MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413781146 · doi:10.1016/j.envc.2025.101289

Advancing geospatial insights in Afghanistan: Annual land cover mapping and landscape metrics analysis for rural landscape planning and restoration

2025· article· en· W4413781146 on OpenAlexaff
Kabir Uddin, Birendra Bajracharya, Bandana Shakya, Sayed Burhan Atal, Mir A. Matin, Waheedullah Yousafi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Challenges · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUnited Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and Health
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceInternational Centre for Integrated Mountain DevelopmentNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationUniversity of MarylandUnited States Agency for International DevelopmentUniversity of Alabama
KeywordsGeospatial analysisGeographyLand coverLandscape planningCover (algebra)Landscape assessmentEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningLand useLandscape designCartographyEcologyEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Desertification, conflict-driven degradation, and climate change increasingly threaten Afghanistan's landscapes, shaped by both natural processes and long-standing human-environment interactions. There is an urgent need to analyze land cover dynamics and methodological insights in the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) region, particularly in Afghanistan, to guide landscape restoration and regeneration efforts. Addressing this gap, this study produces the first consistent, harmonized annual land cover dataset for Afghanistan from 2000 to 2018, using Google Earth Engine (GEE), the Random Forest algorithm, remote sensing techniques, and 30-meter resolution satellite images. Despite historical data constraints, the cloud-based approach enabled comprehensive national-scale mapping. In 2018, rangeland was the dominant land cover type (45.66%), followed by barren land (31.03%) and sand (7.71%). Over the 19-year period, Rangeland expanded by 1.08%, with notable expansions in built-up areas and sand-covered zones. Spatial patterns and fragmentation were assessed using five landscape metrics: greatest patch area, number of patches, overall core area, splitting index and, largest patch index. These analyses identified critical trends in urban expansion and rangeland fragmentation. The resulting annual land cover database and landscape metrics offer a robust evidence base to inform rural landscape planning, zoning, and restoration initiatives aligned with national and global sustainability goals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ChallengesSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207