Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geoscience Frontiers
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gsf

Research Paper

Assessing the impacts of current and future changes of the planforms of

river Brahmaputra on its land use-land cover
Jatan Debnath a, Dhrubajyoti Sahariah a, Durlov Lahon a, Nityaranjan Nath a, Kesar Chand b,
Gowhar Meraj c,f,⇑, Pankaj Kumar d, Suraj Kumar Singh e, Shruti Kanga f,g, Majid Farooq c,f
a
Department of Geography, Gauhati University, Jalukbari, Assam, India
b
GB Pant National Institute of Himalayan Environment (NIHE), Himachal Regional Centre (Himachal Pradesh), Kullu, India
c
Department of Ecology, Environment and Remote Sensing, Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Kashmir 190018, India
d
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Hayama 240-0115, Japan
e
Centre for Sustainable Development, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur 302017, India
f
Centre for Climate Change and Water Research(C3WR), Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur 302017, India
g
Department of Geography, School of Environment and Earth Sciences, Central University of Punjab, VPO-Ghudda, Bathinda 151401, India

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

Article history: River bankline migration is a frequent phenomenon in the river of the floodplain region. Nowadays,
Received 23 July 2022 channel dynamics-related changes in land use and land cover (LULC) are becoming a risk to the life
Revised 5 January 2023 and property of people living in the vicinity of rivers. A comprehensive evaluation of the causes and
Accepted 25 January 2023
consequences of such changes is essential for better policy and decision-making for disaster risk reduc-
Available online 2 February 2023
Handling Editor: E. Shaji
tion and management. The present study assesses the changes in the Brahmaputra River planform using
the GIS-based Digital Shoreline Analysis System (DSAS) and relates it with the changing LULC of the
floodplain evaluated using the CA-Markov model. In this study, the future channel of the Brahmaputra
Keywords:
River and its flood plain’s future LULC were forecasted to pinpoint the erosion-vulnerable zone. Forty-
Channel shifting eight years (1973–2021) of remotely sensed data were applied to estimate the rate of bankline migration.
Erosion-Accretion It was observed that the river’s erosion-accretion rate was higher in early times than in more recent ones.
Bankline Prediction The left and right banks’ average shifting rates between 1973 and 1988 were
55.44 m/y and
56.79 m/
DSAS y, respectively, while they were
17.25 m/y and
48.49 m/y from 2011 to 2021. The left bank of the river
CA-Markov Brahmaputra had more erosion than the right, which indicates that the river is shifting in the leftward
Brahmaputra River direction (Southward). In this river course, zone A (Lower course) and zone B (Middle course) were more
adversely affected than zone C (Upper course). According to the predicted result, the left bank is more
susceptible to bank erosion than the right bank (where the average rate of erosion and deposition was

72.23 m/y and 79.50 m/y, respectively). The left bank’s average rate of erosion was
111.22 m/y.
The research assesses the LULC study in conjunction with river channel dynamics in vulnerable areas
where nearby infrastructure and settlements were at risk due to channel migration. The degree of accu-
racy was verified using the actual bankline and predicted bankline, as well as the actual LULC map and
anticipated LULC map. In more than 90% of cases, the bankline’s position and shape generally remain
the same as the actual bankline. The overall, and kappa accuracy of all the LULC maps was more than
85%, which was suitable for the forecast. Moreover, chi-square (x2) result values for classified classes
denoted the accuracy and acceptability of the CA-Markov model for predicting the LULC map. The results
of this work aim to understand better the efficient hazard management strategy for the Brahmaputra
River for hazard managers of the region using an automated prediction approach.
Ó 2023 China University of Geosciences (Beijing) and Peking University. Production and hosting by
Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction

Rivers are dynamic systems and continuously change their

⇑ Corresponding author. planforms in response to different flow conditions (Shu et al.,
E-mail address: gowhar.60842@mygyanvihar.com (G. Meraj). 2019). The river becomes sluggish and achieves meandering nature

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101557
1674-9871/Ó 2023 China University of Geosciences (Beijing) and Peking University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
while it attains the mature stage. These fluctuations in the river
flow become a source of immense river bank erosion (Rahman,
2010; Das and Bhowmik, 2013). River bank erosion is the removal
of the soil materials/particles from the stream bank by hydraulic
processes (Clark and Wynn, 2007). It is a widespread and frequent
natural hazard. Generally, the hydrological processes of the fluvial
system are controlled by the meander geometry of the river, the
kinetic energy of the flowing water, and the river’s gradient
(Jana, 2021). Among the two dominant forces of bank erosion,
i.e., hydraulic action and mass failure, hydraulic action is regarded
as the prime source of river bank erosion, followed by mass failure
(Simon et al., 2000; Posner and Duan, 2012). The river flow under-
cuts the upper bank materials during intense floods, resulting in an
overhanging cantilevered block that eventually collapses
(Goswami, 2002). Although flooding contributes to large-scale ero-
sion of river bank soil (Schumm and Lichty, 1963), increasing rain-
fall intensity and lack of management and mitigation are escalating
bank erosion significantly (IPCC, 2018). According to Hickin and
Nanson (1984) and Thakur et al. (2012), river planform change is
a process that can potentially have a catastrophic local or regional
impact on the floodplain dwellers of the respective river.
Increasing population and extreme climatic conditions have
become a major concern for the river valleys because the vulnera-
bility and risk have increased several times more than the previous
havoc (Das, 2009; Rahman and Gain, 2020). Hazarika et al. (2015)
and Debnath et al. (2017) expressed that the gradual changes in
river planform alter the LULC and directly affect floodplain dwell-
ers worldwide. As a result, floodplains have become one of the
most endangered worldwide. According to Chakraborty and Saha
(2022), flood plains are the geomorphic units that are under the
greatest threat from increased land use pressure. People’s liveli-
hoods are negatively impacted by riverbank erosion, which over
time, causes them more economic, social, and psychological misery
(Debnath et al., 2022). River bank erosion results in human fatali-
ties and significant property and public infrastructure damage
(Rahman et al., 2022). Riverbank erosion may also impact river
ecology (Tha et al., 2022). The recurrence of fluvial hazards faced
by the local people of the river valley owing to bank erosion needs
immediate attention (Deb et al., 2012). The flood-prone region of a
river acts as a bottleneck to agricultural development and is one of
the significant reasons for economic backwardness (Mahanta and
Das, 2012). Flooding-related losses are momentary, while land lost
due to river bank erosion is permanent and affects the economy
(Altaf et al., 2013; Das et al., 2014). Bank erosion and shifting of
the river severely affect the livelihood of the local people and will
continue to devastate in the future unless proper protective mea-
sures against this hazard are considered (Deb and Ferreira, 2015).
Spatio-temporal mapping and monitoring of the channel plan-
form change associated with LULC change in the floodplain are
essential to documenting the erosion hazard and identifying the
actual causes for such changes (Hasanuzzaman et al., 2022). Due
to their capabilities, such as extensive area coverage, synoptic per-
spective, and regular data, satellite imageries are now frequently
utilized by fluvial geomorphologists to track the change in bank-
lines. Remote sensing and GIS technique for detecting Spatio-
temporal changes is used enormously, primarily for the long and
most dynamic river (Nanson and Hickin, 1986; Yang et al., 1999;
Bhakal et al., 2005, Kotoky et al., 2005; Kummu et al., 2008;
Sarma and Acharjee, 2012; Chakraborty and Datta, 2013; Gogoi
and Goswami, 2013). Moreover, predicting future positions using
geospatial models is essential for delineating the vulnerable zone
and early warning systems. The Digital Shoreline Analysis System
(DSAS) produced by the USGS is a well-adopted geospatial model
that helps to estimate the channel migration rate by taking dis-
cretely right and left banks. It is the most widely used tool to study
the shoreline or river bankline changes over a period of time using
2
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
historical datasets (Billah, 2018; Tyagi and Rai, 2020; Rajakumari
et al., 2021). The model provides rate calculation of the shorelines
or the river bankline movements (Nithu et al., 2019). Moreover,
this highly adopted model is used for the prediction of future bank-
line position effectively. Numerous researchers have successfully
used the DSAS model in their field, including Hapke et al. (2009)
in the USA, Esteves et al. (2009) in the UK, Alberico et al. (2012)
in Italy, Hai-Hoa et al. (2013) in Vietnam, Rahman et al. (2022) in
Bangladesh, Siyal et al. (2022) in Pakistan, Rajakumari et al.
(2021) and Dutta et al. (2022), Tha et al. (2022) in Cambodia. Usu-
ally, this model is applied for the monitoring of the sea shoreline
change. Still, nowadays, it is used for river bankline shifting with
a higher degree of accuracy after adopting the right and left banks
separately (Ashraf and Shakir, 2018; Jana, 2021; Hasanuzzaman
et al., 2022). Moreover, the CA Markov model for LULC change pre-
diction has become an important tool for correlating the coupled
effects of the bankline changes and the associated changes in the
LULC. This model can be combined with another model to simulate
and anticipate spatial patterns of land use because of its open
structure. Recently, the model has been used significantly because
it integrates the spatiotemporal dimensions of the processes with
ease, flexibility, and intuitiveness (Alam et al., 2021). The previous
studies of Hazarika et al. (2015), Debnath et al. (2017), Milani et al.
(2018), and Hasanuzzaman et al. (2022) are highlighted the impact
of bank erosion on the riverine LULC dynamics. Therefore, the com-
bined use of both the DSAS and CA-Markov models can be used to
efficiently analyze the impact of current and future changes of the
planforms in the floodplain LULC. Moreover, the information
regarding the future riverine LULC dynamics along with the future
bankline position of the river becomes essential to quantify the
probable losses in the floodplain due to the bank erosion hazard.
Combined use of these two models in a floodplain is a robust
approach to identifying the vulnerable areas for bank erosion.The
present study has been conducted in the Brahmaputra valley,
which has been experiencing the extensive erosion-accretion by
the mighty river Brahmaputra from time immemorial. Due to its
extreme characteristics, particularly during the rainy season, and
its predominance as a braided river, this river is also referred to
as the most disastrous river in the World (Coleman, 1969;
Goswami et al., 1999; Das et al., 2014). The bank erosion causes
severe devastation to the property and life alongside the Brahma-
putra river. According to the WRD (2008) assessment, more than
2500 villages and 18 towns, including culturally significant sites
and tea plantations, have been destroyed by bank erosion, harming
the life of close to 500,000 residents in the Brahmaputra valley
(Das et al., 2014). From an economic point of view, mitigation of
bank erosion in this part of India has become an essential part of
poverty reduction.
The objective of the present study is to identify the spatio-
temporal change of the bankline and its associated impact on the
LULC change of the Brahmaputra Valley using the geospatial tech-
nique with field verification. Several studies have been conducted
based on the change in the bankline of the Brahmaputra River to
understand and accommodate bank erosion processes and func-
tions. However, these studies have not considered bank erosion
management at the appropriate scale or the long-term and cumu-
lative effects of bank erosion control equipment. As a result, the
present research not only evaluates the bankline migration with
LULC change during 48 years but also projects where the bankline
will be in 2031 and 2041 using the DSAS tool. Assessment of zone-
wise bank erosion rate at 100 m intervals for different years in the
Brahmaputra River is done in the present research, which was very
much uncommon in the previous research. Moreover, the current
study combines the DSAS model for bank erosion rate calculation
and prediction along with the CA-Markov model for LULC predic-
tion, which has generated a unique way for bank erosion study
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
in the floodplain. Therefore, the present study’s findings may be
used by policymakers to develop their strategy for preserving the
nation’s economy, food security, and way of life for the populace.
2. Study area
The mighty Brahmaputra River is a moving ocean and is an
ancient snow-fed river (Sarma, 2004; Sarma and Phukan, 2004).
The river crosses the developing Young Himalayan Range and is
crucial for Bangladesh, India, and Tibet (China). The river’s length
is 2880 km, of which 1625 km in China, 918 km in India, and
337 km in Bangladesh. Due to the river’s unusual drainage pattern,
intricate geological settings, high sediment load, and significant
bank erosion problem, it is unique in the World (Mahanta and
Saikia, 2015). After leaving the ChemaYundung glacier, the
Brahmaputra runs through rocky gorges with a high gradient
(4.3–16.8 m/km) (Sarma and Acharjee, 2018). This river in the
Himalayas is roughly 600 m wide. The river enters India through
Pashighat, and right after Pashighat, the channel’s width increases
to 10–12 km due to a significant drop in gradient to 0.27 m/km
(Sarma and Acharjee, 2018). At Pashighat and Pandu in India, the
Brahmaputra’s annual runoff averages 186,290 and 494,290 mil-
lion cubic meters, respectively (Sarma, 2005). The river discharges
an estimated 1000 million tonnes of suspended debris to the Bay of
Bengal (Milliman and Meade, 1983).
In Assam, India, the Brahmaputra flows 670 km through a small
valley called the Brahmaputra Valley of Assam Valley. It then runs
for roughly 100 km until it meets the Ganga River in Bangladesh.
The channel’s width ranges from 1.1 km to 18.6 km, and the valley
has an average width of roughly 86 km. Vast amounts of silt are
deposited by the river Brahmaputra, which has a braided channel
for much of its course in the Assam valley and is joined by numer-
ous tributaries on both sides. According to Goswami (1985), the
area is covered by recent alluvium that is 200–300 m thick and
is made up of clay, silt, sand, and pebbles. Despite being a part of
the south Asiatic monsoon basin in general, the region’s unusual
orographic configuration is a major factor in the development of
meteorological anomalies. W. Koppen states that this region has
a humid mesothermal Gangetic climate or ‘‘Cwg” overall, excluding
the high mountain boundaries. The current study was carried out
in the Brahmaputra Valley, with a maximum length (725 km) of
the river chosen from India and a minimum length (100 km) from
Bangladesh. Because of its extensive braiding, this specific section
of the Brahmaputra River was chosen for the current study. After
leaving the mountainous region, the river acquired its braided nat-
ure, which has caused severe bank erosion in this segment. The
entire chosen section of the river was split into three equal parts
to simplify the investigation, i.e., zone A (Lower course), Zone B
(Middle course), and zone C (Upper course). In addition, a buffer
zone 10 km from either of the Brahmaputra River’s banklines has
been chosen to research LULC change in the Brahmaputra valley
since bank erosion impacts the nearby flood plain significantly
(Fig. 1).
3. Materials and methods
Since the last centuries, researchers have been particularly
interested in tracking the morphological changes that river chan-
nels undergo over time. River morphology has been the subject
of several studies, many of which are still ongoing. Conducting
the research on a large river like the Brahmaputra River requires
implementing a simplified method to allow consistent and compa-
rable results along the river course. The most common method for
tracking river channel behavior over time is GIS in conjunction
with satellite imagery. Since the river Brahmaputra is braided in
3
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
the area chosen for the study, satellite images from one specific
season were used to preserve consistency and determine the actual
bankline. The DSAS tool and CA-Markov model were used to assess
the future bankline and LULC in the floodplain. The steps followed
for the entire study have been illustrated in the flowchart (Fig. 2)
and analyzed briefly in the below section.
3.1. Datasets
In the present research, Landsat MSS 1973, TM 1988, TM 1997,
ETM + 2005 and 2011, and Landsat OLI 2021 were used to identify
the banklines of the Brahmaputra River and LULC study. Besides,
the recent Landsat OLI image of 2021 was used to validate the pre-
dicted result. The Landsat imageries, freely accessible on the USGS
website, provided critical data for identifying and monitoring nat-
ural and anthropogenic environments. Only the post-monsoon sea-
son datasets were collected to have less cloud cover and to identify
the exact channel and area under the sand bars. The ArcGIS plat-
form’s Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection with zone
47 North and the WGS 1984 datum was used to project the gath-
ered Landsat imageries. The images were further pre-processed
using image-enhancing techniques like haze reduction, sharpness,
and contrast for better categorization and accuracy. The images
from each year were then mosaicked to produce one continuous
image covering the entire river stretch for the present study. The
stretch was divided into three distinct zones with an extension
of 275 km to explain the model’s findings.
3.2. Methods
3.2.1. Banklines identification and extraction
This procedure was used to locate the bankline utilizing satel-
lite imagery. The right and left banks of the river channel are deter-
mined by a method that converts the raster data structure into a
vector layer. Based on Eqs. (1)–(3), the Normalized Difference
Water Index (NDWI) and Modified Normalized Difference Index
(MNDWI) were employed to detect banklines. For this purpose,
the land and water were divided using the green and near-
infrared bands. Here, pixels with the value ‘‘100 were chosen to rep-
resent a body of water, and pixels with the value ‘‘0” were chosen
to represent land.
Green
NIR
NDWI ¼ ð1Þ
Green þ NIR
The MNDWI was evaluated using the SWIR band of Landsat 5
and 8 and the MIR band of Landsat 7 coupled with the green band.
The MNDWI calculation formula was provided by Xu (2006) and is
as follows:
Green
MIR
MNDWI ¼ ð2Þ
Green þ MIR
Green
SWIR
NDWI ¼ ð3Þ
Green þ SWIR
The Brahmaputra River’s left and right banklines were both dig-
itally digitized using the final images of NDWI and MNDWI (Jana,
2021; Hasanuzzaman et al., 2022).
3.2.2. Assessment of bankline shifting rate
The GIS-based DSAS model was employed in the current study
project. This ArcGIS extension tool was used to determine the rate
of bankline change using the time series bankline vector data. The
spatiotemporal change rate of the bankline was predicted using
the end point rate (EPR) and linear regression (LRR) statistical
methodologies of the DSAS tool (Jana, 2021; Hasanuzzaman
et al., 2022). The entire study period was split into five temporal
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Fig. 1. Location map of the study area.

datasets, namely 1973–1988, 1988–1997, 1997–2005, 2005–2011, (Yrb) bankline positions. It was utilized as Y in this effort to repre-
and 2011–2021, to run various statistical techniques. The final line sent the expected bankline location and was calculated using the
of overlapping visualization for each dataset’s superimposed bank- Eq. (5).
ine location was depicted to trace out the composite line. Subse-
Y ¼ aEPR þ bEPR X ð5Þ
quently, the baselines were created for the right and left banks
separately, taking a 1000 m buffer from the composite line. As a where: aEPR stands for the model intercept;bEPR for river bank shift-
result, 9000 transects were formed for the entire chosen portion ing rate (slope or regression coefficient); X for the time gap (Xob –
of the Brahmaputra River at 100 m intervals along the baseline. Xrb) between earlier (Xob) and recent bankline (Xrb);
These transects were generated at an acute angle to the baseline Moreover, the EPR intercept is calculated using Eq. (6).
up to 10 km away from the banks with an uncertainty of 5 m.


The EPR was estimated after dividing the distance of bankline Y ob
Y rb Y ob
Y rb
aEPR ¼ Y ob
X ob ¼ Y rb
X rb ð6Þ
migration by the time between the oldest and most recent bank- X rb
X ob X rb
X ob
line. It was determined using the equation shown as Eq. (4):
The rate of bankline change for particular sets of the transect
(bEPR ) is calculated using the Eq. (7):
Distance of bankline mov ement

EPR ¼ ð4Þ Y ob
Y rb
Time between oldest and most recent bEPR ¼ ð7Þ
X rb
X ob
To predict the spatiotemporal change of the bankline and rate of In order to create a model that is suitable for predicting the val-
river erosion–deposition (Mukhopadhyay et al. 2012), this EPR ues of the dependent variable, the Linear Regression Rate (LRR) is
model was implemented using the two years of data set separately utilized. By fitting a least squares regression line to every bankline
such as 1973–1988, 1988–1997, 1997–2005, 2005–2011, and point, it is possible to calculate a linear regression rate-of-change
2011–2021. This model used Y for the earlier (Yob) and recent statistic. It was estimated using Eq (8).

4
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Fig. 2. Flowchart of the methodology applied in the present study.

5
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
y ¼ a þ bx ð8Þ
where x is the explanatory variable, y is the dependent variable, the
value of which will be predicted or explained, a constant, and b is
the slope of the regression line. The slope shows that each unit of
x affects how much y changes. The rate is the slope of the equation
describing the line. The correlation coefficient (R2) was estimated
for the validation of the relationship between the x and y values.
3.2.3. Standard error and R2 of the bankline change calculation
The rate of error for the LRR and WLR statistics was estimated to
calculate the bankline shifting (Barik and Guru, 2021). The follow-
ing equation represents the anticipated baseline distance (y) of
each bankline based on the time (x):
y ¼ mx þ c ð9Þ
where m is the rate of change/slope, c is the y-intercept, y is the
projected baseline distance.
One can assess the accuracy by computing the standard error of
measurement and comparing the value of ‘‘y” to the known value
on bankine points. It is also known as Weighed Linear Regression
(WLR/WSE) and Linear Standard Error (LSE).
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P
ðy
y0Þ2
LSE or WSE ¼ ð10Þ
n
2
where n is the total number of banklines utilized, y is the predicted
value based on the best-fit regression line, and y’ is the length from
the baseline to a particular bankline point.
An R2 score of 1.0 denotes the highest degree of agreement,
while a value of 0.0 denotes the least degree of agreement. The
DSAS model uses the abbreviations LR2 for Linear Regression Rate
and WR2 for Weighed Linear Regression. It was defined by the
Eq. (11)
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
uP
u ðy
y0Þ2
R ¼1
t P
2

ð11Þ
ðy
yÞ
where y stands for the distance from the baseline, y’ for the pro-
jected distance from the baseline depending on the best-fit regres-
sion line, and y for the mean bankline distances from the baseline;
R2 for the coefficient of determination.
3.2.4. Prediction of bankline
The prediction for the next 10 and 20 years was computed using
previous bankline position data in the new DSAS version 5.0
(Thieler et al., 2009; Himmelstoss et al., 2018). The Long and Plant
Kalman filter (Kalman, 1960), which merged the observed bankline
locations with the model-derived locations, was typically used to
estimate a future bankline position. The statistically based Kalman
Filter requires a set of linear regression rates to forecast the loca-
tion of the bankline precisely. The oldest bankline position is used
as the starting point for the DSAS, which continues through con-
secutive years until the next bankline position is reached. The Kal-
man filter operates to minimize the observed error among the
model and bankline position during interactions with a bankline
position to carry out the forecast. The updated rate was used to
project the bankline for each succeeding position until the next
assessment date. The model subsequently included the additional
dataset (Himmelstoss et al., 2018). The procedure was continued
until the anticipated forecast was obtained.
3.2.5. Validation of the forecasted bankline and evaluation
Typically, predicted lines are validated using the Shoreline
Change Envelope (SCE) method (Barik and Guru, 2021). This
method was employed in the current study as a Bankline Change
6
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
Envelope (BCE) to validate the anticipated bankline. For this, the
DSAS in the ArcGIS environment was used to process banklines
between 1973 and 2021, and the expected bankline for 2021 was
estimated. In order to quantify the variance of bankline located
between the actual and forecasted, the forecasted bankline and
actual bankline digitized from satellite image Landsat OLI
(November-December 2021) were compared in a DSAS
environment.
3.2.6. LULC change analysis
In this work, the LULC maps of the study region were estimated
using six Landsat images from the years 1973 (MSS), 1988 (TM),
1997 (TM), 2005 (TM), 2011, and 2021 (OLI). In the present study,
the supervised classification technique was adopted based on
training sites using maximum likelihood classification since it pro-
duces more accurate classification results than unsupervised clas-
sification (Richards and Jia, 2006; Shalaby and Tateishi, 2007; Butt
et al., 2012; Iqbal and Khan, 2014; Debnath et al., 2017). The his-
togram tool was used to compare the categorized class’s training
signatures (Raju et al., 2013). The transformed divergence index
was employed to determine whether the chosen signatures could
be separated.
3.2.7. Prediction of LULC change
The CA-Markov model is used to analyze the temporal and spa-
tial LULC change over time (Weng, 2002; Tadese et al., 2021a,
Tadese et al., 2021b). The CA-Markov model was extensively used
in this study to estimate the likely future situation of LULC modi-
fication. Cellular automata and the Markov chain were combined
to create the CA-Markov model, which aids in forecasting the traits
and patterns of LULC change over time. Future LULC scenarios are
produced, and the CA-Markov model improves policymakers’ abil-
ity to respond to processes driving vegetation change (Yang et al.,
2014). The dynamics of land use and land cover, vegetation, the
growth of built-up areas, and watershed management models are
frequently depicted using this model. Additionally, it plays a signif-
icant role in formulating various land use policies and planning for
long-term LULC management (Ghosh et al., 2017). Future LULC
changes for the research area were predicted using the IDRISI Terr-
set software (CA-Markov model). The actions listed below were
taken throughout this process: The base map, transition suitability
image, and LULC maps from 1973 to 2021 were used to construct
the transition probability image (Fitzsimmons and Getoor, 2003;
Verburg et al., 2004). Then, using the CA-Markov model technique,
the transition probabilities from the years 1973–2021, as well as
the LULC for the year 2021, were simulated. The Multi-Criteria
Evaluation (MCE) module’s constraints and variables were used
to calculate the transition appropriateness image (Omar et al.,
2014; Singh et al., 2015). The LULC was then simulated for the
years 2031 and 2041 using the base map, the transition suitability
map, and the transition probabilities map. The Eq. (9) displays the
Cellular Automata (CA) model equation (Hamad et al., 2018;
Tadese et al., 2021b).
Sðt; t þ 1Þ ¼ f ðSðt Þ; NÞ; ð12Þ
where S (t + 1) is the status of the system at the time (t, t + 1), cal-
culated using the state probability at any time (N)
This model is commonly employed to track LULC, conduct eco-
logical modeling, simulate change, and determine the stability of
upcoming land development in the area of concern. The computa-
tion of the forecast of LULC changes is described by equation (10):
Sðt; t þ 1Þ ¼ Pij  Sðt Þ; ð13Þ
where Pij stands for transition probability matrix in a state, which
was determined by applying the Eq. (11), and S (t) for the system
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

status at time t, S (t + 1) for the system status at time t + 1 (Kumar 3.2.8. Validation and evaluation of classified LULC and predicted LULC
et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2021). map
  Assessment of accuracy is very much important in terms of the
 P1; 1P1; 2P1; N  accuracy of the LULC maps prepared based on satellite images. The
 
 P1; 1P1; 2P2; N 
  accuracy is mainly expressed in the degree of correctness of a clas-
kPij k ¼  ; ð14Þ
   sification map (Foddy, 2002) along with the statistical application.
 
 PN; 1PN; 2PN; N  For this purpose, Google earth imagery was used, and field verifica-
tion using GPS was carried out. For classification accuracy, a confu-
  sion matrix was employed to compute the accuracy of the
0  Pij  1 ; producers and users, which were used to calculate the overall
P denotes the transition probability, Pij denotes the probability accuracy and Kappa accuracy. The overall accuracy was obtained
that a state will change from one moment (i) to another (j) in the by dividing the total number of pixels successfully categorized by
future, and PN denotes the probability that a state will exist at any the sum of the pixels in the error matrix, whereas the Kappa co-
given time. The chance of a low transition will be close to zero and efficient primarily determines the level of agreement between
a high transition will be close to one (Wang et al., 2021). The pre- the classified map and reference data Rosenfield and Fitzpatrick-
cise amount of land that would alter from the previous year to the Lins, 1986). The formula used to calculate these was as follows
anticipated year is estimated through Markov Chain. (Congalton, 1991):

Fig. 3. Different banklines are positioned along the baseline. All transects are oriented at angle with the corresponding baselines.

7
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Pr
i¼1 xii
Ov erall accuracy :  100 ð15Þ
N transects of the left bank experienced erosion. It indicates that
Pr Pr
N i¼1 xii
i¼1 ðxiþ  xþi Þ
Kappa accuracy : P ð16Þ
N2
ri¼1 ðxi þ xþi Þ
where N indicates the sum of pixels in the matrix table, r indicates
the number of rows in the matrix, xii expresses the total number of
correctly categorized pixels in row i and column i,xiþ and xþi denote
the marginal totals of row i and column i; respectively.
Moreover, the accuracy validation of the predicted LULC was
generated using chi-square (x 2) test statistics (Nath et al., 2020).
Here, the real LULC for 2021 and the simulated LULC for 2021 were
contrasted. Fig. 2 contains the flowchart of the thorough process.
4. Results
The rate of erosion-accretion and changes of the LULC in the
riverine floodplain of the Brahmaputra are summarised below.
Mapping of the EPR rate and LULC changes, along with the predic-
tion for selected study years, are shown in this section. This section
is comprised of three sub-sections. First, the information related to
zone-wise trends of the river bank migration/erosion-accretion
rate for the past, present, and future scenarios is analyzed. In the
second section, the information related to changing and conversion
of LULC for different study years, along with the future LULC of the
buffer zone of the Brahmaputra floodplain, is summarised. In the
last section, the validated results are discussed.
4.1. River bank migration/erosion-accretion rate according to the DSAS
model
To fully explain the model outcome, the entire stretch of the
Brahmaputra River used for the current research work was split
into three unique zones: A, B, and C. In each of the zones, about
3000 transects (on both sides) were made to compute the rate of
the bankline shift along with erosion and deposition/accretion
(Fig. 3). By taking into account the complete 48 years of data, the
trend of the river bank shifting was estimated (1973–2021). The
result shows that from 1973 to 1988, the average rate of shifting
in the right and left bank of zone A was
79.20 m/y and 93 m/y,
zone B was
26 m/y and 111.94 m/y, and zone C was 65 m/y
and
65.42 m/y, respectively. In both the right and left banks,
the average erosion rate was
102.21 m/y and
104.38 m/y, and
accretion was 48.07 m/y and 79.89 m/y, respectively. During this
time, the left bank experienced an average shifting of
55.44 m/
y, and the right bank experienced a shifting of
56.79 m/y
(Fig. 4). Additionally, both banks exhibited positive (accretion)
shifting in every zone. The result highlighted that the channel
expansion predominated over channel narrowing at this time
due to greater erosion in both the bankline. Compared to other
zones, zone B had the highest level of river dynamic activity
(Fig. 5).
From 1988 to 1997, the average shifting rate in the right and left
banks of zone A was 82.18 m/y and
45 m/y, respectively. The
location of the transects indicated that erosion occurred in 1941
on the left bank’s 2762 transects and 1065 of the right bank’s
2763 transects. It shows that the left bank had the more shifting
rate comparatively. In zone B, the rate of shifting in the right and
left banks was 108 m/y and
140.29 m/y, respectively. It was
exhibited that the river channel was shifted towards the left side
owing to greater erosion on the left side (1929 transects out of
2734 transects) compared to the right side (2311 transects out of
2734 transects) in this zone. Similarly, in zone C, the rate shifting
in the right and left banks of the river was 35 m/y and

126.22 m/y, respectively. In this zone,1398 transects out of
8
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
2827 transects of the right bank and 856 transects out of 2195
the river migrates more towards the right because of higher ero-
sion in this zone. During this period, the overall average shifting
rate on both the bank of the river was 74.38 m/y (right bank)
and 109.38 m/y (left bank) (Fig. 4). It indicates that sedimentation
was more common in both banks than erosion during this period.
From 1997 to 2005, the average shifting rate in the right and the
left bank of zone A was
123.16 m/y and
40 m/y, respectively.
The location of transects confirmed that erosion had taken place
in 1409 of the 2762 left bank transects and 2176 of the 2763 right
bank transects, proving that the channel migrated more toward the
right bank comparatively. On the other hand, the average shift rate
in zone B’s right and left banks were
131 m/y and
105.77 m/y,
respectively. In this zone, erosion occurred in 1725 of the 2734
transects of the left bank and 2240 of the 2734 transects of the
right bank, proving that erosion was prevalent in both banks. Sim-
ilarly, in zone C, the rate was 70 m/y and
91.29 m/y in the right
and left banks, respectively. The result indicates that the river
migrated more to the left owing to greater erosion in the left bank
(1401 transects out of 2199 transects) compared to the right bank
(1455 transects out of 2827 transects) in this zone. The overall
average shifting rate in the right and left banks at this time was

60.38 m/y and
91.98 m/y, respectively (Fig. 4). It shows that
river erosion was more common in both banks than accretion dur-
ing the study period.
The average migration rate in the right bank of zone A, B, and C was
48.02, 10, and 19 m/y, and in the left bank was
3,
26.77, and
29.33 m/y in 2005 and 2011, respectively. In this period, the average
rate of erosion in the right and left banks was
99.58 m/y and

193.91 m/y, whereas the average rate of accretion was162.88 m/y
and 207.52 m/y, respectively. The total average rate of shifting in both
banks was
14.91 m/y (left bank) and 25.61 m/y (right bank). The spa-
tial distribution of transects revealed that erosion occurred in 4262 of
the 7690 left bank transects and 4354 of the 8324 right bank transects.
The rate of erosion-accretion and the number of transects show that
channel expansion and sedimentation were common along the
Brahmaputra River’s bankline throughout this time (Fig. 5). The bank
erosion was very active in zone B comparatively as it had the erosion in
1435 of the 2734 transects on the left bank and 1647 of the 2734 tran-
sects on the right bank.
Moreover, from 2011 to 2021, the average migration rate in the
right and left banks of zone A was
56.61 m/y and 20 m/y, respec-
tively. Out of 2762 transects, erosion was found in 1892 (right
bank) and 1622 (left bank) of them. The study demonstrated that
erosion was greater than deposition in this zone of the river bank
zone. Both the left bank (1647 transects out of 2734 transects)
and the right bank of zone B showed severe erosion (1834 transects
out of 2734 transects). The average migration rate in the right and
the left bank was
40 m/y and
66.76 m/y, respectively. This zone
supports the hypothesis that because of the greater erosion rate,
the channel shifted leftwards significantly. On the other hand, in
zone C, both the right and the left banks had negative shifting rates
(
23.29 m/y and
49 m/y at the right bank and left bank, respec-
tively). According to the spatial distribution of transects, erosion
was active in 69.44% (1963 transects out of 2827 transects) and
60.63% (1341 transects out of 2201 transects) transects of the right
and left bank respectively. The overall migration rate from 2011 to
2021 was
48.49 m/y and
17.25 m/y on the right and left banks,
respectively, which indicate a rightward shift of the river planform.
4.1.1. Prediction of bankline shifting using the DSAS model
The predicted result shows that the average rate of bank migra-
tion in zone A was 19.97 m/y and
29.69 m/y in the right and left
banks from 2021 to 2031, respectively. The right bank erosion was
expected to be
87.39 m/y and the left bank erosion to be
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Fig. 4. DSAS model derived rate of channel migration rate (erosion and accretion) during the periods of (a) 1973 to 1988 (b) 1988 to 1997 (c) 1997 to 2005 (d) 2005 to 2011
and (e) 2011 to 2021.

9
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Fig. 5. DSAS model derived rate of channel migration rate (erosion and accretion) during the periods of (a) 1973 to 1988 (b) 1988 to 1997 (c) 1997 to 2005 (d) 2005 to 2011
and (e) 2011 to 2021 (f) 2021 to 2031 (g) 2031–2041.

66.76 m/y on average in this zone. On the other hand, the esti-
mated average rate of accretion for the right and left banks were
59.41 m/y and 75.37 m/y, respectively, during this period. Since
60.72% of transects experienced signs of erosion compared to
39.01% in the left bank, the right bank was expected to be highly
erodible. In zone B, the average migration rate was
1 m/y on
the right bank and
46.11 m/y on the left bank. The estimated
average rate of erosion and accretion for the right bank was

67.45 m/y and 80.91 m/y and for the left bank was
137.72 m/
y and 82.91 m/y during this predicted period, respectively. In this
zone, the left bank was expected to be a highly erodible bank since
68.96% of transects had experienced erosion as opposed to 55.37%
in the right bank. In zone C, the average migration rate in the right
and left banks was 27 m/y and
29.30 m/y, respectively. The aver-
age rate of erosion was
58.16 m/y (43.33% of transects) and

110.31 m/y (58.94% of transects), and accretion was 92.04 m/y
(56.67% of transects) and 86.87 m/y (41.05% of transects) respec-
tively. After considering transects and the rate of erosion and depo-
sition, the left bank was projected to be vulnerable to erosion
compared to the right bank. The overall average shifting was pro-
jected to be 1.12 m/y and
24.93 m/y in the right and left banks,
respectively. Moreover, the left bank (Average rate of erosion was

111.22 m/y and accretion of 80.28 m/y) was expected to be more
vulnerable to erosion compared to the right bank throughout this
predicted period bank (average rate of erosion was
72.23 m/y
and accretion of 79.50 m/y) (Fig. 4).
From 2021 to 2041, the average rate of migration in the right
and the left bank of zone A was estimated to be
24.22 m/y and
11.41 m/y, respectively. In the left bank (40.90% of transects), ero-
sion and accretion were expected to occur at an average rate of
10
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

31.17 m/y and 40.88 m/y, respectively, whereas, in the right bank
(77.88% of transects), these rates were anticipated to be
36.66 m/
y and 19.52 m/y respectively. According to the previous discussion,
the channel would mostly shift to the right owing to significant lat-
eral erosion, while the left bank would experience deposition. In
zone B, the average rate of erosion and accretion in the right bank
was expected to be
66.90 m/y (78.49% transects out of total tran-
sects) and 29.68 m/y (21.50% transects out of total transects)
respectively. While in the left bank, it was
38.07 m/y (66.97%
transects out of total transects) and 31.37 (49.32% transects out
of total transects), respectively.
Furthermore, in zone C, the average migration rate was
expected to be 10 m/y and 24.75 m/y in the right and left banks,
respectively. The estimated overall average shifting was

9.58 m/y and
19.37 m/y, respectively. The projected average
rate of erosion and accretion in the entire stretch of the left bank
was to be
52.87 m/y and
34.66 m/y and in the right bank was
to be 37.59 m/y and 40.51 m/y, respectively. It indicates that the
left bank was anticipated to be the most susceptible to bank ero-
sion throughout this predicted period compared to the right bank.
In both the expected periods, i.e., 2021– 2031 and 2021–2041, it
was predicted that the absolute bankline migration in the Brahma-
putra River would be quite considerable, especially from 2021 to
2031. The left bank would be severely eroded in both periods,
whereas the right bank experiences excessive sedimentation. Nev-
ertheless, due to the diversity of the various factors of bank erosion
and accretion process, such lateral migration could become unu-
sual and widespread. The projected banklines often show sediment
deposition along the right bank, and the bulkier expansion will
happen along the left bank (Fig. 6).
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Fig. 6. Spatial Pattern of migration rate after prediction in the year 2021, 2031, and 2041.

11
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Fig. 7. LULC maps of the years (a) 1973, (b) 1988, (c) 1997, (d) 2005, (e) 2011, (f) 2021, (g) Predicted 2021, (h) Predicted 2031, and (i) Predicted 2041.

Table 1
Area under the different classified classes of the LULC maps.

LULC class 1973 1988 1997 2005 2011 2021

Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%)
Vegetation 6128.30 30.11 5127.98 25.19 4940.78 24.27 5510.67 27.07 4628.83 22.74 3807.25 18.71
Cultivated land 8445.65 41.49 7425.36 36.48 7402.55 36.37 7142.03 35.09 7655.85 37.61 7746.86 38.06
Water body 1737.79 8.54 3400.17 16.71 3177.70 15.61 3497.09 17.18 2786.31 13.69 2557.45 12.57
Barren land 2670.45 13.12 2900.27 14.25 3068.80 15.08 2101.90 10.33 2812.27 13.82 3197.52 14.71
Built-up area 1371.64 6.74 1500.05 7.37 1764.00 8.67 2102.14 10.33 2470.57 12.14 3044.75 14.96
20,353.83 100.00 20,353.83 100.00 20,353.83 100.00 20,353.83 100.00 20,353.83 100.00 20,353.83 100.00

4.2. Changing land use land cover from 1973 to 2021
LULC classifications of all the study years (1973, 1988, 1997,
2005, 2011, and 2021) were carried out using the supervised clas-
sification technique. The base maps were classified into five LULC
categories, viz. vegetation, cultivated land, water body, barren
land, and built-up area (Fig. 7). The result reveals that the areas
occupied by these respective classes during 1973 as 30.11%,
41.49%, 8.54%, 12.12%, and 6.74%. Similarly, in 1988 the areas occu-
pied by the respective classes were 25.19%, 36.48%, 16.71%, 14.25%,
and 7.37%, and in 1997 these were 24.27%, 36.37%, 15.61%, 14.25%,
15.08%, and 8.67% respectively. In 2005 these areas became 27.07%,
35.09%, 17.18%, 10.33%, and 10.33%, respectively. The map of 2011
displays the areal coverage by different LULC categories as 22.74%,
37.61%, 13.69%, 13.82%, and 12.14%, respectively; whereas for
2021, it was 18.71%, 38.06%, 12.57%, 14.71%, and 14.96% respec-
tively. The category-wise areal coverage and the rate of coverage
during all the studied periods have been displayed in Table 1.
The chronological LULC maps of the Brahmaputra river buffer
zone showed significant variations from the base period to the
respective selected periods. Both human and natural factors exag-
gerated these changes. From 1973 to 1988, the areas under vegeta-
tion and cultivated land had decreased by 16.32% and 12.08%,
respectively. In contrast, water bodies, barren land, and the built-
up area significantly increased by 95.66%, 8.61%, and 9.36%, respec-
12
tively. Similarly, from 1988 to 1997, the areas under vegetation,
cultivated land, and water bodies decreased by 3.65%, 0.31%, and
6.54%, respectively, while barren land and built-up area were
expanded by 5.81% and 17.60%, respectively (Table 2).
On the other hand, in the period1997 to 2005, the areas under
vegetation, water body, and built-up increased by 11.53%,
10.05%, and 19.17%, respectively, with the reduction of cultivated
land (3.52%), and barren surface (31.51%). The assessment of the
next six years period (2005 to 2011) revealed that the areas under
vegetation and water body decreased by 16% and 20.32%, respec-
tively, while cultivated land, bare surface, and built-up area
increased by 7.19%, 33.80%, and 17.53% respectively from the pre-
vious period. Similarly, between 2011 and 2021, the areas under
vegetation and water body decreased by 17.75% and 8.21%, respec-
tively, while cultivated land, bare surface, and built-up area
increased by 1.19%, 13.70%, and 23.24%, respectively.
4.2.1. The trend in the conversion of LULC categories
To signify the alteration of LULC of the study area, five change
maps have been obtained by overlaying the maps of (i) 1973 and
1988, (ii) 1988 and 1997, (iii) 1997 and 2005, (iv) 2005 and
2011, and (v) 2011 and 2021. The change maps have been dis-
played as ‘From-To’ maps. Every change map gives information
about the changed areas using different colors (Fig. 8).
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Table 2
Relative changed area under the different classified classes of the LULC maps.

LULC class 1973–1988 1988–1997 1997–2005 2005–2011 2011–2021

Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed Changed
Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%)
Vegetation
1000.32
16.32
187.2
3.65 569.89 11.53
881.84
16.00
821.58
17.75
Cultivated land
1020.29
12.08
22.81
0.31
260.52
3.52 513.82 7.19 91.01 1.19
Water body 1662.38 95.66
222.47
6.54 319.39 10.05
710.78
20.32
228.86
8.21
Barren land 229.82 8.61 168.53 5.81
966.9
31.51 710.37 33.80 385.25 13.70
Built-up area 128.41 9.36 263.95 17.60 338.14 19.17 368.43 17.53 574.18 23.24

Fig. 8. Conversion of LULC class during the periods of (a) 1973 to 1988 (b) 1988 to 1997 (c) 1997 to 2005 (d) 2005 to 2011 and (e) 2011 to 2021.

(i) The ‘From-To’ map developed for the periods 1973–1988
indicates significant conversion (Table 3). It has been noticed
that vegetation was largely converted into cultivated land
(614.62 km2), built-up area (490.08 km2), water body
(281.06 km2), and barren land (236.87 km2). The cultivated
land was significantly replaced by barren land
(733.97 km2), built-up area (402.60 km2), and water bodies
(192.98 km2). Similarly, in the case of the water body, about
102.81 km2 areas were transformed into cultivated land, and
789 km2 and 153.33 km2 areas became barren land and
built-up area, respectively. However, most of the barren
lands were converted into water bodies (876.99 km2) and
cultivated land (399.77 km2), while in the case of the
built-up area, about 30.85 km2 and 68.75 km2 areas were
replaced by water body and barren land.
(ii) In the 1988–-1997 ‘From-To’ map similar kind of alteration
prevailed (Fig. 8). Here, vegetation cover was replaced by cul-
tivated land (480.15 km2), built-up area (312.17 km2), and
water body (279.59 km2). On the other hand, cultivated land
was mostly replaced by built-up area (331.72 km2) and
water bodies (286 km2). Similarly, the area under the water
body was mostly converted into cultivated land
(133.45 km2) and Built-up area (130.72 km2). However,
most of the barren lands were converted into water bodies
(17.69 km2). Built-up areas were mainly altered into water
bodies (20.40 km2) and barren land (9.21 km2).
(iii) The 1997–2005 periods’ conversion map also reveals the sig-
nificant transformation of classified LULC categories. The
map shows the conversion of 681.01 km2 of vegetation cover
to cultivated land, 437.73 km2 to the built-up area, and
279.59 km2 to water bodies. Whereas in the case of culti-
vated land, 512.15 km2 became a built-up area, and
395.33 km2 areas were modified into water bodies. In this
period, water bodies were largely converted into barren land
(897.80 km2) and cultivated land (392.86 km2). In the case of
barren land, 1163.65 km2 and 537.89 km2 areas were

13
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Table 3
Conversion area of the LULC class.

Changed LULC Class 1973–1988 1988–1997 1997–2005 2005–2011 2011–2021

Vegetation - Cultivated land 614.62 480.15 681.01 800.69 498.75
Vegetation - Water body 281.06 279.59 217.17 395.53 258.55
Vegetation - Barren land 236.87 21.90 99.92 358.91 224.23
Vegetation - Built-up area 490.08 312.17 437.73 945.17 498.49
Cultivated land - Vegetation 20.41 10.79 18.55 11.11 10.89
Cultivated land - Water body 192.98 286.00 395.33 365.92 249.97
Cultivated land - Barren land 733.97 277.14 121.50 232.99 48.70
Cultivated land - Built-up area 402.60 331.72 512.15 857.78 856.44
Water body - Vegetation 67.93 120.70 282.79 409.16 116.52
Water body - Cultivated land 102.81 133.45 392.86 672.80 132.63
Water body - Barren land 789.00 50.75 897.80 1164.19 1167.59
Water body - Built-up area 153.33 130.72 303.45 294.97 255.55
Barren land - Vegetation 139.77 8.85 537.89 415.85 418.43
Barren land - Cultivated land 399.77 17.19 402.64 104.62 40.76
Barren land - Water body 876.99 49.24 1163.65 633.83 677.17
Barren land - Built-up area 81.47 54.62 184.29 110.81 150.95
Built-up area - Water body 30.85 20.40 43.35 81.40 45.96
Built-up area - Barren land 68.75 9.21 19.47 13.29 6.16

replaced by water bodies and vegetation, respectively. The
area under built-up area was replaced by water bodies
(43.35 km2) and barren land (19.47 km2).
(iv) (iv)The conversion map of 2005–2011 recognized the maxi-
mum conversion of vegetation cover into the built-up area
(945.17 km2) and cultivated land (800.69 km2) (Table 3).
During this period, the area under cultivated land was trans-
formed into a built-up area (857.78 km2) and water body
(365.92 km2) largely. In the case of water bodies, 1164.19,
672.80, and 294.97 km2 areas were replaced by barren land,
cultivated land, and built-up area, respectively. Similarly,
633.83 and 110.81 km2 area under barren land was trans-
formed into a water body and built-up area, respectively.
The map also displays that 81.40 km2 and 13.29 km2 of
built-up areas became water bodies and barren land,
respectively.
(v) The map developed for 2011–2021 indicates significant con-
version. It has been noticed that vegetation was largely con-
verted into cultivated land (498.75 km2) and built-up area
(498.49 km2). Cultivated land was significantly replaced by
built-up areas (856.44 km2) and water bodies
(192.98 km2). Similarly, in the case of the water body, about
1167.59 km2 areas were transformed into barren land, and
255.55 km2 and 132.63 km2 of areas became built-up and
cultivated land, respectively, during this study period. How-
ever, most of the barren lands converted into water bodies
(677.17 km2), vegetation cover (418.43 km2), and built-up
area (150.95 km2); while in the case of the built-up area
about 45.96 km2 and 6.16 km2 areas were replaced by water
body and barren land respectively.
4.2.2. Predicted LULC 2031 and 2041
To create LULC prediction maps adopting the sophisticated Cel-
lular Automata-based Markov model, the transition probability
matrix was generated using the LULC maps from 2011 to 2021
(Fig. 7). This research showed that the area covered by vegetation
will remain at 17.97% and 17.75% by the ends of 2031 and 2041,
respectively, if the current spatio-temporal LULC trends hold.
According to the spatio-temporal LULC dynamics predictions, by
the years 2031 and 2041, the area covered by agriculture will
increase by 36.83% and 35.13%, while the area covered by built-
up areas will increase by 17.37% and 19.21% (Table 4). Generally,
it was predicted that a small area under water bodies would
decrease, whereas barren surfaces would increase in 2031 and
2041. The overall change in LULC throughout the 20 years of esti-
mation indicated that cultivated land would predominate, occupy-
ing the vegetation cover, water bodies, and arid terrain.
4.3. Validation
4.3.1. Standard error graph and R2 evaluation
The standard error graph and R2 were estimated for the accu-
racy assessment of the bankline change calculation using transects.
The outcome demonstrates that, in both the right and left bankline
change calculations, the accuracy is very high, and the uncertainty
is very less in the case of the WLR approach compared to the LRR
method (Fig. 9). The result indicates that the WLR method is more
accurate than the LRR method. The R2 value in the computations
for the right and left bank changes is 1, indicating that the outcome
is satisfactory (Fig. 10).
4.3.2. Validation of the forecasted bankline and evaluation
Fig. 11 displays the BCE determined for the predicted and initial
banklines. Red color transects indicate a BCE rate greater than
10 m, light green transects indicate a BCE rate less than or equal
to 10 m, and deep green color transects indicate a BCE rate less
than 1 m. Generally, to evaluate the beta forecasting method’s pre-

Table 4
Area different classified classes of the Predicted LULC maps.

LULC class 2021 2031 2041

Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%) Area (km2) Area (%)
Forest 3732.85 18.34 3658.31 17.97 3613.03 17.75
Cultivated land 7596.44 37.32 7497.29 36.83 7150.59 35.13
Water body 2604.94 12.80 2574.41 12.65 2549.40 12.53
Barren land 3001.19 14.75 3088.17 15.17 3131.41 15.38
Built-up area 3418.41 16.79 3535.65 17.37 3909.40 19.21
20,353.83 100.00 20,353.83 100.00 20,353.83 100.00

14
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Fig. 9. Standard error for LRR and WLR.
cision, the BCE rate was determined using a 10 m default uncer-
tainty buffer (Himmelstoss et al., 2018).
The BCE rate was calculated for 8063 and 8235 transect loca-
tions in the left and right banklines, respectively. In 5450 transect
locations of the left bank, the BCE value was recorded between 0
and 1.0 m., and in 2014 locations, a change between 1.0 and
10.0 m was recorded. Similarly, in 3453 transect locations of the
right bank, the BCE value was recorded between 0 and 1.0 m; in
4451 locations, a change between 1.0 m and 10.0 m was recorded.
It proves that the bankline positions of the actual bankline 2021
and the predicted bankline 2021 remained the same in 92.57%
cases (7464 transects) of the left bank and 94.94% (7904 transects)
cases of the right bank. However, the difference in bankline posi-
tions between the two banklines was greater than 10 m in 7.42%
of cases (599 transects) of the left bank and 5.06% of cases (421
transects) of the right bank (Table 5). The projection appears to
be significantly more deflective than the actual position in some
areas. However, in more than 90% of cases, the bank line’s position
15
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
and shape generally remain the same as the actual bankline. More-
over, a field study was done to verify the erosion-prone areas
shown in the prediction map (Fig. 12).
4.3.3. Validation and evaluation of classified and predicted LULC
The classified images displayed an overall accuracy of 86%, 97%,
88%, 85%, 86%, 98%, and 93% in the years 1973, 1988, 1997, 2005,
2011, and 2021 with a kappa coefficient of 85%, 96%, 87%, 84%,
85%, 97%, and 92% respectively (Tables 6, 7). Although there
remained confusion between the pixels of different classes in all
the classified maps, the accuracy above 85% is reliable for further
analysis (Anderson et al., 1976). The classification accuracy result
shows that the kappa statistics for 2021 were 97%. The degree of
agreement suggests that the LULC maps for classification and fore-
cast were suitable. Moreover, chi-square (x2 ) result values for clas-
sified classes denoted the accuracy and acceptability of the CA-
Markov model for predicting the LULC map.
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Fig. 10. R-square statistics for shoreline change rate.
5. Discussion
Over time, the Brahmaputra River’s LULC buffer regions under-
went constant alteration due to erosion and deposition (Goswami,
1985; Sarma and Phukan, 2004; Lahiri and Sinha, 2012). As a result,
the modification of LULC in the River Brahmaputra’s floodplain is
unmistakably a noteworthy reality. The shifting and broadening
of the channel are strongly correlated with river bank erosion
and accretion. This study demonstrates that the river Brahmaputra
underwent varying degrees of erosion and deposition/accretion
from 1973 to 2021. Different periods were used for the erosion
and accretion processes on the right and left banks, respectively.
Throughout the study period, zones A and B, situated in the lower
and middle courses of the river, respectively, had a high intensity
of erosion and accretion. Significant erosion and accretion, along
with channel dynamicity, occurred between 1973 and 1988 due
to the Brahmaputra River’s intense and regular flooding. During
this time, high and moderate erosion and accretion were affected
in all the river zones.
The areas located immediately downstream of the confluence,
especially the Subansiri-Brahmaputra River confluence, Jia Bareli
-Brahmaputra River confluence, Aie-Brahmaputra River conflu-
ence, and Beki-Brahmaputra River confluence experienced a high
rate of erosion and accretion as well as lateral migration signifi-
cantly. A significant bank shifting was also observed in the Barpeta,
Goalpara, and Dhubri districts of Assam, India. Channel widening
occurs in these zones as a result of ongoing and overturning ero-
sion. Although there was less erosion from 1988 to 1997 compared
to the previous period, it was nevertheless noticeable in some
places of Bhuragaon, Moirabari, Mukalmua, Nagarbera, Goalpara,
and Dhubri, among others. On the other hand, due to an increase
in the frequency of river flooding from 1997 to 2005 and 2005 to
2011, the severity of high erosion and accretion increased once
more in several locations within the research region. However,
the erosion and accretion process slowed down significantly from
2011 onward, owing to low-magnitude floods in the Brahmaputra
region. There are some similarities between the land use in the
study area and the rate of erosion and accretion. After 1988, the
16
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
rate of change for some classes steadily reduced. From 1973 to
1988, the rate of change for some classes was high due to a higher
rate of erosion and accretion. On the other side, low-affected zones
showed less LULC modification. In the nearby village region of the
Brahmaputra River, the change of the LULC was a noteworthy and
intriguing reality. According to this investigation, vegetation, culti-
vated land, and water bodies decreased over time (1973–2021),
which changed how the channel behaved. Built-up areas and culti-
vated land were continuously eroded and transformed into depos-
ited land. This deposited land is once more utilized for settlement
and farming. However, specific locations continue to fall under this
category since they have a significant amount of sand deposition
that cannot be used for other reasons. Maximum channel bars
are visible during the dry season and are submerged in water dur-
ing the rainy season. Some of the mid-channel bars were occupied
by the built-up area as these became stable and not inundated by
the low-frequency flood. The World’s largest river island, i.e.,
Majuli Island, is also located within this study area and became a
habitat island for human beings long ago. But erosion hazards have
created a threat to the existence of this river island. A significant
portion of the Brahmaputra floodplain was covered with vegeta-
tion. But present study depicts that the area under vegetation
cover decreased within the floodplain. It may be due to two causes
mainly, i.e., erosion of the vegetation covered by the river and
clearing of the vegetation covered by the people for settlement
and cultivation purposes, especially by those who lost their land
due to bank erosion.
Changes in LULC brought on by river bank erosion and sedimen-
tation are particularly important from a socio-economic perspec-
tive (Debnath et al., 2017; Hasanuzzaman et al., 2022). Locals are
forced to relocate to another location to change their mode of sub-
sistence. On the other hand, the re’ion’s biological system suffered
due to the loss of wetlands in the floodplain area. Kaziranga
National Park (famous for the one-horned rhinoceros), the Dibru
Saikhowa Biosphere Reserve, and the BurhaChapori Wildlife Sanc-
tuary, all of which are close to the Brahmaputra River, have all suf-
fered dramatically from bank erosion (Sarma and Acharjee, 2012;
Basumatary et al., 2019, Basumatary et al., 2021). The expected
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Fig. 11. BCE for the forecasting validation.

17
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Table 5
BCE for the validation of the predicted banklines.
Sl. No Bank line change envelope (range) No. of transects
(Frequency)
Left Bank
1 0–1.0 5450
2 1.0–10.0 2014
3 10.0–706.71 599
bankline and LULC results indicate that future bank erosion will
seriously threaten vegetation cover, built-up areas, and cultivated
land. However, it is currently challenging to forecast the rate of
channel migration and LULC change due to changing climate, pop-
ulation increase, and uncertain rate of tectonic movement. How-
ever, it is true that channel migration and land utilization will
aid in the development of the village and urban region along the
Brahmaputra River. These concepts will be helpful in the future
for restoring and managing the socio-economic situation of the
riparian peoples as well as improving it. Therefore, the present
study’s results might be used to address threats and deterioration
of the ecosystems in the river adjacent village region and provide a
geographical strategy to observe the channel migration and LULC
change trends for a future perspective. Additionally, the use of
CA-Markov and DSAS models makes it meaningfully possible to
anticipate the position of the river bankline and the LULC pattern.
Both natural and manmade processes are influencing the shift-
ing of the Brahmaputra River. The driver may shift for several rea-
sons, including its braided character, minor, and big floods, water
discharge into the channel, bed load, bank material, terrain, tec-
tonic activity, river confluence, thalweg shift, river flow direction,
and human involvement (Basumatary et al., 2019; Basumatary
et al., 2021). The flow pattern of the Brahmaputra River is altered
by a mid-channel bar that is progressively growing, which affects
the rates of channel migration, erosion, and deposition on both
banks. The study area is typically located in a region with extreme
rainfall. Both rainwater and glacier melt water feed the Brahmapu-
tra River. The large ice melt water and high rains contribute to the
significant discharge of water and debris into the river, especially
during the monsoon season. Excessive sedimentation has raised
the river’s channel bed, which has decreased the channel’s capacity
to hold water. The river pressures the bank during the rainy season
to occupy the extra water discharge. As a result, the river bank
erodes, and the channel widens.
Additionally, bed level rise significantly influences the large and
frequent floods in the Brahmaputra River practically every year.
Each year flood occurs in this river in three to four waves during
the rainy season. Typically in June, the first flood reaches its height,
and this time, the discharge rises incredibly quickly. The next flood
occurs in late July or early August and lasts roughly a month. In
September, the third or fourth wave arrives (Coleman, 1969;
Basumatary et al., 2021). The Brahmaputra floodplain experienced
severe flooding in 1954, 1962, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984,
1987, 1988, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1998, 2004, 2016, 2017, and
2022. The 1998 flood most severely damaged the Brahmaputra val-
ley out of all floods (Bhattachaiyya and Bora, 1997; Kotoky et al.,
2005; Borah et al., 2018).
Massive bank erosion typically happens during the flood’s
receding stage when too much sediment is deposited as sand bars
in the channel, changing the flow direction and causing the sand
bars to move there. It can also happen when the silty materials
of the banks fail to flow, which causes flowage (Sarma and
Acharjee 2012). The Brahmaputra River’s banks are typically con-
structed of silty or sandy loam in the top layer and silty clayey
loam or clayey loam in the deeper layers. These substances are
easily eroded. As a result, bank erosion is widespread in this river
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
No. of transects (%) Remarks
Right Bank Left Bank Right Bank
3453 67.59 41.48 Negligible variation
4451 24.98 53.47 Variation within 10 m uncertainty band buffer
421 7.43 5.06 Higher varaition
(Kotoky et al., 2005). The bank embraces the thalweg for most of
the Brahmaputra River’s course, which overstresses the bank’s
material and causes bank slumping during floods (Coleman,
1969). The confluence zones of tributaries play an important role
in bank erosion and lateral migration (Debnath et al., 2019). The
Brahmaputra River joins several significant tributaries along its
course, and these confluence zones serve as a focal point for bank
erosion. The Brahmaputra River is located in one of the most tec-
tonically active parts of the World. According to historical sources,
the channel of the Brahmaputra River has changed over the cen-
turies due to geological occurrences like earthquakes (Lahiri and
Sinha, 2012; Bracciali et al., 2015). Consequently, tectonic activity
is one of the most significant sources of this river’s dynamicity
among its many other causes. According to our calculations, this
river is still eroding because total erosion is more than total
deposition.
The most significant causes of this dynamic change, among the
many major reasons, are human action, particularly the building of
the embankment along the rivers (Meraj et al., 2018). The output of
the EPR model was determined by considering the effects of river
bank erosion and deposition, channel migration, and embankment
structure at various river zones. According to the current study’s
findings, many parts of the Brahmaputra valley, where most resi-
dents are involved in agriculture, are at risk of flooding and bank
erosion. As a result, embankments were built along the Brahmapu-
tra River to manage the flood. Embankments along the river typi-
cally impact river channel morphology and flow dynamics
(Chakraborty and Saha, 2022; Hasanuzzaman et al., 2022). In con-
trast to preserving the river bank from erosion, manmade embank-
ments put extra strain on it (Yao et al., 2011; Meraj et al., 2015).
This is a significant factor in the morphologic changes, including
the erosion of the river bank and the depositing on the floodplain.
Another important human intervention that has been made to
improve erosion and deposition in the Brahmaputra River is the
construction of bridges to connect two locations, improve trans-
portation options, and promote the socio-economic growth of
those local areas. Bridges are inevitably constructed across rivers.
But some of its negative effects completely disrupt the river’s nat-
ural properties and characteristics, such as river bed and width
change, bank shifting, and LULC changes (Kauser et al., 2015;
Islam et al., 2017; Uddin et al., 2022). It was noted that several
bridges were being built over the Brahmaputra River. As a result,
bank erosion has substantially risen downstream of the river. For
planners, environmentalists, and policymakers to comprehend
and create adequate channel design plans for the Brahmaputra Riv-
er’s sensitive zones, it is crucial to assess river bank erosion and
accretion, lateral migration of channel, and LULC change of the
floodplain.
6. Limitations and future scope of research
The data were only collected over a limited spatial–temporal
scale to evaluate the Brahmaputra River’s channel migration,
which may be considered one of the study’s weaknesses. A thor-
ough investigation is therefore still needed before recommending
18
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Fig. 12. Field images (arrow) showing the bank line change direction.

the study’s findings for policy and planning. Despite these draw- Brahmaputra River will differ substantially from studies conducted
backs, other studies can use the technique and analysis performed on other rivers, but the methodologies and tactics used in
in this one as a reference. The results of the current study on the these studies can be extensively applied. To determine how the
19
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al. Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557

Table 6
Accuracy assessment of the classified LULC maps.

LULC classes 1973 1988 1997 2005 2011 2021

Producers Users Producers Users Producers Users Producers Users Producers Users Producers Users
accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy accuracy
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Forest 94 95.92 94 97 100 97.89 71.74 74.16 99 100
98.15 99
Cultivated 70.59 85.71 78 87 76.15 90.22 83.02 74.58 94 82
land 90.12 88.25
Water body 82.5 83.10 94 81 97.62 82 96.88 100 100 83
93.23 89.56
Barren land 86.21 100 100 94 92.31 100 95 100 96 100
91.36 86.63
Built-up area 93.75 68.18 97 86 91.89 72.34 87.89 74.36 97 91
94.69 87.78
Overall 86% 97% 88% 85% 98% 93%
Accuracy
Kappa 85% 96% 87% 84% 97% 92%
Accuracy

Table 7 The predicted result also shows that the average rate of migration
Validation of change prediction based on actual (2021) and predicted (2021) LULC
will be high in the left bank (
24.93 m/y will be in 2021–2031 and
maps using Chi-Square test.

19.37 m/y will be in 2031–2041) compared to the right bank
LULC classes 2021 Area (km2) 2021 Area (km2) (P-A)2/A (
1.12 m/y will be in 2021–2031 and
9.58 m/y will be in
Forest 18.71 18.34 0.01 2031–2041). Therefore, the left bank (Average rate of erosion
Cultivated land 38.06 37.32 0.01 was
111.22 m/y and accretion 80.28 m/y) was predicted to a
Water body 12.57 12.80 0.00
most vulnerable to bank erosion compared to the right bank (Aver-
Barren land 15.71 14.75 0.06
Built-up area 14.96 16.79 0.20
age rate of erosion was
72.23 m/y and accretion 79.50 m/y).
Total 100.00 100.00 0.28 According to the Spatio-temporal LULC dynamics predictions, by
P ðP
AÞ2 the years 2031 and 2041, the area covered by agriculture would
X2 ¼ ¼ 0:28; df = 5 and X20.05 (5) = 0.28. Data shown in the 2nd and 3rd
A
columns as in P and A represent the percentage share of individual LULC classes used
increase by 36.83% and 35.13%, while the area covered by built-
for model validation. up areas will increase by 17.37% and 19.21% in the nearby flood
plain of the Brahmaputra River. These significant changes in LULC
especially building settlements and infrastructure near the river
bank, enhance the level of vulnerability in the floodplain. The goal
Brahmaputra River channel migrates in various physiographic of the current research was to use an automated computational
zones, such as mountains and plains, we advise extensive study planform to estimate past and prospective bankline movement
of the entire river channel. The Brahmaputra River provides a vari- due to the LULC change. Such automated systems require a great
ety of ecosystem services (Meraj, 2020; Meraj et al., 2022). Future deal of field validation and ongoing observation. As a result, the
studies will need to explore how people perceive this channel automated DSAS and CA-Markov-based methodology, which can
migration and how it affects their way of life and the environment. successfully measure and predict erosion and accretion and LULC
The scientific and technological advancements that, in the not-too- change at a suitable scale, were used in the present research effort
distant future, may establish connections between climate change as a substitute method. The degree of accuracy was verified using
and channel movement in the Brahmaputra floodplain. the predicted and actual banklines and the actual and predicted
LULC maps. Therefore, the current research will be highly benefi-
cial in developing future measures to reduce dangers in the
7. Conclusions
Brahmaputra valley. The study also recommended reducing human
interference with the river’s natural flow and increasing riparian
The current research has offered a detailed assessment of the
vegetation to improve the ecological and biological variety of the
geographical and temporal changes in the Brahmaputra River’s
floodplain region. One of the limitations of the study is that data
course and the adjustment of LULC types with channel dynamicity.
for assessing the Brahmaputra River’s channel migration were only
The multi-temporal data analyses show that the erosion-accretion
acquired on a small spatiotemporal range. In light of this, further
processes continuously changed the Brahmaputra River’s bankli-
research is required before the study’s results may be recom-
nes, which considerably altered the LULC of the Brahmaputra val-
mended for policy and planning purposes. Despite its flaws, this
ley. In contrast to more recent times, the erosion and accretion rate
study’s methodology and analysis can serve as a foundation for
of the river was higher in earlier times. The investigation shows
future research. Although the current study on the Brahmaputra
that the average rate of migration in the entire left and right bank
River will yield very different results from those of other rivers,
stretch was
55.44 m/y and
56.79 m/y from 1973 to 1988,
the strategies and methods employed in these studies have huge
109.38 m/y and 74.38 m/y from 1988 to 1997,
91.98 m/y and
replicability.
-
60.38 m/y from 1997 to 2005,
14.91 m/y and 25.61 m/y from
2005 to 2011, and
17.25 m/y and
48.49 m/y from 2011 to
2021 respectively. The higher erosion rate on the left bank relative CRediT authorship contribution statement
to the right bank suggests that the river Brahmaputra is migrating
to the left (Southward). Zone A (Lower course) and B (Middle Jatan Debnath: Conceptualization, Validation, Formal analysis,
course) are more adversely affected than zone C (Upper course). Investigation, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization,
20
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Project administration. Dhrubajyoti Sahariah: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources,
Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Supervision,
Project administration. Durlov Lahon: Validation, Formal analysis,
Investigation, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization,
Project administration. Nityaranjan Nath: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data cura-
tion, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualiza-
tion. Kesar Chand: Data curation, Writing – original draft. Gowhar
Meraj: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Writing –
review & editing, Validation, Visualization. Pankaj Kumar: Con-
ceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Resources, Supervi-
sion. Suraj Kumar: Validation, Investigation, Visualization. Shruti
Kanga: Formal analysis, Project administration. Majid Farooq:
Methodology, Investigation, Visualization.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The first author is grateful to the University Grants Commission,
Government of India, for giving the fellowship through the Dr. D.S.
Kothari Post-Doctoral Fellowship (UGC-DSKPDF) program
(Enrollment No. F.4-2/2006(BSR)/ES/20-21/0008). The correspond-
ing author G.M. is thankful to the Department of Science and
Technology, Government of India (DST-GoI), for providing the
fellowship under the Scheme for Young Scientists and Technology
(SYST-SEED) (Grant No. SP/YO/2019/1362(G) & (C)).
References
Alam, N., Saha, S., Gupta, S., Chakraborty, S., 2021. Prediction modelling of riverine
landscape dynamics in the context of sustainable management of floodplain: a
Geospatial approach. Ann. GIS 27 (3), 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19475683.2020.1870558.
Alberico, I., Amato, V., Aucelli, P.P.C., D’Argenio, B., Paola, G.D., Pappone, G., 2012.
Historical shoreline change of the Sele Plain (Southern Italy): The 1870–2009
time window. J. Coast. Res. 28, 1638–1647.
Altaf, F., Meraj, G., Romshoo, S.A., 2013. Morphometric analysis to infer hydrological
behaviour of Lidder watershed, Western Himalaya, India. Geogr. J. 2013. https://
doi.org/10.1155/2013/178021.
Anderson, J.M., Hardy, E.E., Roach, J.T., Witmert, R.E., 1976. A land use classification
system for use with remote sensing data. U.S. Geological Survey Professional
Paper, Washington DC, pp. 1–41.
Barik, G., Guru, B., 2021. Francis Sangma. Shoreline Changes Analysis and Forecast
Using Digital Shoreline Assessment System 5.0: Evidences from Parts of East
Coast of India. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 49 (11), 2815–2830. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12524-021-01424-4.
Basumatary, H., Sah, R.K., Das, A.K., 2019. Analyzing area dynamics on a protected
floodplain using long-term sequential data: the case of Kaziranga national park.
J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 47 (9), 1557–1566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-
019-01000-x.
Basumatary, H., Sah, R.K., Das, A.K., 2021. Bankline dynamics and their effects on
protected areas along the Brahmaputra river. Catena 197,. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2020.104947 104947.
Bhakal, L., Dubey, B., Sarma, A.K., 2005. Estimation of bank erosion in the river
Brahmaputra near Agyathuri by Using Geographic Information System. J. Ind.
Soc. Remote Sens. 33 (1), 81–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02989994.
Bhattachaiyya, N.N., Bora, A.K., 1997. Floods of the Brahmaputra River in India.
Water Int. 22 (4), 222–229.
Billah, M.M., 2018. Mapping and monitoring Erosion-Accretion in an alluvial river
using satellite imagery – The river bank changes of the Padma river in
Bangladesh. Geographicae. 37 (3). https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2018-0027.
ISSN 0137-477X, eISSN 2081-6383.
Borah, S.B., Sivasankar, T., Ramya, M.N.S., Raju, P.L.N., 2018. Flood inundation
mapping and monitoring in Kaziranga National Park, Assam using Sentinel-1
SAR data. Environ. Monit. Assess. 190 (9), 1–11.
Bracciali, L., Najman, Y., Parrish, R.R., Akhter, S.H., Millar, I., 2015. The Brahmaputra
tale of tectonics and erosion: Early Miocene river capture in the Eastern
Himalaya. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 415, 25–37.
21
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
Butt, M.J., Waqas, A., Iqbal, M.F., Muhammad, G., Lodhi, M.A.K., 2012. Assessment of
urban sprawl of Islamabad metropolitan area using multi-sensor and multi-
temporal satellite data. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 37, 101–114.
Chakraborty, S., Datta, K., 2013. Causes and consequences of channel changes – a
spatio-temporal analysis using remote sensing and GIS— Jaldhaka-Diana River
System (Lower Course), Jalpaiguri (Duars), West Bengal, India. J. Geogra. Nat.
Disasters. 3 (1), 1–13.
Chakraborty, K., Saha, S., 2022. Assessment of bank erosion and its impact on land
use and land cover dynamics of Mahananda River basin (Upper) in the Sub-
Himalayan North Bengal. India. SN Appl. Sci. 4, 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s42452-021-04904-x.
Clark, L.A., Wynn, T.M., 2007. Methods for determining streambank critical shear
stress and soil erodibility: Implications for erosion rate predictions.
Transactions of the ASABE. 50 (1), 95-106. doi:10.13031/2013.22415.
Coleman, J.M., 1969. Brahmaputra river: Channel processes and sedimentation.
Sedim. Geol. 3, 129–239.
Congalton, R.G., 1991. A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of
remotely sensed data. Remote Sens. Environ. 37, 35–46.
Das, N., Bhowmik, M., 2013. Qualitative Assessment of River Bank Erosion Risk in
Jirania Rural Development Block, Tripura. Ind. J. App. Res. 3 (6), 274–276.
Das, K.T., Halder, H.K., Gupta, I.D., 2014. River bank erosion induced human
displacement and its consequences. Living Rev.Landsc. Res. 8(3). doi:10.12942/
lrlr-2014-3.
Das, P.J., 2009. Water and climate induced vulnerability in northeast India: concerns
for environmental security and sustainability. WATCH Research Report 1.
AARANYAK, Guwahati.
Deb, M., Das, D., Uddin, M., 2012. Evaluation of Meandering Characteristics Using RS
and GIS of Manu River. J. Water Reso. Protec. 4, 163–171.
Deb, M., Ferreira, C., 2015. Planform channel dynamics and bank migration
hazard assessment of a highly sinuous river in the north-eastern zone of
Bangladesh. Environ. Earth Sci. 73, 6613–6623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-
014-3884-3.
Debnath, J., Meraj, G., Das, Pan.N., Chand, K., Debbarma, S., Sahariah, D., et al., 2022.
Integrated remote sensing and field-based approach to assess the temporal
evolution and future projection of meanders: A case study on River Manu in
North-Eastern India. PLoS ONE. 17 (7), e0271190. doi:10.1371/journal.
pone.0271190.
Debnath, J., Das(Pan), N., Ahmed, I., Bhowmik M., 2017. Channel migration and its
impact on land use/land cover using RS and GIS: A study on Khowai River of
Tripura, North-East India. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 20, 197–210.
Debnath, J., Das (Pan), N., Sharma, R., Ahmed, I., 2019. Impact of confluence on
hydrological and morphological characters of the trunk stream: a study on the
Manu River of North-east India. Environ. Earth Sci. 78 (6), 190. doi:10.1007/
s12665-019-8190-7.
Dutta, D., Kumar, T., Jayaram, C., Akram, W., 2022. Shoreline Change Analysis of
Hooghly Estuary Using Multi-Temporal Landsat Data and Digital Shoreline
Analysis System. in: Y. Zhang, and Q. Cheng (Eds.), Geographic Information
System [Working Title]. IntechOpen. doi:10.5772/intechopen.103030.
Esteves, L.S., Williams, J.J., Nock, A., Lymbery, G., 2009. Quantifying shoreline
changes along the Sefton coast (UK) and the implications for research-informed
coastal management. J. Coast. Res. 56, 602–606.
Fitzsimmons, P.J., Getoor, R.K., 2003. Homogeneous random measures and strongly
supermedian kernels of a markov process. Electron. J. Probab. 8, 1–54. https://
doi.org/10.1214/EJP.v8-142.
Foddy, G.M., 2002. Status of land covers classification accuracy assessment. Remote
Sens. Environ. 80 (1), 185–201.
Ghosh, P., Mukhopadhyay, A., Chanda, A., Mondal, P., Akhand, A., Mukherjee, S.,
Nayak, S.K., Ghosh, S., Mitra, D., Ghosh, T., Hazra, S., 2017. Application of Cellular
automata and Markov-chain model in geospatial environmental modeling- A
review. Remote Sens. Appl.: Soc Environ. 5, 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rsase.2017.01.005.
Gogoi, C., Goswami, D.C., 2013. A study on bank erosion and bankline migration
pattern of the Subansiri River in Assam using remote sensing and GIS
technology. Int. J. Eng. Sci. 2 (9), 1–6.
Goswami, D.C., 1985. Brahmaputra River, Assam, India: Physiography, basin
denudation and channel aggradation. Water Resour. Res. 21, 959–978.
https://doi.org/10.1029/WR021i007p00959.
Goswami, D.C., 2002. Channel pattern, sediment transport and bed regime of the
Brahmaputra River, Assam. In: Tandon, S.K., Thakur, B. (Eds.), Recent Advances
InGeomorphology, Quaternary Geology and Environmental Geosciences: Indian
Case Studies. Manisha Publications, New Delhi, pp. 143–156.
Goswami, U., Sarma, J.N., Patgiri, A.D., 1999. River channel changes of the Subansiri
in Assam, India. Geomorphology 30, 227–244.
Hai-Hoa, N., McAlpine, C., Pullar, D., Johansen, K., Duke, N.C., 2013. The relationship
of spatial–temporal changes in fringe mangrove extent and adjacent land-use:
Case study of Kien Giang coast, Vietnam. Ocean Coast. Manage. 76, 12–22.
Hamad, R., Balzter, H., Kolo, K., 2018. Predicting land use/land cover changes using a
CA-Markov model under two different scenarios. Sustainability. 10 (10). https://
doi.org/10.3390/su10103421.
Hapke, C.J., Reid, D., Richmond, B., 2009. Rates and trends of coastal change in
California and the regional behavior of the beach and cliff system. J. Coast. Res.
25, 603–615.
Hasanuzzaman, M., Gayen, A., Mafizul Haque, S., Shit, P.K., 2022. Spatial modeling of
river bank shifting and associated LULC changes of the Kaljani River in
Himalayan foothills. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. 36, 563–582. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00477-021-02147-1.
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Hazarika, N., Das, A.K., Borah, S.B., 2015. Assessing land-use changes driven by river
dynamics in chronically flood affected Upper Brahmaputra plains, India, using
RS-GIS techniques. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 18, 107–118.
Hickin, E.J., Nanson, G.C., 1984. Lateral Migration Rates of River Bends. J. Hydraul.
Eng. 110, 1557–1567.
Himmelstoss, E.A., Henderson, R.E., Kratzmann, M.G., Farris, A.S., 2018. Digital
Shoreline Analysis System (DSAS) version 5.0 user guide (No. 2018–1179). US
Geological Survey.
IPCC, 2018. Summary for Policy makers. In: Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC
Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial
levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of
strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable
development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H.
O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P. R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C.
Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J. B. R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M. I. Gomis, E.
Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, T. Waterfield (eds.)]. World Meteorological
Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 32.
Iqbal, M.F., Khan, I.A., 2014. Spatio-temporal land use land cover change analysis
and erosion risk mapping of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Egypt. J.
Remote Sens. Space Sci. 17, 209–229.
Islam, R., Islam, M., Islam, M.N., 2017. Impacts of Bangabandhu Jamuna multi-
purpose bridge on the dynamics of bar morphology at the Jamuna River in
Bangladesh. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 3 (3), 903–925.
Jana, S., 2021. An automated approach in estimation and prediction of river bank
shifting for flood-prone middle-lower course of the Subarnarekha River, India.
Int. J. River Basin Manage. 19 (3), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15715124.2019.1695259.
Kalman, R.E., 1960. A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. J.
Basic Eng. 82, 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3662552.
Kauser, M.R.H., Alam, H.S., Islam, M.K., 2015. Bank shifting and land use change of
Jamuna River due to construction of multipurpose Bangabandhu Bridge: a
remote sensing and GIS approach. In: International Conference on Recent
Innovation in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Development. D–ET - Gazipur,
Bangladesh.
Kotoky, P., Bezbaruah, D., Baruah, J., Sarma, J.N., 2005. Nature of bank erosion along
the Brahmaputra River channel, Assam, India. Cur. Sci. 88 (4), 634–640.
Kumar, S., Radhakrishnan, N., Mathew, S., 2014. Land use change modelling using a
Markov model and remote sensing. Geomat. Nat. Haz. Risk 5 (2), 145–156.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2013.795502.
Kummu, M., Lub, X.X., Rasphonec, A., Sarkkulad, J., Koponen, J., 2008. River bank
Changes along the Mekong River: Remote Sensing Detection in the Vientiane-
Nong Khai Arquarterater. Int. 186 (1), 100–112.
Lahiri, S.K., Sinha, R., 2012. Tectonic controls on the morphodynamics of the
Brahmaputra river system in the upper Assam valley, India. Geomorphology
169–170, 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.04.012.
Mahanta, C., Saikia, L., 2015. The Brahmaputra and other rivers of the north-east. In:
Iyer, R (Ed.), Living Rivers, dying rivers. Oxford University Press, New Delhi,
p. 155pp.
Mahanta, R., Das, D., 2012. Common property resource degradation and migration:
a Study of Assam. J. Human Ecol. 38 (3), 223–230.
Meraj, G., 2020. Ecosystem service provisioning–underlying principles and
techniques. SGVU J. Clim. Chang. Water. 7, 56–64.
Meraj, G., Romshoo, S.A., Yousuf, A.R., Altaf, S., Altaf, F., 2015. Assessing the
influence of watershed characteristics on the flood vulnerability of Jhelum basin
in Kashmir Himalaya. Nat. Hazards 77 (1), 153–175.
Meraj, G., Romshoo, S.A., Ayoub, S., Altaf, S., 2018. Geoinformatics based approach
for estimating the sediment yield of the mountainous watersheds in Kashmir
Himalaya, India. Geocarto Int. 33 (10), 1114–1138.
Meraj, G., Singh, S.K., Kanga, S., Islam, M., 2022. Modeling on comparison of
ecosystem services concepts, tools, methods and their ecological-economic
implications: A review. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 8, 15–34. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s40808-021-01131-6.
Milani, G., Volpi, M., Tonolla, D., Doering, M., Robinson, C., Kneubühler, M.,
Schaepman, M., 2018. Robust Quantification of Riverine Land Cover Dynamics
by High-resolution Remote Sensing. Remote Sens. Environ. 217, 491–505.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.08.035.
Milliman, J.D., Meade, R.H., 1983. Worldwide delivery of river sediment to the
oceans. J. Geol. 91, 1–21.
Nanson, G.C., Hickin, E.J., 1986. A statistical analysis of bank erosion and channel
migration in Western Canada. Geol. Society American Bull. 97 (4), 497–504.
Nath, B., Wang, Z., Ge, Y., Singh, R.P., Niu, Z., 2020. Land use and land cover change
modeling and future potential landscape risk assessment using Markov-CA
model and analytical hierarchy process. ISPRS Int. J. Geo. Inf. 9 (2), 134.
doi:10.3390/ ijgi9020134.
Nithu, R., Gurugnanam, B., Sudhakar, V., Glitson Francis, P., 2019. Estuarine
shoreline change analysis along the Ennore river mouth, south east coast of
India, using Digital Shoreline Analysis System. Geod. Geodyn. 10 (3), 205–212.
Omar, N.Q., Ahamad, M.S.S., Wan Hussin, W.M.A., Samat, N., Binti Ahmad, S.Z., 2014.
Markov CA, Multi Regression, and Multiple Decision Making for Modeling
Historical Changes in Kirkuk City, Iraq. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 42 (1), 165–
178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-013-0311-2.
Posner, A.J., Duan, J.G., 2012. Simulating river meandering processes using
stochastic bank erosion coefficient. Geomorphology 163–164, 26–36.
Rahman, M.R., 2010. Impact of river bank erosion hazard in the Jamuna floodplain
areas in Bangladesh. J. Sci. Found. 8 (1 and 2), 55–65.
22
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
Rahman, M.S., Gain, A., 2020. Adaptation to river bank erosion induced
displacement in KoyraUpazila of Bangladesh. Prog. Disaster Sci. 5,. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2019.100055 100055.
Rahman, S.A., Islam, M.M., Salman, M.A., Rafiq, M.R., 2022. Evaluating bank erosion
and identifying possible anthropogenic causative factors of Kirtankhola River in
Barishal, Bangladesh: an integrated GIS and Remote Sensing approaches. Int. J.
Eng. Geosci. 7 (2), 179–190.
Rajakumari, S., Meenambikai, M., Divya, V., Sarunjith, K.J., Ramesh, R., 2021.
Morphological changes in alluvial and coastal plains ofKandaleru river, Andhra
Pradesh using RS and GIS. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 24, 1071–1081.
Raju, A., Dwarakish, G.S., Reddy, D.V., 2013. A comparative analysis of histogram
equalization based techniques for contrast enhancement and brightness
preserving. Int. J. Signal Process., Image Process. Pattern Recogn. 6 (5), 353–366.
Richards, J.A., Jia, X., 2006. Remote sensing digital image analysis: An introduction.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.
Rosenfield, G.H., Fitzpatrick-Lins, K., 1986. A Coefficient of Agreement as a Measure
of Thematic Classification Accuracy. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sensing 52,
223–227.
Sarma, J.N., 2004. An overview of the Brahmaputra River system. In: The
Brahmaputra Basin Water Resources. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London,
UK, pp. 72–87.
Sarma, J.N., Acharjee, S., 2012. A GIS based study on bank erosion by the river
Brahmaputra around Kaziranga National Park, Assam, India. Earth Syst. Dyn.
Discuss. 3, 1085–1106.
Sarma, J.N., Acharjee, S., 2018. A study on variation in channel width and braiding
intensity of the Brahmaputra river in Assam, India. Geosciences 8 (9), 343.
https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8090343.
Sarma, J.N., Phukan, M.K., 2004. Origin and some geomorphological changes of
Majuli Island of the Brahmaputra river in Assam, India. Geomorphology. 60 (1–
2), 1–19.
Sarma, J.N., 2005. Fluvial process and morphology of the Brahmaputra river in
Assam, India. Geomorphology 70, 226–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.geomorph.2005.02.007.
Schumm, S.A., Lichty, R.W., 1963. Channel widening and floodplain construction
along Cimarron River in Southwestern Kansas’. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. 352-D,
71–88.
Shalaby, A., Tateishi, R., 2007. Remote sensing and GIS for mapping and monitoring
land cover and land use changes in the North-western coastal zone of Egypt.
Appl. Geogr. 27 (1), 28–41.
Shu, A., Duan, G., Rubinato, M., Tian, L., Wang, M., Wang, S., 2019. An Experimental
Study on Mechanisms for Sediment Transformation Due to River bank Collapse.
Water 11, 529.
Simon, A., Curini, A., Darby, S.E., Langendoen, E.J., 2000. Bank and near-bank
processes in an incised channel. Geomorphology 35, 193–217.
Singh, S.K., Mustak, S., Srivastava, P.K., Szabó, S., Islam, T., 2015. Predicting Spatial
and Decadal LULC Changes Through Cellular Automata Markov Chain Models
Using Earth Observation Datasets and Geo-information. Environ. Process 2 (1),
61–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-015-0062-x.
Siyal, A.A., Solangi, G.S., Siyal, Z.U.A., Siyal, P., Babar, M.M., Ansari, K., 2022. Shoreline
change assessment of Indusdelta using GIS-DSAS and satellite data. Reg. Stud.
Mar. Sci. 53, 102405.
Tadese, S., Soromessa, T., Bekele, T., 2021b. Analysis of the Current and Future
Prediction of Land Use / Land Cover Change Using Remote Sensing and the CA-
Markov Model in Majang Forest Biosphere Reserves of Gambella, Southwestern
Ethiopia. 2021.
Tadese, S., Soromessa, T., Bekele, T., 2021a. Analysis of the Current and Future
Prediction. Sci. World J. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6685045.
Tha, T., Piman, T., Bhatpuria, D., Ruangrassamee, P., 2022. Assessment of River bank
Erosion Hotspots along the Mekong River in Cambodia Using Remote Sensing
and Hazard Exposure Mapping. Water. 14, 1981. doi:10.3390/w14131981.
Thakur, P.K., Laha, C., Aggarwal, S.P., 2012. River bank erosion hazard study of river
Ganga upstream of Farakka barrage using remote sensing and GIS. Nat. Hazards
61, 967–987.
Thieler, E.R., Himmelstoss, E.A., Zichichi, J.L., Ergul, A., 2009. The Digital Shoreline
Analysis System (DSAS) version 4.0-an ArcGIS extension for calculating
shoreline change (No. 2008–1278). US Geological Survey.
Tyagi, S., Rai, S.C., 2020. Monitoring shoreline changes along Andhra coast of India
using Remote Sensing And Geographic Information System. Indian J. Geo Mar.
Sci. 49 (02), 218–224.
Uddin, M.J., Haque, M.N., Fayshal, M.A., Dakua, D., 2022. (2022) Assessing the bridge
construction effect on river shifting characteristics through geospatial lens: A
case study on Dharla River, Bangladesh. Heliyon 8, e10334.
Verburg, P.H., Schot, P.P., Dijst, M.J., Veldkamp, A., 2004. Land use change modelling:
Current practice and research priorities. GeoJournal 61 (4), 309–324. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10708-004-4946-y.
Wang, S.W., Munkhnasan, L., Lee, W.K., 2021. Land use and land cover change
detection and prediction in Bhutan’s high altitude city of Thimphu, using
cellular automata and Markov chain. Environ. Challenges. 2,. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.envc.2020.100017 100017.
Weng, Q., 2002. Land use change analysis in the Zhujiang Delta of China using
satellite remote sensing, GIS and stochastic modelling. J. Environ. Manage. 64
(3), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.2001.0509.
WRD, 2008. North Eastern Integrated Flood and River Bank Erosion Management
Project: Feasibility Study (PPTA, Phase II). Unpublished report of Water
Resources Department, November 2008.
J. Debnath, D. Sahariah, D. Lahon et al.
Xu, H., 2006. Modified normalised difference water index (NDWI) to enhance open
water features in remotely sensed imagery. Int. J. Remote Sens. 27 (14), 3025–
3033.
Yang, X., Damen, M.C.J., Zuidam, R.A.V., 1999. Satellite Remote Sensing and GIS for
the Analysis of Channel Migration Changes in the Active Yellow River Delta,
China. Inter. J. App. Earth Observ. Geoinfo. 1 (2), 146–157.
23
Geoscience Frontiers 14 (2023) 101557
Yang, X., Zheng, X.Q., Chen, R., 2014. A land use change model: Integrating
landscape pattern indexes and Markov-CA. Ecol. Model. 283, 1–7. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.03.011.
Yao, Z., Ta, W., Jia, X., Xiao, J., 2011. Bank erosion and accretion along the Ningxia-
Inner Mongolia reaches of the Yellow River from 1958 to 2008. Geomorphology
127 (1–2), 99–106.