Spat. Inf. Res.
(2017) 25:351–359
DOI 10.1007/s41324-017-0102-x
LULC analysis of urban spaces using Markov chain predictive
model at Ranchi in India
Firoz Ahmad1 • Laxmi Goparaju1 • Abdul Qayum2
Received: 31 December 2016 / Revised: 12 April 2017 / Accepted: 17 April 2017 / Published online: 25 April 2017
Ó Korean Spatial Information Society 2017
Abstract Monitoring of land use and land cover (LULC)
change is one important drivers of global change, which
plays a decisive role on the management and sustainable
developmental planning for urban spaces. The study aims
to develop series of LULC maps of urban areas of Ranchi,
India and was studied during the years 1989 and 2015. It
predicts LULC changes using geospatial tools such as
remote sensing and GIS. Various satellite imagery datasets
such as Landsat TM, ETM? and Landsat 8 OLI of years
1989, 2002 and 2015 were used to analyze urban LULC,
which was later used to predict for 2015 and 2028 using
Markov transition matrix and was cross-validated with true
LULC of 2015. The urban area growth was found 11%
more than the predicted value. Slope map was also gen-
erated from digital elevation model and urban expansion in
2015 was 67% and with respect to roads it was 60% within
1 km road buffer in 2015 over 2002. Regression equation
was developed over decadal population of 1961–2011 to
estimate it for years 1989, 2002, 2015 and 2028. The
population has increased 102% in 2015 over 1989. How-
ever, Markov predicted 43% more urban expansion for
year 2028 over 2015. Coarse resolution temporal satellite
data can be effectively harnessed to assess LULC change
whereas prediction can be done with accuracy as high as
89.02% based on Markov transition matrix. An effective
coordination between governments agencies are solicited
& Abdul Qayum
qayum.iitk@gmail.com
1
Vindhyan Ecology and Natural History Foundation,
Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, India
2
Department of Environment and Forest, Government of
Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, India
to achieve sustainable development to be implemented
systematically.
Keywords Geographic information system  Land use land
cover change  Markov transition matrix  Remote sensing
data  Satellite imagery
1 Introduction
Land use and land cover (LULC) change is controlled by
the interaction in space and time between biophysical and
human factors [1, 2]. Urbanization is a fast land use change
process that produces different spatial patterns depending
on the large urban cities across the landscape [3]. Since
1850, the total global human population has increased six
times and the urban population has increased over 100
times [4]. Moreover, half of the world’s population lives in
cities and it will further increase to 66% by 2050 [5]. Large
scale modification of the earth surface is going on due to
anthropogenic pressure, which has resulted to impact
severely on the functioning of the global systems [6]. It is
one of the most recognizable consequences of disturbance
is an alteration of LULC which significantly affecting the
local, regional and global environment [7, 8]. The effect of
this includes a gradual decline in rich bio-diversity
including vast flora and fauna [9, 10], soil degradation [11],
rampant urban sprawl [12], marked variation in biogeo-
chemical and hydrological cycles [13], non-point source
pollution [14], a gradual decline in ecosystem services [15]
and many others.
The information about existing LULC is a necessary
prerequisite for better land use planning [16]. Therefore,
knowledge concerning the past, current and future growth
plays an important role in decision making process [17].
123
352
The long term support of better land use policies leads
sustainable development by optimizing the available
resources and the decision making systems [18]. Geospatial
technology, which comprises of satellite remote sensing
data (RS) and Geographic Information System (GIS) have
been recognized as a vital tool in determining LULC
changes at different spatial scales [17, 19, 20]. Monitoring
and characterizing spatial patterns of LULC changes are
vital for understanding and predicting it [21]. Markov chain
analysis (MCA) is one among the common methodology
for producing spatially explicit LULC predictions [21–24].
Hegazy and Kaloop [25] has taken the Landsat imagery
for Daqahlia Governorate Egypt for the years 1985, 2000
and 2010 for producing LULC map, which shows built-up
and barren lands depicting the increasing trend, whereas
agriculture is showing decreasing trend and using MCA
technique, LULC prediction was done with area statistics
for the year 2035. Further, Corner et al. [26] has taken it for
the capital city of Dhakha in Bangladesh for the years
1990, 2000 and 2011 for producing LULC map and
showed built-up and bare soil and confirmed increasing
trend whereas cultivated land shows a decreasing trend. By
using the MCA technique, it was validated for the year
2011 and predicted it for the years 2022 and 2033.
A similar work has been done by Moghadam and Hel-
bich [27] for the Mumbai city in India for the years 1973,
1990, 2001 and 2010 and similar trends were observed,
including decreasing trends in forest lands and wetlands
and using MCA technique, LULC was predicted for the
years 2020 and 2030. Several other studies have been done
for the LULC mapping at different time periods [28–30]
but a limited exposure has been given in Indian sub-con-
tinent for urban sprawl predictive modeling [27, 31]. For
the model city in the current work, a temporal LULC
mapping has been done [32, 33]. However, a research gap
has been found in terms of extending the LULC mapping
towards developing a predictive modeling.
The objective of the present work is to generate LULC
map for the model city to have temporal study for the years
1989, 2002 and 2015. And, later by using MCA technique,
it is to validate 2015 LULC map with predicted map and it
was extrapolated to predict it for the year 2028. Further, it
was intended to study the urban expansion on the base year
of 2015 to analyze it with respect to slope map and road
buffer as well.
2 Study area
To validate Markov chain based prediction, a model city
Ranchi in India was chosen based upon data availability
and urban sprawl potential. This city is the capital of
Jharkhand which has a humid subtropical climate with
123
F. Ahmad et al.
uneven topography comprises of hills and valleys. It has an
unexpected pleasant climate due to regional micro climate
ability for which it has been known since ages. Its climate
is the primary reason that it was once the summer capital of
the State of Bihar before its bifurcation. The geographical
coordinates of the study area comprise of Latitude
23°090 3600 N to 23°340 0100 N and Longitude 85°080 4000 E to
85°350 5700 E, whereas total geographical area is
136,577.7 ha. Summer temperature varies from 20 to
42 °C, while winter temperature varies from 0 to 25 °C
(Fig. 1). The annual rainfall is about 1430 mm while the
average elevation is 652 m from mean sea level. As per the
latest census of India (2011), Ranchi Urban cluster com-
prising population of 1,120,374 making it the 46th largest
urban city in India. It has an average literacy rate of
87.68%. The population of the city has increased due to the
increase in employment opportunities owing to several
developmental activities initiated after the declaration of
the new state of Jharkhand in year 2000.
3 Material and methodology
The required satellite imagery of years 1989, 2002 and
2015 was downloaded from the USGS Earth explorer
database. Each dataset was found radiometrically, geo-
metrically corrected and was free from the line dropouts.
The image processing and interpretation for the delineation
of LULC maps was performed in ERDAS Imagine soft-
ware. The generated maps were studied and analyzed to
detect the LULC changes. The prediction was based upon
the previously developed LULC map. The detailed
methodology is presented through a schematic
flowchart (Fig. 2).
3.1 Image processing and classification
Various image enhancement techniques were performed on
each image for improving the visual interpretability [34].
The pre-processed Landsat images were classified by
supervised classification methods while the unsupervised
classification used was based upon the interactive self-or-
ganizing data analysis (ISODATA) algorithm for clustering
and classified according to the number of classes required
and the digital number (DN) of the pixels available. The
unsupervised classification gives general understanding
and reference about the distribution pattern of pixel with
different DN values. The image was classified using
supervised classification technique (maximum likelihood
algorithm) where the training sets (signatures) were pro-
vided by the user based on the visual interpretation of
image.
LULC analysis of urban spaces using Markov chain predictive model at Ranchi in India
Fig. 1 Study area location map
It provides superior result when applied on the RS data
considering the assumption that pixel in each category follows
a Gaussian distribution pattern [35]. The signatures for various
LU patterns with its domains are provided (Table 1) to guide
the software to delineate the land use patterns. The image alarm
function was used to validate the signatures of various classes.
The vegetation class is best extracted by Normalized Differ-
ence Vegetation Index (NDVI) [36]. Using NDVI and density
slicing method the vegetation class was delineated. The dif-
ferent classes such as vegetation, urban, and water, etc. were
integrated in one layer using the ERDAS model maker. NDVI
improves the accuracy of land use and land cover classification
of landsat data [37]. At the end, four land cover classes, namely
vegetation, urban, water and other were delineated for all three
time periods in the study. Thus, Anderson classification level I
scheme was achieved by identifying the four LULC categories
in the Landsat images [38]. The classified LULC data was then
smoothed using 3 9 3 majority filter for eliminating salt and
pepper effects [39].
353
3.2 Land use and land cover study
Anthropogenic activities have contributed considerably
towards the changing land cover during the period of study.
Land is one of the most important natural resource. Its
whole ecosystem is comprised of soil, water and plant,
which meets the inhabitant (dominated by tribal commu-
nities) need of food, fuel, fiber and other needs of their
livelihood [40]. Scanning of earth from space through
different satellites with different resolutions by multi-
spectral and multi temporal RS data gives better under-
standing of the impact of human activities on the natural
resources. Very often land use changes are undocumented
and unrecorded. Therefore, monitoring of the earth surface
change from the space gives unbiased and precise infor-
mation of human activities on land and utilization of the
landscape. The classified LULC images provide all the
necessary information for better understanding of the
LULC change of the study area.
123
354 F. Ahmad et al.

Fig. 2 Schematic flowchart for

predicting urban sprawl

Table 1 LULC classification types

Classification (land use Domains
pattern)

Urban Residential, Industrial, Commercial and Services; Transportation and Utilities, Built-up
Water Reservoirs, ponds, dam, lakes, waterlogged area
Vegetation Trees, Natural vegetation, Gardens, Parks and playgrounds, Grassland (including Herbs and Shrubs), Agricultural
lands, and Crop fields
Others Areas with no vegetation cover, Waste land, Barren land, Open space, and Uncultivated agricultural lands

3.3 Change detection analysis
Several change detection analysis techniques have been
used to extract information from RS data [41, 42] whereas
post LULC classification, comparison method of change
detection is the most common approach [41, 43] when the
data with different dates are compared. Post classification
comparison was adopted for the classified images of
varying years, which was used to calculate the area of
different land covers and analyzed the changes which were
taking place. Change detection analysis is very much
helpful in identifying and locating various geospatial
changes occurring in different classes of land use. The
ancillary data such as digital elevation model (DEM), roads
and population were incorporated for better understanding
of the urban expansion. The slope percent map was gen-
erated from aster 30 m DEM whereas roads were taken
from DIVA GIS for creating the road buffer. The urban
growth pattern of 2015 with respect to 2002 was analyzed
using GIS with respect to slope and road buffer. Decadal
population data of the city were used from 1961 to 2011 to
understand the population growth trend, which showed
better correlation when represented by polynomial func-
tion. Therefore, polynomial regression equation was
developed for estimating the population for the years 1989,
2002, 2015 and 2028.
3.4 Markov chain analysis
Markov chains follows stochastic process models which
describe the likelihood that one variable (e.g. vegetation)
changes to another (e.g. urban) within a given time period
[44]. Based on the transition probability matrix, the pre-
diction was done for the future. The transition probability

123
LULC analysis of urban spaces using Markov chain predictive model at Ranchi in India
matrix for 1989–2002 is used for prediction of LULC area
category for the year 2015. Later, it was validated with true
LULC of the year 2015. The matrix for 2002–2015 was
used for prediction of LULC area category for the year
2028.
4 Results and discussion
4.1 LULC images
The classified images for the years 1989, 2002 and 2015
were obtained for LULC (Fig. 3). These maps contain
useful information about the land use pattern of past and
the present. Appropriate legends are provided highlighting
the land use change for urbanization, vegetation water
bodies etc.
4.2 Classification accuracy assessment
Accuracy assessment is a significant step in the image
classification for evaluating the quality of the classified
images [45]. It was computed for each classified dataset
using a stratified random sampling method wherein 100
points were generated for each category and each point was
Fig. 3 Temporal analysis of the satellite data
355
assigned to the respective class based on the ground
information. The final output LULC map shows four major
categories (Fig. 3). LULC accuracy was also calculated
and tabulated (Table 2) for the years 1989, 2002 and 2015,
which were 91, 88 and 95% respectively. The Kappa
statistic, noted 0.8524, 0.8045 and 0.9180, respectively.
4.3 Change detection analysis
The cause and effects of different types of land degradation
were identified. The main type of human induced degra-
dation in the study area is urbanization and it will be at a
higher rate than the expectation [46]. These degradation
variables were evaluated, showing the changes which
occurred during the years 1989, 2002 and 2015 due to
anthropogenic factors studied across satellite images of
variable dates (Fig. 4).
The total studied area was found to be 136,577.7 ha.
During the year 1989, built-up area was 1566.99 ha, veg-
etation cover was 21,269.25 ha and water bodies covering
area was 2728.8 ha. Similarly, it can be studied for the
years 2002 and 2015 and it may be calculated that during
the whole period the urban area is persistently increasing
whereas vegetation is constantly decreasing. However,
water body area first increases in the year 2002 and
123
356 F. Ahmad et al.

Table 2 Overall accuracy and Kappa statistic of LULC analysis From the GIS analysis, the urban growth, expansion in
Years % Accuracy Kappa statistic
2015 was found to be 67% with respect to the year 2002,
while the slope percent was less than 10%, whereas for the
1989 91 0.8524 same period 60% of the urban growth expansion was
2002 88 0.8045 observed within 1 km road buffer. The regression equation
2015 95 0.9180 generated based on the decadal population data of the city
from 1961 to 2011 and it was used to extrapolate it for
future dates (Fig. 6).
The population was estimated for the city based on
LULC for the years 1989, 2002 and 2015 regression equation for the years 1989, 2002, 2015 and
120000 2028 as 592,725; 862,879; 1,195,040 and 1,513,776
100000 respectively and it shows an increase of 102% in 2015 with
respect to 1989 whereas increase of 46% in 2002 in com-
Area ( Ha)

80000
60000
parison of the same base year.
40000
4.4 Markov transitional probability matrix
20000
and validation of 2015 land use statistics
0
1989 2002 2015
Urban 1566.99 4700.43 8713.53
The Markov chain is the simplest model for prediction
Water 2728.8 2942.37 2649.42
Vegetation 21269.25 20479.86 19294.02
based upon the probability matrix. It simulates the condi-
Other 111012.66 108455.04 105920.73 tion of a system using a random variable which transforms
over time. The information about the past trend of land
Fig. 4 Bar diagram for LULC for the years of study cover changes in the area was available in advance. The
prediction was done for 2015 based on Markov transition
decreases in year 2015 (Fig. 4). The slope percent map and probabilities (Table 3) for the period 1989–2002 and bar
road buffer map generated from the ancillary sources and diagram was plotted to understand transition in land use
were used to understand the urban growth expansion pattern (Fig. 7).
(Fig. 5).

Fig. 5 Slope map and road buffer map of the study area

123
LULC analysis of urban spaces using Markov chain predictive model at Ranchi in India 357

1.2 Pridicted LULC area statistics for year 2028

Population (Millions) -->

120000
1
100000
0.8

Area (Ha) --->

80000
0.6
60000
0.4
40000

0.2
20000

0 0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Urban Water Vegetation Other
Area( ha) 12427.30225 2391.320593 18433.24997 103325.8272
Year -->

Fig. 6 Regression equation representing the population growth Fig. 8 Predicted LULC for the year 2028

Table 3 Markov transition probabilities matrix for the periods was validated by Indian meteorological data (http://www.
1989–2002 and 2002–2015 indiawaterportal.org/met_data/).
Urban Water Vegetation Other
4.5 Markov transitional probability matrix
1989 2002 and land use prediction for the year 2028
Urban 0.9995 0 0 0.0005
Water 0.0012 0.9555 0.0042 0.0391 Based upon the land use conditions between the periods
Vegetation 0.0133 0.0015 0.7229 0.2623 2002–2015, the transition probability matrices of each land
Other 0.0257 0.0027 0.0459 0.9257 use type during the above mentioned periods was com-
2002 2015 puted using Markovian process (Table 3). The diagonal
Urban 0.9511 0 0.0105 0.0384 element indicates the probability value of self-replacement
Water 0.0003 0.8731 0.0156 0.111 during the course of time, assuming land use remains
Vegetation 0.0054 0.0006 0.6359 0.3581 unchanged [47], whereas off diagonal values represent the
Other 0.0381 0.0006 0.057 0.9043 probability of change from one land use to the other. The
current study LULC for the year 2028 was predicted to
obtain area statistics in hectares (Fig. 8). Urbanization was
predicted for the year 2028 as 12,427 ha and urban
LULC-Predicted Vs True value expansion in terms of the area will be 43% more when
120000 compared to 2015 data. Based on the estimate from
100000
regression equation, the population will be 75% more in
the year 2028 with respect to the year 2002, whereas it was
Area ( Hectares)

80000
27% more with respect to the year 2015.
60000 The urban and population temporal growth percent
40000 (Table 4) indicates that the urban growth was always
20000
higher in the past with respect to its population growth. The
prediction of the urban growth, expansion is 43% as well as
0
Urban Water Vegetation Other an estimate of population growth is 27% for the year 2028
Pridicted 7756.3833 3138.273306 19792.7826 105890.2608
Actual 8713.53 2649.42 19294.02 105920.73 with respect of base year 2015 shows urban growth
expansion in the future will continue to be more rapid than
Fig. 7 LULC-predicted versus true value for the year 2015 population growth. Further, a similar finding has been
reported by Jat et al. [48].
The percentage error (true value vs. predicted) for land
classes as urban, water, vegetation and others was 10.98,
18.45, 2.58 and 0.03%, respectively. The prediction of the 5 Conclusion
urban area was less than the actual showing that after
creation of the State of Jharkhand urbanization was more It was found that coarse resolution temporal satellite data
rapid [33] whereas water bodies prediction was done using can be effectively harnessed to assess LULC change,
the 2002 data. The precipitation from August to December whereas prediction can be done with accuracy as high as
in the year 2002 was 30% more than previous data and it 89.02% based on Markov transition matrix for future years.

123
358
Table 4 Temporal urban and population growth percentage
Temporal change Urban growth (%) Population growth (%)
1989–2002 200 46
2002–2015 85 38
2015–2028 43 27
Further, the prediction model can be validated for some
years. It confirms that both the results are more or less
similar except in the urbanization. True urban area growth
was more than the predicted area, which is because of the
bifurcation of the Bihar State and creation of the model city
as the capital of Jharkhand State. The study observed a
rapid urban growth leading to increased pressure on the
urban vegetation which is evident from its decreasing
trend. The urbanization of the city was not restricted to the
plain land, but majority of the people preferred inhabiting
even in moderate slope which is due to the unavailability of
plain land. People also prefer inhabiting places near to
roads for convenient transportation facility and access to
essential requirements.
The urban area in 2028 will be 43% more whereas
regression equation based population estimate will be 27%
more with respect to 2015. Vegetation cover and water
bodies will also decrease in 2028 and it’s likely to create
more pressure in times to come. In such circumstances
effective coordination between the government agencies is
needed to achieve sustainable development and come out
of this new emerged challenge. A policy level regulation is
solicited and it must be implemented systematically.
Wetlands shall be conserved as Ramsar Conventions for
Ramsar qualifying sites. The urban expansion should be
strictly not permitted in the vegetated areas (irrespective of
whether such lands form part with protected area networks
or not). To achieve sustainable urban development the need
of the hour is to revise the land management policy and to
initiate inter-disciplinary research to design strategy for
unregulated urban sprawl.
Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the USGS for free
download of Landsat and DEM (ASTER) data which was used in the
analysis. Required GIS layers were downloaded from DIVA GIS.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no competing
interests.
References
1. Parker, D. C., Manson, S. M., Janssen, M. A., Hoffmann, M. J., &
Deadman, P. (2002). Multiagent system for the simulation of
123
F. Ahmad et al.
land-use and land-cover change: A review. Annals of the Asso-
ciation of American Geographers, 93, 314–337.
2. Verburg, P. H., de Groot, W. T., & Veldkamp, A. J. (2003).
Methodology for multi-scale land use change modeling: Concepts
and challenges. In A. J. Dolman & A. Verhagen (Eds.), Global
environmental change and land use (pp. 17–51). Dordrecht:
Kluver Academic Publishers.
3. Wu, J. (2004). Effects of changing scale on landscape pattern
analysis: Scaling relations. Landscape Ecology, 19, 125–138.
4. Hauser, P. N., Gardner, R. W., Laquian, A. A., & El-Shakhs, S.
(1982). Population and the urban future. Albany: State Univer-
sity of New YorkPress.
5. United Nations. (2014). World population data sheet—population
reference Bureau. http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/
population/world-urbanization-prospects-2014.html. Accessed
August 20, 2016
6. Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola, S. B., et al.
(2001). The causes of land-use and land-cover change: Moving
beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change Human and
Policy Dimensions, 11(4), 261–269.
7. Mahmood, R., Pielke, R. A., Hubbard, K. G., Niyogi, D., et al.
(2010). Impacts of land use/land cover change on climate and
future research priorities. Bulletin of the American Meteorologi-
cal Society, 91(1), 37–46.
8. Yu, W., Zang, S., Wu, C., Liu, W., & Na, X. (2011). Analyzing
and modeling land use land cover change (LUCC) in the Daqing
city, China. Applied Geography, 31(2), 600–608.
9. Srivastava, S., Singh, T. P., Singh, H., Kushwaha, S. P. S., &
Roy, P. S. (2002). Assessment of large-scale deforestation in
Sonitpur district of Assam. Current Science, 82(12), 1479–1484.
10. Yamamura, Y., Amano, T., Koizumi, T., Mitsuda, Y., Taki, H., &
Okabe, K. (2009). Does land-use change affect biodiversity
dynamics ata macro-ecological scale? A case study of birds over
the past 20 years in Japan. Animal Conservation, 12(2), 110–119.
11. Islam, K. R., & Weil, R. R. (2000). Land use effects on soil
quality in a tropical forest ecosystem of Bangladesh. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment, 79(1), 9–16.
12. Wu, K., & Zhang, H. (2012). Land use dynamics, built-up land
expansion patterns, and driving forces analysis of the fast-
growing Hangzhou metropolitan area, eastern China
(1978–2008). Applied Geography, 34, 137–145.
13. Foley, J. A., De Fries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., et al. (2005).
Global consequences of land use. Science, 309(5734), 570–574.
14. Xian, G., Crane, M., & Su, J. (2007). An analysis of urban
development and its environmental impact on the Tampa Bay
watershed. Journal of Environmental Management, 85(4),
965–976.
15. Quetier, F., Lavorel, S., Thuiller, W., & Davies, I. (2007). Plant-
trait-based modeling assessment of ecosystem-service sensitivity
to land-use change. Ecological Applications, 17(8), 2377–2386.
16. Bagan, H., & Yamagata, Y. (2012). Landsat analysis of urban
growth: How Tokyo became the world’s largest megacity during
the last 40 years. Remote Sensing of Environment, 127, 210–222.
17. Patino, J. E., & Duque, J. C. (2013). A review of regional science
applications of satellite remote sensing in urban settings. Com-
puters, Environment and Urban Systems, 37, 1–17.
18. Taubenbock, H., Esch, T., Felbier, A., Wiesner, M., Roth, A., &
Dech, A. (2012). Monitoring urbanization in mega cities from
space. Remote Sensing of Environment, 117, 162–176.
19. Van der Meer, F., Schmidt, K. S., Bakker, A., & Bijker, W.
(2002). New environmental RS systems. In A. K. Skidmore (Ed.),
Environmental modeling with GIS and RS (pp. 26–51). London:
Taylor & Francis.
20. Bhatta, B., Saraswati, S., & Bandyopadhyay, D. (2010). Urban
sprawl measurement from remote sensing data. Applied Geog-
raphy, 30, 731–740.
LULC analysis of urban spaces using Markov chain predictive model at Ranchi in India
21. Petit, C., Scudder, T., & Lambin, E. (2001). Quantifying pro-
cesses of land-cover change by remote sensing: Resettlement and
rapid land-cover changes in south-eastern Zambia. International
Journal of Remote Sensing, 22(17), 3435–3456.
22. Muller, M. R., & Middleton, J. (1994). A Markov model of land-
use change dynamics in the Niagara Region, Ontario, and
Canada. Landscape Ecology, 9(2), 151–157.
23. Coppedge, B. R., Engle, D. M., & Fuhlendorf, S. D. (2007).
Markov models of land cover dynamics in a southern Great Plains
grass land region. Landscape Ecology, 22, 1383–1393.
24. Tang, J., Wang, L., & Yao, Z. (2007). Spatio-temporal urban
landscape change analysis using the Markov chain model and a
modified genetic algorithm. International Journal of Remote
Sensing, 15(10), 3255–3271.
25. Hegazy, I. R., & Kaloop, M. R. (2015). Monitoring urban growth
and land use change detection with GIS and remote sensing
techniques in Daqahlia governorate Egypt. International Journal
of Sustainable Built Environment, 4, 117–124.
26. Corner, R. J., Dewan, A. M., & Chakma, S. (2013). Monitoring
and prediction of land-use and land-cover (LULC) change
megacity. In: Dhaka megacity, geospatial perspectives on
urbanisation, environment and health. Part of the series (pp.
75–97). Springer Geography. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6735-5_5.
27. Moghadam, H. S., & Helbich, M. (2013). Spatiotemporal
urbanization process in mega city of Mumbai, India: A Markov
chains-cellular automata urban growth model. Applied Geogra-
phy, 40, 140–149.
28. Mallupattu, P. K., & Reddy, J. R. S. (2013). Analysis of lan-
duse/land cover changes using remote sensing data and GIS at an
Urban Area, Tirupati, India. The Scientific World Journal. doi:10.
1155/2013/268623.
29. Ramesh, B. R., Menon, S., & Bawa, K. S. (1997). A vegetated
based approach to biodiversity gap analysis in the Agastyamalai
region, Western Ghats, India. Ambio, 26, 529–536.
30. Jha, C. S., Dutt, C. B. S., & Bawa, K. S. (2000). Deforestation
and land use changes in Western Ghats, India. Current Science,
79, 231–238.
31. Behera, M. D., Borate, S. N., Panda, S. N., Behera, P. R., & Roy,
P. S. (2012). Modeling and analyzing the watershed dynamics
using Cellular Automata (CA)–Markov model–A geo-informa-
tion based approach. Journal of Earth System Science, 121(4),
1011–1024.
32. Ahmad, F., & Goparaju, L. (2016). Analysis of urban sprawl
dynamics using geospatial technology in Ranchi City, Jharkhand,
India. Journal of Environmental Geography, 9(1–2), 7–13.
33. Kumar, A., Pandey, A. C., Hoda, N., & Jeyaseelan, A. T. (2011).
Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern in the tribal-dominated cities
359
of Jharkhand state, India. International Journal of Remote Sens-
ing, 32, 7651–7675.
34. Starck, J. L., Murtagh, F., & Bijaoui, A. (1998). Image processing
and data analysis: The multi-scale approach. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
35. Bolstad, P. V., & Lillesand, T. D. (1991). Rapid maximum
likelihood classification. Photogrammetric Engineering &
Remote Sensing, 57(1), 67–74.
36. Tucker, C. J. (1979). Red and photographic infrared linear
combinations for monitoring vegetation. Remote Sensing of the
Environment, 8, 127–150.
37. Manandhar, R., Odeh, I. O. W., & Ancev, T. (2009). Improving
the accuracy of land use and land cover classification of landsat
data using post-classification enhancement. Remote Sensing, 1,
330–344. doi:10.3390/rs1030330.
38. Anderson, J. R., Hardy, E. E., Roach, J. T., & Witmer, R. E.
(1976). A land use and land cover classification system for use
with remote sensor data. Washington, DC: United States
Government Printing Office.
39. Lillesand, T. M., & Kiefer, R. W. (1999). Remote sensing and
image interpretation. New York: Wiley.
40. Islam, M. A., Rai, R., & Quli, S. M. S. (2015). Forest resources
usefor building livelihood resilience in ethnic communities of
Jharkhand. Trends in Biosciences, 8(5), 1256–1264.
41. Lu, D., Mausel, P., Brondiozio, E., & Moran, E. (2004). Change
detection techniques. International Journal of Remote Sensing,
25(12), 2365–2407.
42. Lu, D., Moran, E., Hetrick, S., & Li, G. (2011). Land-use and
land-cover change detection. In Q. Weng (Ed.), Advances in
environmental remote sensing: Sensors, algorithms and appli-
cations (pp. 273–291). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
43. Jensen, J. R. (1996). Introductory digital image processing: A
remote sensing perspective. Upper Saddle: Prentice Hall.
44. Lopez, E., Boccoa, G., Mendozaa, M., & Duhau, E. (2001).
Predicting land-cover and land-use change in the urban fringe. A
case in Morelia city, Mexico. Landscape Urban Planning, 55,
271–285.
45. Foody, G. M. (2001). Status of land cover classification accuracy
assessment. Remote Sensing of Environment, 80, 185–201.
46. Bhagat, R. B. (2011). Emerging pattern of urbanization. Eco-
nomic & Political Weekly, 46(34), 10–12.
47. Guan, D., Li, H., Inohae, T., Su, W., et al. (2011). Modeling
urban land use change by the integration of cellular automaton
and Markov model. Ecological Modeling, 222, 3761–3772.
48. Jat, M. K., Garg, P. K., & Khare, D. (2008). Monitoring and
modeling urban sprawl using remote sensing and GIS techniques.
International Journal of Applied Earth Observation, 10, 26–43.
123