FINAL REPORT
to the
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
Contact person: Mr Freddy Nachtergaele, Land and Water Division
SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL LAND-COVER CHANGE MAP
Project GW 51/037/01
Report No GW/A/2010/47
By: Schoeman, F., Newby, T. S., Thompson, M.W. and Van den Berg, E.C.
June 2010
Agricultural Research Council-Institute for Soil, Climate and Water (ARC-ISCW)
Private Bag X79, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa
Contact person: T. Newby
Tel: +27 12 310-2500, Fax: +27 12 323-1157
E-mail: [email protected]
i
Table of Contents
TALE OF CONTENTS...........................................................................................I
LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................III
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................... IV
LIST OF APPENDICES...................................................................................... VI
1. TERMS OF REFERENCE .............................................................................1
2. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................3
3. MATERIALS..................................................................................................4
3.1. Data Sources and Acknowledgements........................................................................4 3.1.1. National Land-Cover 1994 ..........................................................................................4 3.1.2. National Land-Cover 2000 ..........................................................................................5 3.1.3. “Five Class” National Land-Cover 2005.......................................................................5
4. METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................8
4.1. Workflow .......................................................................................................................8
4.2. Process Description .....................................................................................................9 4.2.1. Base Grid ...................................................................................................................9 4.2.2. Conversion to Standardised Land-Cover Datasets ....................................................10 4.2.3. Zonal Attributes ........................................................................................................10 4.2.4. Final Annual Land-Cover Datasets............................................................................10
4.3. Temporal Land-Cover Change Modelling Issues ......................................................11 4.3.1. Land-Cover Change – Two Date Sequence Logic Review ........................................12 4.3.2. Land-Cover Change – Three Date Sequence Logic Review......................................13
4.4. Modelling.....................................................................................................................14 4.4.1. Modelling process (explanation)................................................................................14 4.4.2. Data normalisation - Number of changes made to original cell values .......................14
5. RESULTS....................................................................................................16
5.1. Land-cover Statistics per Assessment Year .............................................................16
5.2. Land-cover Change Statistics between Assessment Years .....................................22
5.3. Comment on Accuracy of Change Assessment........................................................23
ii
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................25
7. SOUTH AFRICAN LAND-COVER CHANGE PRODUCT DESCRIPTION & METADATA........................................................................................................27
7.1.1. Data description........................................................................................................27 7.1.2. Attribute Description .................................................................................................27
8. MAPS ..........................................................................................................29
9. REFERENCES ............................................................................................29
10. APPENDICES..........................................................................................30
iii
List of Figures
Figure 4.1. Illustration of the overall workflow that was followed to convert the individual national
land-cover datasets into a standardised 5 x class legend format within the 500 x 500 m
national grid structure..........................................................................................................9
Figure 4.2. Example of the attribute table showing the three land-cover codes...........................11
Figure 4.3. Shows an example of the year-on-year land-cover code sequence (refer to Table 10.2
in Appendix A for full table). The 3 x year columns on the left indicate the original 3 x date
land-cover sequences, whilst those on the right illustrate the corrected sequences. Red cells
indicate land-cover sequences that could not be logically corrected and were thus labelled
as “mapping error” in the final data results.........................................................................14
Figure 4.4. Example of the data normalisation results table (refer to Appendix A Table 10.3 for full
table). ...............................................................................................................................15
iv
List of Tables
Table 1.1. Definitions of the five land-cover classes on which the land-cover change has been
based .................................................................................................................................2
Table 3.1. Details of owners and datasets used to compile the 5 class national land-cover 2005..6
Table 4.1. Example of the two date sequence (refer to Appendix A Table 10.1 for full table) ......13
Table 5.1. Indicates the number of cells and percentage of the total number of cells that have
been classed as transformed on a national scale on each of the three dates .....................16
Table 5.2. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates ............................17
Table 5.3. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Eastern
Cape Province ..................................................................................................................17
Table 5.4. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Free State
Province ...........................................................................................................................18
Table 5.5. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Gauteng
Province ...........................................................................................................................18
Table 5.6. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the KwaZulu-
Natal Province ..................................................................................................................19
Table 5.7. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Limpopo
Province ...........................................................................................................................19
Table 5.8. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Mpumalanga
Province ...........................................................................................................................20
Table 5.9. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Northern
Cape Province ..................................................................................................................20
Table 5.10. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the North West
Province ...........................................................................................................................21
Table 5.11. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the North West
Province ...........................................................................................................................21
Table 5.12. Illustration of the percentage change in land-cover classes between the different
assessment years .............................................................................................................22
Table 7.1. Description of the attributes in the attribute table of the digital 500x500m grid vector
data ..................................................................................................................................27
Table 10.1. Two date land-cover sequence ...............................................................................30
Table 10.2. Three date year-on-year land-cover sequence and the resulting logical corrections
(original sequence on left, corrected sequence on right). ...................................................31
Table 10.3. Cell changes resulting from logical corrections ........................................................39
Table 10.4. Eastern Cape land-cover change ............................................................................45
Table 10.5. Free State Land-cover change ................................................................................46
v
Table 10.6. Gauteng Land-cover change ...................................................................................47
Table 10.7. KwaZulu Natal Land-cover change..........................................................................48
Table 10.8. Lesotho Land-cover change....................................................................................49
Table 10.9. Limpopo Land-cover change ...................................................................................50
Table 10.10. Mpumalanga Land-cover change ..........................................................................51
Table 10.11. North West Land-cover change .............................................................................52
Table 10.12. Northern Cape Land-cover change........................................................................53
Table 10.13. Swaziland Land-cover change ..............................................................................54
Table 10.14. Western Cape Land-cover change ........................................................................55
Table 10.15. National Land-cover change..................................................................................56
vi
List of Appendices
Appendix A. Data Tables ..........................................................................................................30
Appendix B. Results Summaries ...............................................................................................45
Appendix C. Maps.....................................................................................................................57
1
1. Terms of Reference
The FAO has contracted (Annexure 1) the ARC-ISCW to prepare a national land-
cover change map of South Africa. The subsequent activities have been
identified to support and prepare a national land-cover change map:
• Generating a reporting framework.
• Coding of the 1994/1995 national land-cover dataset.
• Coding of the national land-cover 2000 dataset.
• Coding of available 2005 land-cover data.
• Mapping and coding of 2005 gaps from imagery.
• Implementing a quality improvement procedure.
The final products will include:
a) A vector-based land-cover information system for South Africa for
the year 1995.
b) A vector-based land-cover information system for South Africa for
the year 2000.
c) A vector-based land-cover information system for South Africa for
the year 2005
d) A methodological report covering the preparation of (a), (b) and (c)
e) An analytical report on the main land-cover changes that have
taken place in the country over the period considered and their
geographic locations (a land-cover change map) with overall
statistics.
Land-cover change will be based on five land-cover classes: Urban, Mining,
Forestry, Cultivation and Other. These have been defined in Table 1.1.
2
Table 1.1. Definitions of the five land-cover classes on which the land-cover change has been based
Land-cover class Class definition
Urban Human settlements, both rural and urban
Mining Areas covered by mining and related mining activities, also includes mine dumps
Forestry and plantations All forestry and plantations including woodlots and clear fell areas (excludes indigenous natural forests)
Cultivation All areas used for agricultural activities, including old fields and subsistence agriculture
Other All other areas not covered by those listed above
The work has been carried out by a consortium comprising the Agricultural
Research Council (South Africa) and GeoTerraImage (Pty) Ltd., a private
company, located in South Africa
3
2. Introduction
Globally, countries face a changing environment due to population growth,
increase in agricultural production, increasing demand on natural resources,
climate change and resultant degradation of the natural environment. One means
of monitoring this changing scenario is through land-cover change mapping.
Modern Earth Observation (EO) technologies, especially those EO datasets
comprising a multi-year data archive, lend themselves to land-cover change
studies. South Africa has over recent years experienced significant changes in
policy, legislation and service delivery. The Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations (FAO) has contracted the Agricultural Research Council
(ARC) to prepare a national land-cover change map to quantitatively assess the
impacts these developments have had on land-cover. This project will use a
practical and cost-effective approach for monitoring land-cover change at a
national scale over time using EO data.
4
3. Materials
3.1. Data Sources and Acknowledgements
Land-cover data for the 3 x assessment years was sourced from a combination
of existing datasets and data generated specifically for the FAO land-cover
change assessment. The 1994 land-cover data was extracted from the existing
1994 South African National Land-Cover Dataset (NLC 94). The 2000 land-cover
data was extracted from the existing 2000 South African National Land-Cover
Dataset (NLC 2000). The 2005 land-cover data was generated from a
combination of provincial land-cover datasets, captured from various satellite
data acquired between 2005 - 2009, and from new land-cover data captured
specifically for the FAO project from historical 2005 Landsat imagery.
All existing land-cover datasets contained sufficient levels of land-cover detail to
enable standardised re-formatting into the required four basic change
assessment land-cover types, namely: urban / built-up, cultivated, mines, and
(forest) plantation. All new land-cover datasets were only mapped in terms of the
required 4 x change assessment land-cover classes.
3.1.1. National Land-Cover 1994
The NLC 94 data was mapped manually from 1:250,000 scale hardcopy Landsat
image maps, based on imagery acquired 1994 – 1995. The original land-cover
data was captured as a digital vector dataset with a minimum mapping unit of
25ha, and contained 31 land-cover classes (Fairbanks et al., 2000). The original
land-cover class detail was simplified into the required 4 x class change
assessment legend format, with all excluded original land-cover classes being
amalgamated into a new “other / background” class. The final map accuracy of
the NLC 94 dataset (averaged over the 3 x geographical production phases) was
79.4% (78.5 – 80.4% at the 90% confidence limits), with a kappa index of
74.8(Fairbanks et al., 2000).
5
3.1.2. National Land-Cover 2000
The NLC 2000 data was generated from digital Landsat imagery, acquired
primarily from 2000 to 2001. The original land-cover data was captured as a
digital raster dataset with a minimum mapping unit of 2ha, and contained 45
land-cover classes (Van den Berg et al., 2008). The original land-cover class
detail was simplified into the required 4 x class change assessment legend
format, with all excluded original land-cover classes being amalgamated into a
new “other/background” class. The final map accuracy for NLC 2000 was 65.8%
(65.10 – 66.52% at the 90% confidence limits), with a kappa statistic of 57 (Van
den Berg et al., 2008).
3.1.3. “Five Class” National Land-Cover 2005
The 2005 land-cover data was derived from a combination of existing provincial
land-cover datasets (which had been generated from suitably dated satellite
imagery), and new land-cover data mapped specifically for this project, off
historical Landsat imagery circa 2005 (Table 3.1).
The existing provincial land-cover datasets were all generated independently
using SPOT satellite data and contained comparable levels of detailed land-
cover information. These datasets included detailed coverage of Gauteng
Province, KwaZulu Natal Province, significant parts of the Western and Northern
Cape, and North West Province, (and nationally, all urban / built-up areas).
Permission to use and extract relevant land-cover class information from these
datasets was granted by Cape Nature, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, ESKOM,
GeoTerraImage Pty Ltd, and North West Dept of Agriculture, Conservation and
Environment. The datasets that were used as well as the Organisations or
Companies that own the copyright to the datasets are listed below:
6
Table 3.1. Details of owners and datasets used to compile the 5 class national land-cover 2005
Organisation/Company Offered Land-Cover Dataset
ESKOM National SPOT Building Count (SBC) (2006 SPOT data)
Cape Nature Fine Scale Biodiversity Land-Cover Dataset (2005 SPOT data)
Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife KwaZulu Natal Provincial Land-Cover (2005 SPOT data)
NW Dept Agric, Conservation & Environment North West Provincial Land-Cover (2006 SPOT data)
GeoTerraImage Pty Ltd Gauteng Provincial Land-Cover (2009 SPOT data)
The original land-cover class detail in these existing land-cover datasets was
simplified into the required 4 x class change assessment legend format , with all
excluded original land-cover classes being amalgamated into a new “other /
background” class.
The reported mapping accuracies for these existing datasets were as follows:
• The final map accuracy the EKZNW 2005 KZN Provincial land-
cover dataset was 83.06% (81.26 – 84.86% at the 90% confidence
limits), with a kappa index of 81.5(GTI EKZNW Land-Cover Report,
2008).
• The (amalgamated) final map accuracy for the Cape Fine Scale
Biodiversity land-cover was 81.63% (74.88 – 88.42% at the 90%
confidence limits), with a kappa index of 77.98(GTI Cape Nature
Report, 2008).
• The final map accuracy the NW Province land-cover dataset (Level
1) was 80.37% (78.97 – 81.77% at the 90% confidence limits), with
a kappa index of 78.57(GTI NW Province Land-Cover Report,
2008).
7
• No formal statistical mapping accuracies were calculated for the
ESKOM SBC dataset or the GTI 2009 Gauteng Province land-
cover dataset. Both datasets have however received extensive
independent end-user reviews and applications, and are assumed
to be of a suitable level of accuracy for use in the FAO change
assessment project having both been derived from high resolution
SPOT5 imagery.
Areas for which no suitable 2005 land-cover data existed were mapped using
conventionally digital classification techniques from archival 2005 Landsat
imagery, as part of the data preparation activities for this project. These datasets
were only generated in terms of the required 4 x basic land-cover change
assessment classes, and not as full detail land-cover legends. New 4 x class
land-cover data were generated for Mpulalanga, Eastern Cape and Limpopo
Provinces.
8
4. Methodology
The basic approach taken for the land-cover change assessment was to
compare standardised 4 x class land-cover datasets representing the 3 x
assessment years (i.e. 1995, 2000 and 2005), within a uniform national grid,
based on 500 x 500 m cells. The land-cover allocated to each cell in each year
represented the spatially dominant land-cover within that cell, as determined from
the original 1994, 2000 and 2005 land-cover datasets. Various spatial modelling
procedures, as described below, were used to ensure compilation of comparable
and standardised land-cover class allocations to each 500 x 500 m cell for each
year, prior to any year-on-year change analyses.
A 500 x 500 cell size was chosen since this is the same as the 25 ha theoretical
minimum mapping unit associated with the original NLC1995 land-cover dataset,
and as such represented the coarsest level of mapping detail in the input
datasets. All other input datasets were thus spatially downgraded to this coarsest
level.
4.1. Workflow
The flow chart below (Figure 4.1) illustrates the overall workflow that was
followed in order to convert the individual 1995, 2000 and 2005 national land-
cover datasets into standardised 5 x class legend format, and code the cells
within the 500 x 500 m national grid structure, on which all change assessments
were based.
9
Figure 4.1. Illustration of the overall workflow that was followed to convert the individual national land-cover datasets into a standardised 5 x class legend format within the 500 x 500 m national grid structure.
4.2. Process Description
4.2.1. Base Grid
A national vector grid frame, based on 500 x 500 m cells and covering
all of South Africa was created as the base template. All cells were
given national and provincial name attributes to assist with final
results reporting and analysis on a sub-national level. Boundary cells
were clipped according to the definitive national boundary and thus
are not necessarily complete 500 x 500 m square cell structures (see example)
10
4.2.2. Conversion to Standardised Land-Cover Datasets
Prior to encoding of the 500 x 500 m national base grid, each of the individual
national land-cover datasets for 1995, 2000 and 2005 were initially converted to
comparable 30m raster national datasets, based on the 4 x class basic land-
cover legend format to be used in the change analysis. This approach was done
to ensure, as far as possible, that comparable results would be achieved, year-
on-year, when spatially summarising the original land-cover to the required 500 x
500m cell format.
4.2.3. Zonal Attributes
Encoding of the individual 500 x 500m cells with the appropriate land-cover for
each year was achieved using a “zonal majority” modelling process (ERDAS ©).
This process generated an attribute code for each cell based on the spatially
dominant land-cover class located within that cell extent.
Due to the physical size of the datasets being processed in this manner, it was
necessary to sub-divide the country into a series of non-overlapping data clips,
which were processed individually before being re-combined into a single
national coverage.
4.2.4. Final Annual Land-Cover Datasets
The land-cover codes for each year are represented as different attributes for
each cell within the same base grid template, rather than generate separate grid
templates for each assessment year (Figure 4.2). Similarly, all change
assessment results are reported as additional attributes within the same data
coverage. This approach has been taken since it allows a single data coverage
to be the final product deliverable, and facilities transparency of results reporting.
11
Figure 4.2. Example of the attribute table showing the three land-cover codes.
4.3. Temporal Land-Cover Change Modelling Issues
The accuracy of (land-cover) change modelling is directly dependent on the
accuracy of the input data, between which any changes are to be determined.
As indicated previously, a significant proportion of the input land-cover data used
in the FAO change assessment project was based on pre-existing land-cover
data. In such cases, these datasets are known to have a certain error component
in the original mapping content which could influence the accuracy and reliability
of comparative change analyses.
In order to minimise, as far as possible errors in change detection resulting from
original land-cover data misclassifications in the individual year datasets, two
systematic desk-top assessment procedures were used to identify and correct
any likely land-cover misclassifications based on the logic of the 3 x year
sequence of reported land-cover types within each specific grid cell. Whilst the
limitations of such an approach are acknowledged, the approach allows a
secondary level of individual year land-cover normalisation to be achieved prior
12
to any year-on-year change analysis, with commensurate increases in the
reliability and accuracy of final change assessment results.
The two corrective modelling procedures were implemented within a single
integrated modelling approach.
4.3.1. Land-Cover Change – Two Date Sequence Logic Review
The first logic assessment was based on the likelihood of any two-date pair
sequence of land-cover classes actually occurring in reality. These pair-based
logic assumptions are illustrated in the table 4.1 below.
For example, it is quite possible for a forestry plantation to be cleared and
replaced by an urban area, but highly unlikely that an urban area will be cleared
for forestry plantation. It is also highly unlikely for urban areas to be cleared for
any of the other land-cover classes.
Forestry will most likely not be cleared for cultivation as this is usually located in
areas where the slope is to steep for agricultural applications or the soil
conditions are marginal. This also applies for changes to class “Other”.
Mining areas are not likely to be converted to either urban or plantation, even
after rehabilitation, although a significant number of mines in the Mpumalanga
Highveld are re-converted to either cultivated lands or grasslands (i.e. “other”) as
a result of local land-use and land-cover characteristics.
The reasoning followed in developing these rules are based on logical principals
associated with drivers such as land use economics and physical landscape
criteria.
13
Table 4.1. Example of the two date sequence (refer to Appendix A Table 10.1 for full table)
Change from code Change to code Logical
Urban Forestry/Plantation No
Urban Mining/Quarries No
Urban Cultivation No
Urban Other No
4.3.2. Land-Cover Change – Three Date Sequence Logic Review
The second logic assessment was based on the likelihood of any three-date
sequence of land-cover classes actually occurring in reality, taking into account
the assumptions of the previous 2-date logic, when seen as part of a longer 3-
date sequence.
For example, it is quite possible for a forestry plantation (first date) to be cleared
and replaced by an urban area (second date), and that the urban area will remain
in the third date. But it is highly unlikely that the urban area (second) will be
cleared for replanting as a forestry plantation in the third year again. In such a 3-
date sequence (i.e. plantation-urban-plantation) it is more likely the case that the
second year “urban” code is a misclassification in the original land-cover dataset,
and should therefore be corrected to a second date “plantation” code (i.e.
plantation-plantation-plantation).
Figure 4.3 illustrates the various year-on-year land-cover code sequences that
could occur between the project legend classes (i.e. urban, plantation, cultivation,
mines and other); and the corrective code sequences that could be logically
applied to improve the initial accuracy of the 3 x year land-cover datasets before
change analysis. Note that in some instances, the logic of the 3 x year sequence
did not allow any corrective re-coding and in such cases these sequences were
identified as “mapping errors” within the final change analysis.
14
Figure 4.3. Shows an example of the year-on-year land-cover code sequence (refer to Table 10.2 in Appendix A for full table). The 3 x year columns on the left indicate the original 3 x date land-cover sequences, whilst those on the right illustrate the corrected sequences. Red cells indicate land-cover sequences that could not be logically corrected and were thus labelled as “mapping error” in the final data results.
4.4. Modelling
4.4.1. Modelling process (explanation)
The 2- and 3-date logic rules were applied to each cell within the national grid
template to correct, as far as possible, any land-cover misclassifications in the
original land-cover datasets that were now represented in the 500 x 500 m cell
attributes (after zonal majority modelling).
4.4.2. Data normalisation - Number of changes made to original
cell values
Table 10.3 (Appendix A) indicates the number individual cell values that were
changed within any 3-date sequence (on a year-by-year basis) within the full
national grid template, prior to any change assessment (Figure 4.4).
As can be seen, in most cases the number of changed cell values, including non-
correctable “mapping error” cells (per land-cover class, per year) was
significantly less than 10%, with many being less than 2%, which indicates that
15
although original mapping errors did exist, they are unlikely to have significantly
affected the reliability of the change assessment results.
Figure 4.4. Example of the data normalisation results table (refer to Appendix A Table 10.3 for full table).
16
5. Results
All change assessment results are illustrated in a series of tables contained in
Appendix B. Digital copies of the same tables are supplied along with the report
in Excel format.
5.1. Land-cover Statistics per Assessment Year
The tables below illustrate the total areas (and percentages) of each of the
mapped land-cover classes within each assessment year, at both a national and
provincial level. Since all mapped classes are representative of transformed
landscapes (i.e. changed from a natural state), these year-on-year statistics are
also broadly indicative of the level of landscape transformation across South
Africa.
Table 5.1 illustrates the total area of transformation, as represented by a
combination of all mapped land-cover classes across the entire country.
Table 5.1. Indicates the number of cells and percentage of the total number of cells that have been classed as transformed on a national scale on each of the three dates
Transformed (cell count)
Other (cell count)
*Mapping Error (cell
count)
Percentage Transformed
Percentage Other
Percentage *Mapping
Error
Total
1994 844306 4953730 8928 14.5% 85.3% 0.2% 100.0%
2000 770412 5027624 8928 13.3% 86.6% 0.2% 100.0%
2005 909633 4888403 8928 15.7% 84.2% 0.2% 100.0%
*Non-correctable mapping errors in final land-cover datasets after all possible
logical corrections have been applied
Table 5.2 is the same as Table 5.1, but sub-divided in terms of individual land-
cover classes.
17
Table 5.2. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates
1994 2000 2005
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 49116 0.8% 86469 1.5% 114987 2.0%
2 - Forestry and Plantations 67346 1.2% 83540 1.4% 93849 1.6%
3 - Mining and Quarries 7321 0.1% 7726 0.1% 9779 0.2%
4 - Cultivated 720523 12.4% 592677 10.2% 691018 11.9%
5 - Other 4953730 85.3% 5027624 86.6% 4888403 84.2%
5798036 5798036 5798036
Mapping errors 8928 0.2% 8928 0.2% 8928 0.2%
Total 5806964 100.0% 5806964 100.0% 5806964 100.0%
Tables 5.3 to Table 5.11 present the same information (on transformation extent)
but on a province by province basis.
Table 5.3. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Eastern Cape Province
1994 2000 2005 Eastern Cape
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 6980 0.9% 15826 2.0% 17136 2.1%
2 - Forestry and Plantations 4037 0.5% 5831 0.7% 6680 0.8%
3 - Mining and Quarries 50 0.0% 49 0.0% 62 0.0%
4 - Cultivated 63530 8.0% 23033 2.9% 64701 8.1%
5 - Other 720726 90.4% 750584 94.1% 706744 88.6%
795323 795323 795323
Mapping errors 1929 0.2% 1929 0.2% 1929 0.2%
Total 797252 100.0% 797252 100.0% 797252 100.0%
18
Table 5.4. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Free State Province
1994 2000 2005 Free State
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 2945 0.5% 4417 0.7% 5220 0.9%
2 - Forestry and Plantations 121 0.0% 155 0.0% 507 0.1%
3 - Mining and Quarries 790 0.1% 626 0.1% 795 0.1%
4 - Cultivated 168252 28.5% 139998 23.7% 173892 29.5%
5 - Other 417642 70.8% 444554 75.4% 409336 69.4%
589750 589750 589750
Mapping errors 229 0.0% 229 0.0% 229 0.0%
Total 589979 100.0% 589979 100.0% 589979 100.0%
Table 5.5. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Gauteng Province
1994 2000 2005 Gauteng
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 12318 16.7% 15341 20.8% 17768 24.1%
2 - Forestry and Plantations 334 0.5% 474 0.6% 625 0.8%
3 - Mining and Quarries 1107 1.5% 982 1.3% 896 1.2%
4 - Cultivated 15998 21.7% 9919 13.5% 20730 28.2%
5 - Other 42824 58.2% 45865 62.3% 32562 44.2%
72581 72581 72581
Mapping errors 1017 1.4% 1017 1.4% 1017 1.4%
Total 73598 100.0% 73598 100.0% 73598 100.0%
19
Table 5.6. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the KwaZulu-Natal Province
1994 2000 2005 KwaZulu-Natal
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 5289 1.2% 7993 1.9% 16918 3.9%
2 -Forestry and Plantations 24203 5.6% 29922 6.9% 33601 7.8%
3 - Mining and Quarries 274 0.1% 197 0.0% 172 0.0%
4 - Cultivated 73607 17.1% 55063 12.8% 55314 12.8%
5 - Other 324976 75.5% 335174 77.8% 322344 74.9%
428349 428349 428349
Mapping errors 2201 0.5% 2201 0.5% 2201 0.5%
Total 430550 100.0% 430550 100.0% 430550 100.0%
Table 5.7. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Limpopo Province
1994 2000 2005 Limpopo
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 6198 1.1% 14488 2.6% 21933 4.0%
2 - Forestry and Plantations 3045 0.6% 4107 0.7% 4482 0.8%
3 - Mining and Quarries 710 0.1% 830 0.2% 948 0.2%
4 - Cultivated 79519 14.4% 65248 11.9% 58214 10.6%
5 - Other 460214 83.6% 465013 84.5% 464109 84.3%
549686 549686 549686
Mapping errors 897 0.2% 897 0.2% 897 0.2%
Total 550583 100.0% 550583 100.0% 550583 100.0%
20
Table 5.8. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Mpumalanga Province
1994 2000 2005 Mpumalanga
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 4360 1.3% 7821 2.3% 11563 3.4%
2 -Forestry and Plantations 28046 8.3% 33789 9.9% 37588 11.1%
3 - Mining and Quarries 1963 0.6% 1558 0.5% 2908 0.9%
4 - Cultivated 56490 16.6% 48043 14.1% 73929 21.8%
5 - Other 247992 73.0% 247640 72.9% 212863 62.6%
338851 338851 338851
Mapping errors 1000 0.3% 1000 0.3% 1000 0.3%
Total 339851 100.0% 339851 100.0% 339851 100.0%
Table 5.9. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the Northern Cape Province
1994 2000 2005 Northern Cape
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 1075 0.1% 3307 0.2% 3974 0.2%
2 -Forestry and Plantations 0 0.0% 11 0.0% 13 0.0%
3 - Mining and Quarries 1330 0.1% 2079 0.1% 2424 0.1%
4 - Cultivated 12324 0.7% 9567 0.6% 11585 0.7%
5 - Other 1701991 99.1% 1701756 99.1% 1698724 99.0%
1716720 1716720 1716720
Mapping errors 28 0.0% 28 0.0% 28 0.0%
Total 1716748 100.0% 1716748 100.0% 1716748 100.0%
21
Table 5.10. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the North West Province
1994 2000 2005 North West
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 5070 1.1% 7503 1.6% 8669 1.8%
2 -Forestry and Plantations 83 0.0% 111 0.0% 312 0.1%
3 - Mining and Quarries 1018 0.2% 1212 0.3% 1268 0.3%
4 - Cultivated 94574 19.9% 101444 21.4% 106739 22.5%
5 - Other 372712 78.6% 363187 76.6% 356469 75.1%
473457 473457 473457
Mapping errors 944 0.2% 944 0.2% 944 0.2%
Total 474401 100.0% 474401 100.0% 474401 100.0%
Table 5.11. Breakdown of transformation per class for each of the three dates for the North West Province
1994 2000 2005 Western Cape
Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage Cell count Percentage
1 - Urban 4617 0.7% 6473 1.1% 7724 1.3%
2 - Forestry and Plantations 2587 0.4% 3895 0.6% 4368 0.7%
3 - Mining and Quarries 56 0.0% 167 0.0% 291 0.0%
4 - Cultivated 108524 17.6% 105627 17.1% 100112 16.2%
5 - Other 499948 81.1% 499570 81.1% 503237 81.7%
615732 615732 615732
Mapping errors 493 0.1% 493 0.1% 493 0.1%
Total 616225 100.0% 616225 100.0% 616225 100.0%
22
5.2. Land-cover Change Statistics between Assessment
Years
Tables 5.12 below illustrate the national changes in land-cover class between the
different assessment years. Note that the percentage values indicated in the
tables below are the percentage of the original cells that have changed to
another class; and not its area in relation to the total area of South Africa, i.e.
53% of the total area of mining in 1994 is still mining in 2000.
Table 5.12. Illustration of the percentage change in land-cover classes between the different assessment years
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.4% 99.5% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 53.2% 4.1% 42.7% 100%
Cultivation 1.7% 0.3% 0.1% 58.4% 39.5% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 0.5% 0.3% 0.1% 3.5% 95.7% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.3% 99.2% 0.5% 0.5% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 76.0% 2.3% 21.8% 100%
Cultivation 1.5% 0.2% 0.1% 76.8% 21.4% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
000
Open 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 4.7% 94.7% 100%
23
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.6% 98.7% 0.1% 0.6% 0.0% 100%
Mining 2.5% 0.7% 58.2% 3.4% 35.2% 100%
Cultivation 3.2% 0.5% 0.2% 65.3% 30.9% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
994
Open 0.9% 0.5% 0.1% 4.4% 94.1% 100%
For example 1.7% of the cells that were classified as Cultivation in the 1994 land-
cover have changed to Urban in the 2000 land-cover. Also 76.8% of the cells
classified as Cultivation in the 2000 land-cover was still classified as Cultivation
in 2005 whereas 21.4% of the cells classified as Cultivation in 2000 were
classified as Open in 2005 land-cover.
Similarly the tables indicate that 4.4% of the cells classed as Open in the 1994
land-cover, were classed as Cultivation in the 2005 land-cover.
5.3. Comment on Accuracy of Change Assessment
The accuracy of land-cover change detection is directly linked to the accuracy of
the input land-cover data being used to detect any change.
Both the 1994 and 2000 land-cover datasets have previously been independently
validated using comprehensive statistical sampling, as has a significant
proportion of the 2005 land-cover data (see section 3).
The assumption is that all the new land-cover data, created specifically for the
FAO change project in order to complete the 2005 national data coverage has
been generated with comparable levels of mapping accuracy, since in many
cases the same experienced remote sensing analysts have been used for this
process as were involved in the previous NLC 94 and NLC 2000 mapping
activities.
It is therefore assumed that the (logic-based) desk-top corrective measures
applied to the original land-cover data prior to change analysis should have
24
corrected, where possible, the identified misclassifications, and so improved
further the reliability of the change detection results.
25
6. Conclusions and Recommendations
The primary objective of the study was to determine the extent of transformed
landscape change within South Africa over a ten year period between 1994 and
2005. In order to achieve this objective, the project used three generalised land-
cover datasets (for 1994, 2000 and 2005) and quantified the change between
these assessment years.
The year 2000 data although not part of the primary project objective proved to
play a critical role in the validation and correction of the 1994 and 2005 datasets
in terms of determining logical land-cover change sequences. As such the 2000
dataset and associated results should not be seen as part of the primary output.
In summary the results indicate at a national level that there has been a total
increase of 1.2% in transformed land specifically associated with Urban,
Cultivation, Plantation Forestry and Mining. This represents an increase from
14.5% transformed land in 1994 to 15.7% in 2005 across South Africa. (see table
5.1a)
On a national basis the areas of Urban, Forestry and Mining have all increased
over the 10 year period where as Cultivated areas have decreased. Urban has
increased from 0.8% to 2%, Forestry from 1.2% to 1.6%, Mining has increased
from 0.1% to 0.2%, while Cultivated has decreased from 12.4% to 11.9%. The
spatial patterns do however vary geographically across provinces in South Africa.
(see table 5.1b)
Although the modelling procedures are considered sound and can form a
framework for similar change assessments in future, it should be noted that the
ouputs are dependent on the quality, compatibility and accuracy of the input
datasets. In this project it should be noted that the differences in the source
datasets relating to mapping methodology, scale and classification systems
used, will still have had an influence on the final project output. This is despite
the corrective modelling procedures implemented.
26
Woodcock and Strahler (1987) discuss the difference between high resolution
and low resolution imagery or spatial data and how the size and spatial
relationship of the object of interest influence the variability with in land-cover
classes. In this study the reported increase in mining in Mpumelanga province
from 0.6% in 1994 to 0.9% in 2005 which represents a 50%
increase in mining activity in the province is possibly an under
estimation. This is the result of the fact that strip mining areas
are generally not the dominant cover with in a 500 x 500 m cell
due to their linear shape. (see inset)
The dataset resulting from the process described can however still be considered
a useful resource for further research. It is presented in a format that facilitates
further research and analysis where researchers can alter assumptions made by
the current research team and introduce their own assumptions. The format of
the dataset allows for ease of re-analysis and further interrogation.
It is recommended that further research should include investigation into the
transformed cover classes with the objective of identifying the drivers and type of
change that has occurred as well as the impacts, socially, environmentally and
economically of these changes over time.
27
7. South African Land-Cover Change Product
Description & MetaData
7.1.1. Data description
The resulting dataset created through the processes described is a grid of
500x500m cells covering the extent of South Africa including Swaziland and
Lesotho.
Type of data: vector (polygon) digital data
Data storage: the data is stored in an ESRI file type geodatabase as it consists of
5,806,964 features/objects thus making it a very large file and to ensure ease of
use the decision was made to store in a file type geodatabase.
7.1.2. Attribute Description
The following fields (Table 7.1) are present in the attribute table of the 500x500m
grid.
Table 7.1. Description of the attributes in the attribute table of the digital 500x500m grid vector data
Attribute Description
ObjectID System generated Object identification. Internal feature number
Shape Feature geometry
Province or Country name for processing and querying purposes
LC_1994 1994 Land-cover code as per FAO code. See *Subclass description
MAJ_F94 Majority fraction of class found in the cell for the 1994 land-cover
LC_2000 2000 Land-cover code as per FAO code. See *Subclass description
MAJ_F00 Majority fraction of class found in the cell for the 2000 land-cover
LC_2005 2005 Land-cover code as per FAO code. See *Subclass description
MAJ_F05 Majority fraction of class found in the cell for the 2005 land-cover
LC_1994c Normalised 1994 Land-cover code as per FAO code. See *Subclass
28
description
LC_2000c Normalised 2000 Land-cover code as per FAO code. See *Subclass description
LC_2005c Normalised 2005 Land-cover code as per FAO code. See *Subclass description
LC_CHANGE Different land-cover codes found over the three dates. Indicated as a series of codes, for example “4;2;1” will indicated the cell value for 1994 was Cultivated, in 2000 Forestry and Plantations and in 2005 became Urban. This is based on the normalised data values
LCC94_00 Land-cover change between 1994 and 2000. Summarised in Table 3.1.12
LCC00_05 Land-cover change between 2000 and 2005. Summarised in Table 3.1.12
LCC94_05 Land-cover change between 1994 and 2005. Summarised in Table 3.1.12
* Subclass: FAO code and description
1 – Urban
2 – Forestry and plantations
3 – Mining and quarries
4 – Cultivation and agriculture
5 - Other
29
8. Maps
Included in Appendix C.
List of maps
• 1994 summarised FAO land-cover map
• 2000 summarised FAO land-cover map
• 2005 summarised FAO land-cover map
• map showing areas where change occurred
9. References
Fairbanks DHK, Thompson MW, Vink DE, Newby TS, Berg van den HM, and
Everard DA; 2000. The South African Land-Cover Characteristics Database: a
synopsis of the landscape. SA Journal of Science. 96. Feb 2000 p 69 – 82.
GeoTerraImage, 2008. C.A.P.E. NATURE Fine Scale Biodiversity Planning
Conservation Project. Land-Cover Classifications from SPOT5 Satellite Imagey.
End Users Summary Report and Metadata. Unpublished project report, February
2008.
GeoTerraImage, 2008. KZN Province Land-Cover Mapping (from SPOT2/4
Satellite Imagery 2005-06). Data Users Report and Metadata. Unpublished
project report, February 2008.
GeoTerraImage, 2008. North West Province 2006 Land-Cover Project. Summary
MetaData and End-Users Report. Unpublished project report, June 2008
Van den Berg, E.C., Plarre, C., Van den Berg, H.M. and Thompson, M.W. 2008.
The South African National Land-cover 2000. Agricultural Research Council-
Institute for Soil, Climate and Water. Pretoria. (Report No. GW/A/2008/86).
Woodcock, C.E. & Strahler, A.H. (1987), The Factor of Scale in Remote Sensing.
RSoEnv. 21: 311-332.
30
10. Appendices
Appendix A. Data Tables
Table 10.1. Two date land-cover sequence
Change from Code
Change to Code Possible?
Urban Forestry/Plantations No
Urban Mining/Quarries No
Urban Cultivation No
Urban Other No
Forestry/Plantations Urban Yes
Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Yes
Forestry/Plantations Cultivation No
Forestry/Plantations Other No
Mining/Quarries Urban No
Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations No
Mining/Quarries Cultivation Yes
Mining/Quarries Other Yes
Cultivation Urban Yes
Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Yes
Cultivation Mining/Quarries Yes
Cultivation Other Yes
Other Urban Yes
Other Forestry/Plantations Yes
Other Mining/Quarries Yes
Other Cultivation Yes
31
Table 10.2. Three date year-on-year land-cover sequence and the resulting logical corrections (original sequence on left, corrected sequence on right).
FAO Land-cover Change - potential Cell value combinations FAO Land-cover Change – logical corrections – modeling results
1994 2000 2005 Logical 1994 2000 � 2005
Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Y 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations N 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries N 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Cultivation N 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Other X 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up X 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations � Forestry/Plantations 2;2;2
Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up X 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 3;3;3 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries � Mining/Quarries 3;3;3
Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Cultivation Urban/Built-up X 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Cultivation Forestry/Plantations N mapping error
Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
32
Urban/Built-up Cultivation Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Cultivation Cultivation X 4;4;4 Cultivation Cultivation � Cultivation 4;4;4
Urban/Built-up Cultivation Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Other Urban/Built-up X 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up � Urban/Built-up 1;1;1
Urban/Built-up Other Forestry/Plantations N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Other Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Other Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error � Mapping Error 0;0;0
Urban/Built-up Other Other X 5;5;5 Other Other � Other 5;5;5
FAO Land-cover Change - potential Cell value combinations FAO Land-cover Change – logical corrections – modeling results
1994 2000 2005 Logical 1994 2000 2005 Logical
Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Y 2;1;1 Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Y 2;1;1
Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2
Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Y 2;2;1 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Y 2;2;1
Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Y 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Y 2;2;2
Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Y 2;2;3 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Y 2;2;3
Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Cultivation Y 2;2;4
Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Cultivation Y 2;2;4
33
Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Other Y 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Y 2;2;2
Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2
Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 2;3;3 Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 2;3;3
Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 2;3;4 Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 2;3;4
Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Cultivation Urban/Built-up N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Cultivation Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2
Forestry/Plantations Cultivation Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Cultivation Cultivation X 4;4;4 Cultivation Cultivation Cultivation X 4;4;4
Forestry/Plantations Cultivation Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Other Urban/Built-up N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Other Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2
Forestry/Plantations Other Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Other Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Forestry/Plantations Other Other X 5;5;5 Other Other Other X 5;5;5
34
FAO Land-cover Change - potential Cell value combinations FAO Land-cover Change – logical corrections – modeling results
1994 2000 2005 Logical 1994 2000 2005 Logical
Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up X 1;1;1 Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up X 1;1;1
Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries X 3;3;3 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries X 3;3;3
Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2 Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations X 2;2;2
Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries X 3;3;3 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries X 3;3;3
Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up X 3;3;3 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries X 3;3;3
Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations X 3;3;3 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries X 3;3;3
Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 3;3;3 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 3;3;3
Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 3;3;4 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 3;3;4
Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Other Y 3;3;5 Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Other Y 3;3;5
Mining/Quarries Cultivation Urban/Built-up Y 3;4;1 Mining/Quarries Cultivation Urban/Built-up Y 3;4;1
Mining/Quarries Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Y 3;4;2 Mining/Quarries Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Y 3;4;2
Mining/Quarries Cultivation Mining/Quarries Y 3;4;3 Mining/Quarries Cultivation Mining/Quarries Y 3;4;3
Mining/Quarries Cultivation Cultivation Y 3;4;4
Mining/Quarries Cultivation Cultivation Y 3;4;4
35
Mining/Quarries Cultivation Other Y 3;4;5 Mining/Quarries Cultivation Other Y 3;4;5
Mining/Quarries Other Urban/Built-up Y 3;5;1 Mining/Quarries Other Urban/Built-up Y 3;5;1
Mining/Quarries Other Forestry/Plantations Y 3;5;2 Mining/Quarries Other Forestry/Plantations Y 3;5;2
Mining/Quarries Other Mining/Quarries Y 3;3;3 Mining/Quarries Other Mining/Quarries Y 3;3;3
Mining/Quarries Other Cultivation Y 3;5;4 Mining/Quarries Other Cultivation Y 3;5;4
Mining/Quarries Other Other Y 3;5;5 Mining/Quarries Other Other Y 3;5;5
FAO Land-cover Change - potential Cell value combinations FAO Land-cover Change – logical corrections – modeling results
1994 2000 2005 Logical 1994 2000 2005 Logical
Cultivation Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Y 4;1;1 Cultivation Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Y 4;1;1
Cultivation Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Cultivation Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Cultivation Urban/Built-up Cultivation X 4;4;4 Cultivation Cultivation Cultivation X 4;4;4
Cultivation Urban/Built-up Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Y 4;2;1 Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Y 4;2;1
Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Y 4;2;2 Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Y 4;2;2
Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Y 4;2;3 Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Y 4;2;3
Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Cultivation X 4;4;4 Cultivation Cultivation Cultivation X 4;4;4
Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Other N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Cultivation Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up N mapping error
Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
36
Cultivation Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Cultivation Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 4;3;3 Cultivation Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 4;3;3
Cultivation Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 4;3;4 Cultivation Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 4;3;4
Cultivation Mining/Quarries Other Y 4;3;5 Cultivation Mining/Quarries Other Y 4;3;5
Cultivation Cultivation Urban/Built-up Y 4;4;1 Cultivation Cultivation Urban/Built-up Y 4;4;1
Cultivation Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Y 4;4;2 Cultivation Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Y 4;4;2
Cultivation Cultivation Mining/Quarries Y 4;4;3 Cultivation Cultivation Mining/Quarries Y 4;4;3
Cultivation Cultivation Cultivation Y 4;4;4 Cultivation Cultivation Cultivation Y 4;4;4
Cultivation Cultivation Other Y 4;4;5 Cultivation Cultivation Other Y 4;4;5
Cultivation Other Urban/Built-up Y 4;5;1 Cultivation Other Urban/Built-up Y 4;5;1
Cultivation Other Forestry/Plantations Y 4;5;2 Cultivation Other Forestry/Plantations Y 4;5;2
Cultivation Other Mining/Quarries Y 4;5;3 Cultivation Other Mining/Quarries Y 4;5;3
Cultivation Other Cultivation Y 4;5;4 Cultivation Other Cultivation Y 4;5;4
Cultivation Other Other Y 4;5;5 Cultivation Other Other Y 4;5;5
37
FAO Land-cover Change - potential Cell value combinations FAO Land-cover Change – logical corrections – modeling results
1994 2000 2005 Logical 1994 2000 2005 Logical
Other Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Y 5;1;1 Other Urban/Built-up Urban/Built-up Y 5;1;1
Other Urban/Built-up Forestry/Plantations N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Other Urban/Built-up Mining/Quarries N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Other Urban/Built-up Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Other Urban/Built-up Other X 5;5;5 Other Other Other X 5;5;5
Other Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Y 5;2;1 Other Forestry/Plantations Urban/Built-up Y 5;2;1
Other Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Y 5;2;2 Other Forestry/Plantations Forestry/Plantations Y 5;2;2
Other Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Y 5;2;3 Other Forestry/Plantations Mining/Quarries Y 5;2;3
Other Forestry/Plantations Cultivation N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Other Forestry/Plantations Other X 5;5;5 Other Other Other X 5;5;5
Other Mining/Quarries Urban/Built-up N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Other Mining/Quarries Forestry/Plantations N mapping error Mapping Error Mapping Error Mapping Error N 0;0;0
Other Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 5;3;3 Other Mining/Quarries Mining/Quarries Y 5;3;3
Other Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 5;3;4 Other Mining/Quarries Cultivation Y 5;3;4
Other Mining/Quarries Other Y 5;3;5 Other Mining/Quarries Other Y 5;3;5
Other Cultivation Urban/Built-up Y 5;4;1 Other Cultivation Urban/Built-up Y 5;4;1
Other Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Y 5;4;2 Other Cultivation Forestry/Plantations Y 5;4;2
Other Cultivation Mining/Quarries Y 5;4;3 Other Cultivation Mining/Quarries Y 5;4;3
Other Cultivation Cultivation Y 5;4;4
Other Cultivation Cultivation Y 5;4;4
38
Other Cultivation Other Y 5;4;5 Other Cultivation Other Y 5;4;5
Other Other Urban/Built-up Y 5;5;1 Other Other Urban/Built-up Y 5;5;1
Other Other Forestry/Plantations Y 5;5;2 Other Other Forestry/Plantations Y 5;5;2
Other Other Mining/Quarries Y 5;5;3 Other Other Mining/Quarries Y 5;5;3
Other Other Cultivation Y 5;5;4 Other Other Cultivation Y 5;5;4
Other Other Other Y 5;5;5 Other Other Other Y 5;5;5
39
Table 10.3. Cell changes resulting from logical corrections
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 86.09% 13.91% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.41% 0.59% 100.00% 1 - Urban 98.58% 1.42% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 91.13% 8.87% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 94.10% 5.90% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 99.81% 0.19% 100.00%
3 - Mining 98.51% 1.49% 100.00% 3 - Mining 94.78% 5.22% 100.00% 3 - Mining 97.84% 2.16% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.84% 0.16% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.55% 0.45% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.17% 0.83% 100.00%
Mp
um
ala
ng
a
5 - Other 99.90% 0.10% 100.00% 5 - Other 97.85% 2.15% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.69% 0.31% 100.00%
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 58.38% 41.62% 100.00% 1 - Urban 96.53% 3.47% 100.00% 1 - Urban 98.72% 1.28% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 55.98% 44.02% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 97.77% 2.23% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 99.91% 0.09% 100.00%
3 - Mining 90.00% 10.00% 100.00% 3 - Mining 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 3 - Mining 79.49% 20.51% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.85% 0.15% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 98.77% 1.23% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 97.55% 2.45% 100.00%
Easte
rn C
ap
e
5 - Other 99.99% 0.01% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.68% 0.32% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.93% 0.07% 100.00%
40
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 76.22% 23.78% 100.00% 1 - Urban 92.10% 7.90% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.58% 0.42% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 29.01% 70.99% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 70.97% 29.03% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 96.56% 3.44% 100.00%
3 - Mining 96.77% 3.23% 100.00% 3 - Mining 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 3 - Mining 95.02% 4.98% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.99% 0.01% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.95% 0.05% 100.00%
Fre
e S
tate
5 - Other 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.99% 0.01% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.98% 0.02% 100.00%
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 82.25% 17.75% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.82% 0.18% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.36% 0.64% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 45.47% 54.53% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 62.44% 37.56% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 91.71% 8.29% 100.00%
3 - Mining 82.52% 17.48% 100.00% 3 - Mining 89.01% 10.99% 100.00% 3 - Mining 97.44% 2.56% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.84% 0.16% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.24% 0.76% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 96.52% 3.48% 100.00%
Gau
ten
g
5 - Other 99.91% 0.09% 100.00% 5 - Other 95.62% 4.38% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.34% 0.66% 100.00%
41
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 78.02% 21.98% 100.00% 1 - Urban 77.68% 22.32% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.19% 0.81% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 85.11% 14.89% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 89.27% 10.73% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 99.22% 0.78% 100.00%
3 - Mining 85.44% 14.56% 100.00% 3 - Mining 82.70% 17.30% 100.00% 3 - Mining 92.36% 7.64% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 98.96% 1.04% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 98.85% 1.15% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 98.49% 1.51% 100.00%
Kw
aZ
ulu
Nata
l
5 - Other 99.89% 0.11% 100.00% 5 - Other 98.72% 1.28% 100.00% 5 - Other 98.98% 1.02% 100.00%
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 67.97% 32.03% 100.00% 1 - Urban 94.99% 5.01% 100.00% 1 - Urban 100.00% 0.00% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 20.37% 79.63% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 94.74% 5.26% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 98.81% 1.19% 100.00%
3 - Mining 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 3 - Mining 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 3 - Mining 100.00% 0.00% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.88% 0.12% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.82% 0.18% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.91% 0.09% 100.00%
Leso
tho
5 - Other 99.99% 0.01% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.98% 0.02% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.93% 0.07% 100.00%
42
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 82.05% 17.95% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.06% 0.94% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.64% 0.36% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 74.98% 25.02% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 78.94% 21.06% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 97.37% 2.63% 100.00%
3 - Mining 99.15% 0.85% 100.00% 3 - Mining 96.95% 3.05% 100.00% 3 - Mining 99.89% 0.11% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.81% 0.19% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 98.95% 1.05% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.43% 0.57% 100.00%
Lim
po
po
5 - Other 99.97% 0.03% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.76% 0.24% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.82% 0.18% 100.00%
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 70.98% 29.02% 100.00% 1 - Urban 96.98% 3.02% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.62% 0.38% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 98.75% 1.25% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 64.71% 35.29% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 100.00% 0.00% 100.00%
3 - Mining 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 3 - Mining 98.86% 1.14% 100.00% 3 - Mining 99.92% 0.08% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.99% 0.01% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.84% 0.16% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.98% 0.02% 100.00%
No
rthern
Cap
e
5 - Other 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.99% 0.01% 100.00% 5 - Other 100.00% 0.00% 100.00%
43
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 77.31% 22.69% 100.00% 1 - Urban 76.20% 23.80% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.31% 0.69% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 24.33% 75.67% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 51.28% 48.72% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 97.44% 2.56% 100.00%
3 - Mining 2059.18% 100.00% 2159.18% 3 - Mining 97.97% 2.03% 100.00% 3 - Mining 98.95% 1.05% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 23543.64% 100.00% 23643.64% 4 - Cultivated 99.70% 0.30% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.53% 0.47% 100.00%
No
rth W
est
5 - Other 309643.33% 100.00% 309743.33% 5 - Other 99.82% 0.18% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.56% 0.44% 100.00%
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 76.00% 24.00% 100.00% 1 - Urban 96.81% 3.19% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.69% 0.31% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 87.80% 12.20% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 92.52% 7.48% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 99.94% 0.06% 100.00%
3 - Mining 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 3 - Mining 92.86% 7.14% 100.00% 3 - Mining 33.33% 66.67% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.67% 0.33% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.83% 0.17% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.88% 0.12% 100.00%
Sw
azila
nd
5 - Other 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 5 - Other 98.91% 1.09% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.18% 0.82% 100.00%
44
Normalising the data: Logical corrections made to the cell values based on the pairing possibilities and the accepted 3 date sequences
Year: 1994 Year: 2000 Year: 2005
Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage Class Unaltered Percentage
Logically Corrected Percentage
Total Percentage
1 - Urban 82.76% 17.24% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.58% 0.42% 100.00% 1 - Urban 99.39% 0.61% 100.00%
2 - Forestry 51.90% 48.10% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 91.59% 8.41% 100.00% 2 - Forestry 99.55% 0.45% 100.00%
3 - Mining 75.71% 24.29% 100.00% 3 - Mining 99.40% 0.60% 100.00% 3 - Mining 97.32% 2.68% 100.00%
4 - Cultivated 99.97% 0.03% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.66% 0.34% 100.00% 4 - Cultivated 99.85% 0.15% 100.00%
We
ste
rn C
ap
e
5 - Other 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.86% 0.14% 100.00% 5 - Other 99.91% 0.09% 100.00%
45
Appendix B. Results Summaries
Table 10.4. Eastern Cape land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 26.0% 0.0% 74.0% 100%
Cultivation 4.2% 0.3% 0.0% 18.6% 76.9% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.9% 0.2% 0.0% 1.6% 97.4% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 99.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 89.8% 2.0% 8.2% 100%
Cultivation 0.7% 0.1% 0.0% 55.2% 44.0% 100%
Yea
r: 20
00
Open 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 6.9% 92.8% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 99.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 30.0% 8.0% 62.0% 100%
Cultivation 4.8% 0.5% 0.0% 46.7% 48.0% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 1.0% 0.3% 0.0% 4.9% 93.8% 100%
Error count: 1929 0.24%
Total Number of Cells 797252
46
Table 10.5. Free State Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 90.1% 9.9% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 52.4% 0.9% 46.7% 100%
Cultivation 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 67.9% 31.8% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 6.2% 93.6% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 99.4% 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 95.2% 0.3% 4.5% 100%
Cultivation 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 91.4% 8.5% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 10.3% 89.4% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 89.3% 9.9% 0.8% 0.0% 100%
Mining 1.6% 0.3% 61.1% 2.7% 34.3% 100%
Cultivation 0.4% 0.1% 0.0% 79.8% 19.7% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% 9.5% 90.0% 100%
Error count: 229 0.04%
Total Number of Cells 589979
47
Table 10.6. Gauteng Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 67.0% 1.0% 32.0% 100%
Cultivation 5.7% 0.2% 0.4% 43.1% 50.7% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 4.9% 0.3% 0.4% 7.0% 87.3% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 10.1% 87.6% 1.9% 1.9% 0.0% 101%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 70.2% 2.9% 27.0% 100%
Cultivation 1.5% 0.1% 0.2% 89.8% 8.5% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 4.9% 0.4% 0.4% 25.7% 68.6% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 5.1% 92.2% 0.0% 2.7% 0.0% 100%
Mining 6.2% 1.0% 60.3% 2.6% 29.8% 100%
Cultivation 8.3% 0.5% 0.3% 74.0% 16.8% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 9.4% 0.5% 0.4% 20.7% 69.0% 100%
Error count: 1017 1.38%
Total Number of Cells 73598
48
Table 10.7. KwaZulu Natal Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 35.8% 4.0% 60.2% 100%
Cultivation 1.4% 1.5% 0.0% 45.1% 52.0% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.5% 1.4% 0.0% 6.7% 91.3% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.2% 99.0% 0.8% 0.8% 0.0% 101%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 56.9% 1.5% 41.6% 100%
Cultivation 5.9% 1.2% 0.0% 57.9% 35.0% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 1.7% 1.0% 0.0% 6.9% 90.4% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.1% 98.9% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 4.7% 1.8% 28.8% 2.6% 62.0% 100%
Cultivation 6.3% 2.4% 0.0% 49.1% 42.3% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 2.1% 2.4% 0.0% 5.8% 89.6% 100%
Error count: 2201 0.51%
Total Number of Cells 430550
49
Table 10.8. Lesotho Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 83.3% 0.0% 16.7% 100%
Cultivation 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 50.1% 47.4% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 91.6% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 92.3% 0.0% 7.7% 100%
Cultivation 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 56.2% 42.2% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 7.4% 92.5% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 83.3% 0.0% 16.7% 100%
Cultivation 3.8% 0.1% 0.0% 46.7% 49.4% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 0.3% 0.1% 0.0% 6.9% 92.8% 100%
Error count: 100 0.07%
Total Number of Cells 140199
50
Table 10.9. Limpopo Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 64.8% 3.1% 32.1% 100%
Cultivation 4.7% 0.2% 0.1% 54.0% 41.0% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 1.0% 0.2% 0.1% 4.8% 93.9% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.8% 96.9% 2.3% 2.3% 0.0% 102%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 83.7% 1.7% 14.6% 100%
Cultivation 4.5% 0.2% 0.0% 65.7% 29.6% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 1.0% 0.1% 0.1% 3.3% 95.6% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.4% 96.4% 0.0% 3.2% 0.0% 100%
Mining 1.3% 0.0% 66.8% 2.5% 29.4% 100%
Cultivation 9.0% 0.3% 0.1% 48.1% 42.4% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 1.9% 0.3% 0.1% 4.3% 93.5% 100%
Error count: 897 0.16%
Total Number of Cells 550583
51
Table 10.10. Mpumalanga Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 99.9% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 40.6% 10.8% 48.7% 100%
Cultivation 1.5% 0.5% 0.4% 57.9% 39.7% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 1.1% 2.2% 0.2% 6.1% 90.4% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.3% 99.6% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 76.6% 6.6% 16.8% 100%
Cultivation 1.8% 0.4% 1.1% 85.7% 10.9% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 1.1% 1.5% 0.5% 13.2% 83.7% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.2% 99.5% 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 100%
Mining 2.2% 0.9% 59.1% 7.1% 30.7% 100%
Cultivation 3.1% 1.1% 1.1% 76.3% 18.5% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 2.2% 3.7% 0.4% 12.4% 81.4% 100%
Error count: 1000 0.29%
Total Number of Cells 339851
52
Table 10.11. North West Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 48.9% 2.2% 48.9% 100%
Cultivation 0.6% 0.0% 0.1% 67.1% 32.2% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.5% 0.0% 0.2% 10.2% 89.1% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.9% 97.3% 1.8% 1.8% 0.0% 102%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 59.4% 1.6% 39.0% 100%
Cultivation 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 77.8% 21.9% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 7.7% 91.9% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 97.6% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% 100%
Mining 3.0% 1.3% 45.7% 2.8% 47.2% 100%
Cultivation 0.9% 0.1% 0.2% 72.9% 25.9% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 0.7% 0.0% 0.2% 10.1% 88.9% 100%
Error count: 944 0.20%
Total Number of Cells 474401
53
Table 10.12. Northern Cape Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 62.4% 0.1% 37.5% 100%
Cultivation 0.7% 0.1% 0.1% 51.0% 48.2% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 99.6% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 80.1% 0.2% 19.6% 100%
Cultivation 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 76.0% 23.7% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 99.7% 0.0% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0%
Mining 0.3% 0.0% 66.5% 0.0% 33.2% 100%
Cultivation 1.2% 0.1% 0.1% 53.3% 45.3% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.3% 99.5% 100%
Error count: 28 0.00%
Total Number of Cells 1716748
54
Table 10.13. Swaziland Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 45.5% 0.0% 54.5% 100%
Cultivation 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 37.3% 59.1% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 2.2% 1.1% 0.0% 6.9% 89.8% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 92.3% 100%
Cultivation 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 26.6% 72.7% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 0.3% 0.7% 0.0% 1.4% 97.7% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 9.1% 0.0% 90.9% 100%
Cultivation 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 16.5% 79.4% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 2.5% 1.8% 0.0% 1.5% 94.3% 100%
Error count: 90 0.12%
Total Number of Cells 77578
55
Table 10.14. Western Cape Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 55.4% 21.4% 23.2% 100%
Cultivation 0.6% 0.2% 0.0% 80.5% 18.7% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 3.7% 95.9% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 1.2% 98.6% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 85.0% 0.0% 15.0% 100%
Cultivation 0.5% 0.1% 0.0% 82.3% 17.1% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 2.6% 97.1% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.6% 99.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 39.3% 5.4% 55.4% 100%
Cultivation 1.2% 0.3% 0.0% 77.5% 20.9% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 0.4% 0.3% 0.0% 3.2% 96.1% 100%
Error count: 493 0.08%
Total Number of Cells 616225
56
Table 10.15. National Land-cover change
Year: 2000
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.4% 99.5% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 53.2% 4.1% 42.7% 100%
Cultivation 1.7% 0.3% 0.1% 58.4% 39.5% 100%
Ye
ar: 1
99
4
Open 0.5% 0.3% 0.1% 3.5% 95.7% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.3% 99.2% 0.5% 0.5% 0.0% 100%
Mining 0.0% 0.0% 76.0% 2.3% 21.8% 100%
Cultivation 1.5% 0.2% 0.1% 76.8% 21.4% 100%
Ye
ar: 2
00
0
Open 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 4.7% 94.7% 100%
Year: 2005
Percentage Urban Forestry Mining Cultivation Open Total
Urban 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100%
Forestry 0.6% 98.7% 0.1% 0.6% 0.0% 100%
Mining 2.5% 0.7% 58.2% 3.4% 35.2% 100%
Cultivation 3.2% 0.5% 0.2% 65.3% 30.9% 100%
Yea
r: 19
94
Open 0.9% 0.5% 0.1% 4.4% 94.1% 100%
Error count: 8928 0.15%
Total Number of Cells 5806964
57
Appendix C. Maps
58
59
60