio-
physical variables were obtained. First, a correlation coefficient analysis was used to
ensure that the predictor variables were statistically significant for GWR modelling
(Gregorich et al. 2021). To this end, a variance inflation factor (VIF) was calculated to
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 9

ensure the lack of multicollinearity between NDBI, NDBaI, and SAVI (Zhi et al. 2020).
Conventionally, explanatory variables with VIF values > 7.5 were considered highly cor-
related and were removed from regression models (Li et al. 2010). All analyses were per-
formed with a significance level of p < 0.01 and diagnostics of the regression models
were conducted in R v4.2.1 using the spgwr package. All maps were produced
in ArcGIS.

Building density pixel mapping

Actual building layers for the research locations were required to appropriately map
building densities. Here, the Dar es Salaam building layer for 2016 was downloaded from
Resilience Academy (https://resilienceacademy.ac.tz) and updated using high-resolution
imagery from Google Earth to match the LSTs for 2017. Utilising the neighborhood ana-
lysis tool in ArcGIS, built-up pixels were divided into high-, moderate-, and low-density
categories based on the number of built-up pixels present in the high-density plot, which
maintains a plot size of 301–600 m,2 with a maximum of one household, two buildings
per plot, and a maximum plot coverage of 60% (URT 2018). Based on the typical stand-
ards of urban residential areas, the cut-off percentages for low- and moderate-densities
were somewhat arbitrary, as they relied heavily upon researchers’ judgment. Subsequently,
each built-up pixel in the plot was subjected to an "If" condition to determine density
characters levels, as follows:

High-density pixels are built-up, surrounded by

30% of other built-up pixels;
Moderate-density pixels are built-up, surrounded by 10–30% of other built-up pixels;
Low-density pixels are built-up, surrounded by < 10% of other built-up pixels.

The concept of determining the built-up pixels in the urban high-density plot with an
arbitrary plot area of 600m2 is presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Concept of determination for built-up pixels in the urban high-density plot.
10 O. SIMON ET AL.

Results
Spatiotemporal variability in land surface temperature
The spatiotemporal variability of LSTs in 1995, 2009, and 2017 are displayed in Figure
3. The results indicated that the LST minimum temperatures were 16.55, 16.56, and
14.55 and the and maximum temperatures were 27.95, 50.29, and 31.47
C for 1995,
2009, and 2017, respectively, with mean LSTs of 22.37, 22.43, and 25.32
C. As a result,
the area with higher temperatures appeared to increase compared to previous years, as
the mean LST decreased by 0.06
C between 1995 and 2009 but increased by 2.30
C
from 2009 to 2017. While the highest LST (> 28
C) was recorded in the city’s eastern
portion, near the CBD, the western and southwestern parts maintained the lowers LSTs
(< 22
C).

Figure 3. Spatiotemporal distribution of LST for (a) 1995, (b) 2009, and (c) 2017.
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 11

Spatial distribution of three biophysical parameters

The spatial distributions of the three biophysical variables are shown in Figure 4. Namely,
the eastern and central areas displayed the higher NDBI values than the western and
southern areas, that contained few or no buildings. Alternatively, the SAVI map (Figure
4b) shows that the western and southern regions maintained higher values compared to
the eastern and central regions, where structures occupy larger areas. On the western side,
larger SAVI values were related to the presence of game reserves, primarily woodland for-
ests. The highest NDBaI (Figure 4c) values were maintained at the western side of the
study region, in contrast to the central and eastern regions that contained much more
limited areas covered by bare soil.

Figure 4. Geographical variables affecting LST in the study area: a) NDBI, b) SAVI, and c) NDBaI.

GWR and OLS analysis of driving factors

OLS analysis of driving factors
The regression parameters of LST established by OLS are indicated in Table 3. Notably,
OLS results were less than ideal, producing an R2 ¼ 0.4323 and Moran’s I  0.66.
According to Table 4, the VIF values of all explanatory variables were < 7.5, except for
the NDBaI and NDBI of 2009, indicating the lack of collinearity among these variables.
Moreover, OLS model coefficients for all years, except NDBaI for 2009, were statistically

Table 3. OLS model regression results.

1995 2009 2017
Multiple R2 0.3593 0.352 0.4334
Adjusted R2 0.3581 0.3508 0.4323

Table 4. Regression coefficients between LST and driving factors.

1995 2009 2017
NDBI SAVI NDBaI NDBI SAVI NDBaI NDBI SAVI NDBaI
Correlation 3.54 2.32 0.77 5.13 2.36 1.24 4.11 2.88 2.14
VIF 3.32 1.76 2.95 9.80 4.38 7.28 5.18 4.83 2.91
Intercept 23.87 23.10 26.37
  
significance level (p-value): p < 0.001; p < 0.01; p < 0.05
12 O. SIMON ET AL.

Table 5. Results of modelling biophysical variables and LST by the GWR model.
AIC
C R2 WARNING Adjusted R2 Unbiased sigma Sigma biased
1995 3450.55181 0.64 0.55 0.7224467 0.7083403
2009 2983.044 0.89 0.82 0.6364869 0.6096698
2017 3535.6852 0.76 0.62 0.7166683 0.6892951

Table 6. Global Moran’s I spatial autocorrelation summary for 1995, 2009, and 2017.
1995 2009 2017
OLS GWR OLS GWR OLS GWR
Moran’s Index 0.296624 0.002755 0.660033 0.140143 0.212436 0.066100
Expected Index 0.000646 0.00065 0.000560 0.000560 0.000633 0.000633
Variance 0.000185 0.000187 0.000297 0.000297 0.000176 0.000176
z-score 21.878568 0.248839 38.30695 8.166103 16.075018 5.034156
p-value 0.000000 0.803486 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000

significant (p < 0.05). Accordingly, due to its high collinearity with NDBI and lack of stat-
istical significance, NDBaI was excluded from GWR modelling in 2009.

Geographical weighted regression (GWR) analysis of driving factors

The spatial variation of LSTs were analysed using the GWR model and all three biophys-
ical variables. Table 5 presents a summary of the analysis. The corrected AIC (AICc) val-
ues were the lowest in 2009, indicating that the values predicted by the model were closer
to those observed in other years. As the cells were distributed regularly and consistently
throughout the region, a fixed-kernel method was employed, producing maximum
adjusted R2 values between LST and the biophysical parameters of 0.55, 0.62, and 0.82 for
1995, 2009, and 2017, respectively.

GWR and OLS spatial autocorrelation analysis using global Moran index
The spatial autocorrelation analysis of the global Moran’s I using the OLS and GWR
models are presented in Table 6. Here, the Moran index values for OLS were higher
(0.26, 0.66, and 0.21) than those for GWR (0.003, 0.14, and 0.07) in 1995, 2009, and
2017, respectively. Given the z-score values of 16–38 (OLS) and 3–8 (GWR) and vari-
ance values close to 0.000009, it was concluded that there was < 1% likelihood that this
clustered pattern resulted from random chance; thus, the null hypothesis was accepted.
Accordingly, it was concluded that the changes in LST over the DMC followed a ran-
dom pattern.

Modelling the impacts of biophysical variables on LST in DMC via GWR

Owing to its ability to improve the understanding of LSTs and correlated biophysical
variables throughout DMC, the GWR model was used to provide insight into the effects
of biophysical variables on LST across the study area. Accordingly, the standard devia-
tions of the residual values (the difference between the observed and predicted LST val-
ues) were calculated for 1995, 2009, and 2017 (Figure 5). The highest residual values
were primarily observed in the existing city, whereas adjacent areas with compact
human settlements indicated an increased built-up area. In addition, LST decreased
with increasing vegetation.
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 13

Figure 5. Distribution of residuals using GWR in the study area for a) 1995, b) 2009, and c) 2017.

Building density and LST

Maps of the study area’s existing city and CBD identifying high-, moderate-, and low-
density pixels and their corresponding LSTs are shown in Figure 6. In the existing city
area, high-density pixels constituted the majority of built-up pixels, followed by mod-
erate- and low-density pixels. Although completed via visual inspection, high-density
pixels corresponded closely to high LSTs in the existing city periphery; however, the
LSTs of CBD containing high-rise and super high-rise buildings were lower than that
of the adjacent current city.

Discussion
The results revealed that the LST dispersion in DMC appears to have increased dramat-
ically over the past two decades. Notably, high LSTs were most frequent in the ’existing
city’ area adjacent to the eastern CBD, owing to high building densities and low-rise
buildings. This largely resulted from the decrease in vegetation, associated with the high
rate of activities in the built-up areas in addition to the improvement of the transport
sector, particularly road infrastructure (e.g. Dar es Salaam Rapid Transport) and higher
14 O. SIMON ET AL.

Figure 6. Relationships between building density and LSTs in Dar es Salaam central business district and existing city:
a) building layer, b) building density pixel classification, and c) LST. Building layer was modified from Resilience
Academy - Dar es Salaam buildings (https://resilienceacademy.ac.tz).

building densities with low-to medium-rise buildings compared to other locations.

Alternatively, low LSTs were observed in the west and southwest, probably due to thick
vegetation in these areas, particularly in the Pande Game reserve. Typically, LSTs of
areas with high-rise and super high-rise buildings are lower than that of areas with
mid-rise buildings, which can be attributed to the large number of corresponding shad-
ows (Yin et al. 2022). These findings are consistent with those of previous studies
(Singh et al. 2017; Guha et al. 2018; Tarawally et al. 2018; Kashki et al. 2021).
Uncontrolled LULC change especially that related to the growth of informal settlements
leads to increasing urban densities, which in turn leads to higher LSTs; thus, it was con-
cluded here that the urban pattern of high-density built-up areas can be upgraded to
optimise the overall effects of the thermal environment.
The regression analyses revealed that built-up areas were more significantly correlated to
higher LSTs across the DMC compared to other biophysical variables. Here, regression coef-
ficients were both positive and negative, indicating spatial heterogeneity; whereas alternative
patterns were observed in vegetated areas, as indicated by the slightly negative local regres-
sion coefficients of SAVI. The building area increased, which increased LSTs since built-up
features absorb more sunlight, whereby thermal inertia is higher at impermeable levels
(Zhang et al. 2017). Furthermore, vegetation is essential for reducing LSTs and heat islands
in DMC due to its function as a natural air conditioning system that absorbs solar energy
and transports water through its leaves into the atmosphere (Kashki et al. 2021); thus, it
was observed here that this index was the most important factor influencing LSTs.
Nevertheless, the lower R2 value observed in 1995 was probably explained by the local
air turbulence and the presence of pressure systems, thereby reducing the effect of surface
cover on temperature (Table 6; Alibakhshi et al. 2020).
Similarly, the correlations between LST and biophysical variables in this study con-
firmed that the choice of regression model considerably influenced the factor correlation
analysis results. Namely, the analyses revealed that GWR outperformed the OLS global
regression model, as indicated by the higher R2 and AIC and lower spatial
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 15

autocorrelation according to the Global Moran’s I. Notably, similar observations were

reported in Xigang District of Northeast China by Zhi et al. (2020). Hence, GWR was
more adaptable for predicting LSTs by incorporating the local and spatial features of
variables across DMC. Moreover, OLS is unable to accurately examine the relationship
between independent and dependent variables, even when correlations are positive in
one section of the research area and negative in another (Kashki et al. 2021). It has also
been noted elsewhere that the GWR works best with spatially connected variables as it
allows for the investigation of spatial variation and displays model results as rasters
(Kashki et al. 2021). Accordingly, GWR is a useful tool for investigating the spatial vari-
ation and interactions of different variables for decision-making purposes. For parti-
tioned regional landscape design, nonstationary GWR modelling can provide locally
detailed differentiation of the underlying mechanisms influencing LSTs. Thus, land use
planning that addresses building densities to mitigate high LST effects, as well as the
location and structure of green spaces in urban areas, are site-specific policies aimed at
effective LST mitigation (Zhao et al. 2018). Furthermore, GWR can offer a more
dynamic approach to parameter estimation than traditional regression methods using
neighbourhood data, whereas OLS may not accurately identify LST variations over a
diversified metropolitan landscape.

Study limitations
There were a few limitations in this study. For example, inconsistencies in the acquisition
time of input data for modelling produced uncertainties. In addition, the study area is
under cloud cover throughout much of the year. Hence, it was impossible to get clear sky
images at regular intervals.

Conclusion and recommendations

According to GWR analysis, land cover and its correlated biophysical parameters pro-
foundly influenced the LSTs of DMC, as determined through the high R2 values.
Therefore, it is essential to continuously monitor LULC change and quantify the rela-
tionships between LST and biophysical variable indices, such as NDBI, NDWI, SAVI,
and NDBaI. Furthermore, environmental specialists, urban planners, and other officials
should prioritise the GWR model when formulating location-specific LST mitigation
strategies. Further research is recommended into modelling the relationships between
LST and other variables, such as climate, wind, solar radiation, population density,
and topography.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and United
States Geological Survey (USGS) for providing the entire Landsat imagery, as well as the Ministry of
Lands, Housing, and Human Settlement Development, and the National Bureau of Statistics of Tanzania
for providing the administrative boundaries of the study area.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
16 O. SIMON ET AL.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [O.S], upon
reasonable request.

References
Afrakhteh R, Asgarian A, Sakieh Y, Soffianian A. 2016. Evaluating the strategy of integrated urban-rural
planning system and analysing its effects on land surface temperature in a rapidly developing region.
Habitat Int. 56:147–156.
Ahmadi M, Kashki AR, Dadashi Roudbari AA. 2018. Spatial modeling of seasonal precipitation–elevation
in Iran based on Aphrodite database. Model Earth Syst Environ. 4(2):619–633.
Alhowaish AK. 2015. Eighty years of urban growth and socioeconomic trends in Dammam Metropolitan
Area, Saudi Arabia. Habitat Int. 50:90–98.
Alibakhshi Z, Ahmadi M, Farajzadeh Asl M. 2020. Modeling biophysical variables and land surface tem-
perature using the GWR model: case study—Tehran and its satellite cities. J Indian Soc Remote Sens.
48(1):59–70.
Barsi JA, Lee K, Kvaran G, Markham BL, Pedelty JA. 2014. The spectral response of the Landsat-8 oper-
ational land imager. Remote Sens. 6(10):10232–10251.
Baruti MM, Johansson E, Yahia MW. 2020. Urbanites’ outdoor thermal comfort in the informal urban
fabric of warm-humid Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Sustain Cities Soc. 62(July):102380.
Brunsdon C, Fotheringham AS, Charlton M. 1996. Geographically weighted regression: a method for
exploring spatial nonstationarity. . 28(4):285–287.
Chander G, Markham BL, Helder DL. 2009. Summary of current radiometric calibration coefficients for
Landsat MSS, TM, ETMþ, and EO-1 ALI sensors. Remote Sens Environ. 113(5):893–903.
Chen S, Yu Z, Liu M, Da L, Faiz M. 2021. Trends of the contributions of biophysical (climate) and socio-
economic elements to regional heat islands. Sci Rep. 11(1):14.
Deilami K, Kamruzzaman M, Hayes JF. 2016. Correlation or causality between land cover patterns and
the urban heat island effect? Evidence from Brisbane, Australia. Remote Sens. 8(9):716.
Ermida SL, Soares P, Mantas V, G€ ottsche FM, Trigo IF. 2020. Google earth engine open-source code for
land surface temperature estimation from the landsat series. Remote Sens. 12(9):1471.
Esha EJ, Ahmed A. 2018. Impacts of land use and land cover change on surface temperature in the
north-western region of Bangladesh. 5th IEEE Reg 10 Humanitarian Technology Conference 2017,
R10-HTC 2017; p. 200523.
Fan C, Rey SJ, Myint SW. 2017. Spatially filtered ridge regression (SFRR): a regression framework to
understanding impacts of land cover patterns on urban climate. Trans in GIS. 21(5):862–879.
Firozjaei MK, Alavipanah SK, Liu H, Sedighi A, Mijani N, Kiavarz M, Weng Q. 2019. A PCA-OLS model
for assessing the impact of surface biophysical parameters on land surface temperature variations.
Remote Sens. 11(18):2094.
Fonseka HPU, Zhang H, Sun Y, Su H, Lin H, Lin Y. 2019. Urbanisation and its impacts on land surface
temperature in Colombo Metropolitan Area, Sri Lanka, from 1988 to 2016. Remote Sens. 11(8):957.
Gohain KJ, Mohammad P, Goswami A. 2021. Assessing the impact of land use land cover changes on
land surface temperature over Pune city, India. Quat Int. 575–576:259–269.
Gregorich M, Strohmaier S, Dunkler D, Heinze G. 2021. Regression with highly correlated predictors:
variable omission is not the solution. IJERPH. 18(8):4259.
Gu C. 2019. Urbanisation: processes and driving forces. Sci China Earth Sci. 62(9):1351–1360.
Guha S, Govil H, Dey A, Gill N. 2018. Analytical study of land surface temperature with NDVI and
NDBI using Landsat 8 OLI and TIRS data in Florence and Naples city, Italy. Eur J Remote Sens. 51(1):
667–678.
Guha S, Govil H, Gill N, Dey A. 2020. Analytical study on the relationship between land surface tempera-
ture and land use/land cover indices. Ann GIS. 26(2):201–216.
Hidayati IN, Suharyadi R, Danoedoro P. 2018. Developing an extraction method of urban built-up area
based on remote sensing imagery transformation index. For Geo. 32(1):96–108.
Huete AeR. 1988. A soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI). Remote Sens Environ. 25(3):295–309.
Kabanda T. 2019. Urban heat island analysis in Dar es Salaam. Tanzania. S Afr J Geom. 8(1):98–107.
Kafy A-A, Rahman MS, Faisal A, Hasan MM, Islam M. 2020. Modelling future land use land cover
changes and their impacts on land surface temperatures in Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Remote Sens Appl
Soc Environ. 18(March):100314.
 GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL 17

Kashki A, Karami M, Zandi R, Roki Z. 2021. Evaluation of the effect of geographical parameters on the
formation of the land surface temperature by applying OLS and GWR, A case study Shiraz City, Iran.
Urban Clim. 37:100832.
Kaspersen PS, Fensholt R, Drews M. 2015. Using Landsat vegetation indices to estimate impervious sur-
face fractions for European cities. Remote Sens. 7(6):8224–8249.
Kibassa D, Shemdoe R. 2016. Land cover change in urban morphological types of Dar es Salaam and its
implication for green structures and ecosystem services. MESE. 2(3):171–186.
Lafortezza R, Sanesi G. 2019. Nature-based solutions: settling the issue of sustainable urbanisation.
Environ Res. 172(August 2018):394–398.
Li S, Zhao Z, Miaomiao X, Wang Y. 2010. Investigating spatial non-stationary and scale-dependent rela-
tionships between urban surface temperature and environmental factors using geographically weighted
regression. Environ Modell Softw. 25(12):1789–1800.
Livesey N. 2014. Limb sounding atmospheric. In: Njoku EG, editor. Encyclopedia of remote sensing in
encyclopedia of earth sciences series. New York, NY: Springer.
Luo X, Peng Y. 2016. Scale effects of the relationships between urban heat islands and impact factors
based on a geographically weighted regression model. Remote Sens. 8(9):760.
Malekela AA, Nyomora A. 2019. Climate change: its implications on urban and peri-urban agriculture in
Dar es Salaam city. Tanzania. Sci Devel J. 3(1):1–14.
Manyama MT, Nahonyo CL, Hepelwa AS. 2020. Analysis of the impact of built environment on coastline
ecosystem services and values. East Afr J Environ Nat Resour. 2(2):44–63.
Mkalawa CC. 2016. Analysing Dar es Salaam urban change and its spatial pattern. Int J Urban Plan
Transp. 31(1):1138–1149.
Mkalawa CC, Haixiao P. 2014. Dar es Salaam city temporal growth and its influence on transportation
[accessed June 2016]. Urban Plann Transport Res. 2(1):423–446.
Mzava P, Nobert J, Valimba P. 2019. Land cover change detection in the urban catchments of Dar es
Salaam, Tanzania using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Tanzania J Sci. 45(3):315–329. www.ajol.
info/index.php/tjs/.
Nanjing T, Wang R, Hou H, Murayama Y. 2020. Spatiotemporal analysis of land use/cover patterns and
their relationship with land surface. Remote Sens. 1:1–17.
Nasir MJ, Ahmad W, Iqbal J, Ahmad B, Abdo HG, Hamdi R, Bateni SM. 2022. Effect of the urban land
use dynamics on land surface temperature: a case study of Kohat City in Pakistan for the period
1998–2018. Earth Syst Environ. 6(1):237–248.
Orimoloye IR, Mazinyo SP, Nel W, Kalumba AM. 2018. Spatiotemporal monitoring of land surface tem-
perature and estimated radiation using remote sensing: human health implications for East London,
South Africa. Environ Earth Sci. 77(3):1–10.
Peng J, Xie P, Liu Y, Ma J. 2016. Urban thermal environment dynamics and associated landscape pattern
factors: A case study in the Beijing metropolitan region. Remote Sens Environ. 173:145–155.
Peter LL, Yang Y. 2019. Urban planning historical review of master plans and the way towards a sustain-
able city: Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Front Archit Res. 8(3):359–377.
Rongali G, Keshari AK, Gosain AK, Khosa R. 2018. A mono-window algorithm for land surface tempera-
ture estimation from Landsat 8 thermal infrared sensor data: A case study of the Beas River Basin,
India. Pertanika J Sci Technol. 26(2):829–840.
Sekertekin A, Arslan N. 2019. Monitoring thermal anomaly and radiative heat flux using thermal infrared
satellite imagery – A case study at Tuzla geothermal region. Geothermics. 78:243–254.
Shi H, Zhang L, Liu J. 2006. A new spatial-attribute weighting function for geographically weighted
regression. Can J for Res. 36(4):996–1005.
Singh P, Kikon N, Verma P. 2017. Impact of land use change and urbanisation on urban heat island in
Lucknow city, Central India. A remote sensing based estimate. Sustain Cities Soc. 32:100–114.
Sun Q, Wu Z, Tan J. 2012. The relationship between land surface temperature and land use/land cover in
Guangzhou, China. Environ Earth Sci. 65(6):1687–1694.
Tarawally M, Xu W, Hou W, Mushore TD. 2018. Comparative analysis of responses of land surface tem-
perature to long-term land use/cover changes between a coastal and Inland City: A case of Freetown
and Bo Town in Sierra Leone. Remote Sens. 10(1):112–118.
URT. 2013a. 2012 population and housing census: population distribution by administrative areas. Dar es
Salaam: National Bureau of Statistics.
URT. 2013b. Dar es Salaam Masterplan 2012 – 2032. Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlement
Development.
URT. 2018. The Urban Planning Act (CAP. 355), The Urban Planning (Planning and Space Standards)
Regulations.
18 O. SIMON ET AL.

Wang R, Hou H, Murayama Y, Derdouri A. 2020. Spatiotemporal analysis of land use/cover patterns and
their relationship with land surface temperature in Nanjing, China. Remote Sens. 12(3):440.
Yin S, Liu J, Han Z. 2022. Relationship between urban morphology and land surface temperature-A case
study of Nanjing City. PLoS ONE. 17(2):e0260205–17.
Yu X, Guo X, Wu Z. 2014. Land surface temperature retrieval from Landsat 8 TIRS-comparison between
radiative transfer equation-based method, split window algorithm and single channel method. Remote
Sensing. 6(10):9829–9852.
Zha Y, Gao J, Ni S. 2003. Use of normalised difference built-up index in automatically mapping urban
areas from TM imagery. Int J Remote Sens. 24(3):583–594.
Zhang X, Estoque RC, Murayama Y. 2017. An urban heat island study in Nanchang City, China based on
land surface temperature and social-ecological variables. Sustain Cities Soc. 32:557–568.
Zhao H, Chen X. 2005. Use of normalised difference bareness index in quickly mapping bare areas from
TM/ETM. Int Geosci Remote Sens Symp. 3:1666–1668.
Zhao M, Cheng C, Zhou Y, Li X, Shen S, Song C. 2022. A global dataset of annual urban extents
(1992–2020) from harmonised nighttime lights. Earth Syst Sci Data. 14(2):517–534.
Zhao C, Jensen J, Weng Q, Weaver R. 2018. A geographically weighted regression analysis of the underly-
ing factors related to the surface urban heat island phenomenon. Remote Sens. 10(9):1428.
Zhi Y, Shan L, Ke L, Yang R. 2020. Analysis of land surface temperature driving factors and spatial het-
erogeneity research based on geographically weighted regression model. Complexity. 2020:1–9.
Zhou G, Wang H, Chen W, Zhang G, Luo Q, Jia B. 2020. Impacts of urban land surface temperature on
tract landscape pattern, physical and social variables. Int J Remote Sens. 41(2):683–703.