Tropical Ecology International Society

https://doi.org/10.1007/s42965-019-00022-3 for Tropical Ecology

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Study on land‑use and land‑cover change dynamics in Eastern

Arunachal Pradesh, N.E. India using remote sensing and GIS
Jyotishman Deka1 · Om Prakash Tripathi2 · Mohammed Latif Khan3 · Vijay Kumar Srivastava4

Received: 12 December 2018 / Revised: 23 July 2019 / Accepted: 25 July 2019

© International Society for Tropical Ecology 2019

Abstract
The current study describes the land use and land cover dynamics in Eastern Arunachal Pradesh from 1985 to 2005 using
remote sensing and Geographical Information System (GIS). Landsat-MSS, IRS-LISS-I and LISS-III data for the period
1985, 1995 and 2005 were used to prepare the land use/land cover (LULC) map at 1:250K for different periods. Post-
classification change detection technique for quantifying the changes for twelve major land use and land cover types was
analyzed. The study signifies that the region experiences expansion in crop land and built-up area and decline in forest area.
Crop land and built-up area has increased by 665.41 km2 and 16.72 km2, respectively, from 1985 to 2005. On the other hand,
forest area has declined by 699.37 km2 during the period. The study showed that topography and increasing population play
an important role in shaping the LULC pattern. The study further revealed the importance of satellite remote sensing and
GIS as an effective approach for analyzing the direction, rate and spatial pattern of land use dynamics. It is believed that this
type of study will help to contribute towards sustainable land-use planning and management in this part of the North East
India in the near future.

Keywords  Change detection · Change matrix · Land-use · Population · Topography

Introduction Lambin 2002; Lakshumanan et al. 2012; Dubovyk 2017;

Spatial and temporal distribution of land use/land cover
(LULC) is one of the key components of change detection
studies. The LULC pattern of a region is a resultant of both
natural and socioeconomic factors and their utilization by
human beings in time and space (Sundarakumar et al. 2012;
Debnath et al. 2017). Land is becoming a scarce resource
due to immense anthropogenic pressures e.g. agricultural
expansion, forest logging, commercial plantation, mining,
industry, urbanization and road building, etc. (Geist and
* Jyotishman Deka
jyotishmandeka@gmail.com
1
Department of Botany, University of Science
and Technology, Baridua, Meghalaya 793101, India
2
Department of Forestry, North Eastern Regional
Institute of Science and Technology, Nirjuli,
Arunachal Pradesh 791109, India
3
Department of Botany, Dr. Harisingh Gour Central
University, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh 470003, India
4
Land Use Division, National Remote Sensing Center,
Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, 500037, India
Pawe and Saikia 2018). Further, land-use change has a sub-
stantial impact on the world’s ecosystems (Polasky et al.
2011). Therefore, information on LULC and possibilities
for their optimal use is essential for the selection, plan-
ning and implementation of schemes to meet the increasing
demands for basic human needs and their welfare. Over the
past years, data from remote sensing satellites have become
critical in representing the earth’s features, managing natural
resources and analyzing environmental change (Sreeniva-
sulu et al. 2013; Gaur et al. 2016; Lopez and Frohn 2017).
Collection of remote sensing data facilitates the synoptic
analysis of earth-system function, patterning, and change
at local, regional and global scales over time (Rajeshwari
2006; Amin and Fazal 2012). As such, utilization of multi-
spectral-multitemporal remote sensing data has been widely
used to generate thematic LULC inventories for a range of
applications including urban planning, agricultural crop
characterization, forest ecosystem classification and also for
the identification of LULC change drivers (Khorram 1987;
Dewan and Yamaguchi 2009; Aguirre-Gutierrez et al. 2012;
Duraisamy et al. 2018; Sharma et al. 2019; Mishra et al.
2019).

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

Studies on LULC change analysis in northeast India, has
been very limited till date (Deka et al. 2014). Gautam and
Chennaiah (1985) have prepared a LULC map of Tripura
using Landsat imagery data and detected the temporal
changes. Again, Singh (1989) made an attempt for detect-
ing the changes in the forests cover of northeastern region of
India used Landsat data. Kushwaha et al. (2000) evaluated
the habitat changes in Kaziranga National Park and Shrivas-
tava et al. (2002) studied the large scale forest cover change
in Sonitpur District, Assam using Remote Sensing and GIS.
Lele et al. (2005) also used the geospatial technology for
analyzing forest cover dynamics in northeast India. Further,
Sarma et al. (2008) made an attempt for land-use and land-
cover change in Manas National Park, India using multi-
temporal satellite data. Again, Chakraborty (2009) used
moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) to
study the change in forest cover of Barak basin, north eastern
part of India. Similarly, Deka et al. (2011) conducted a study
on Deepor Beel wetland ecosystem of Assam to monitor
the spatial change in the extent using remote sensing and
GIS. Kotoky et al. (2012) studied the changing pattern in
land use and land cover along the Dhansiri River Channel,
Assam using IRS LISS-III images. Similarly, Debnath et al.
(2017) investigated the chronological Change of Land Use/
Land Cover of the Muhuri River Basin from 1972 to 2016,
Tripura, northeast India. Recently Areendran et al. (2018)
made an attempt to map the LULC of Mouling National Park
in Arunachal Pradesh.
Even though various research efforts has been undertaken
to understand the changing LULC patterns, requirement of a
fundamental datasets providing both quantitative and quanti-
tative land-cover information is still a need, especially at the
local level. The current study area which falls in the Him-
alayan region also known for its rich biodiversity, human
induced landscape encroachment in the form of settlement
and agricultural extension and over-exploitation of the natu-
ral resources has already reached an alarming level. Hence
there is a need to initiate various conservation and man-
agement strategies to mitigate such uncontrolled resource
exploitation. Therefore, the current study will prove to play
a vital role to understand and mitigate the land cover change
pattern which otherwise will have an adverse effect on the
existing biodiversity and the environment both at the local
and regional scale. Further in order to understand the forces
and the nature of change, it is also necessary to study the
explicit relation between the land use change drivers and the
variations in change physiognomies. Moreover it is of the
general argument that growing population leads to increase
in socioeconomic necessities which create a pressure on the
existing LULC, which subsequently leads to severe environ-
mental problems such as landslides, floods etc. Hence the
current study attempts to address a better quantitative under-
standing of how the study area in this Himalayan region has
13
Tropical Ecology
actually been changing. The relationship between population
and topography with LULC change has also been studied.
The study uses the geospatial technology to characterize
and analyze LULC change from 1985 to 2005 in Eastern
Arunachal Pradesh.
Study area
The study area comprises of three districts of Arunachal
Pradesh, viz. Lower Dibang valley, Lohit and Changlang
(Fig. 1). These districts lie between 26°52′36″ to 28°38′36″N
latitude and 95°19′12″ to 97°09′59″E longitude and covers
an area of 12,851 km2. The topology is generally undulating
and hilly with attitudes ranging from 120 to 5175 m msl. It
has a vast plain area towards the western side forming the
alluvial plain. Forest types in the study area also change with
altitude from tropical, subtropical to temperate types. The
annual rainfall ranges from 2000 to 4300 mm with a mean
annual temperature of 21°C.
Materials and methods
Data used
The geo-corrected satellite data of Landsat-MSS, IRS-LISS-
I and LISS-III for pre- and post-monsoon seasons for the
period 1985, 1995 and 2005 provided by National Remote
Sensing Centre, Hyderabad were utilized in order to under-
stand the dynamics of LULC change.
Preparation of LULC map of 1995 and 1985
The LULC map for the year 2005 prepared by NRSC,
Hyderabad, using IRS-LISS-III data. It has been used
as the master map for generation of LULC map of 1995
and 1985. The LULC map was originally at 1:50K which
was recasted to 1:250K by merging polygons smaller
than 56.25 ha (minimum mappable unit at this scale).
In the process the classification scheme also got modi-
fied in view of the interpretability of the LULC class, in
accordance with the IGBP classification scheme at this
scale. This map has an overall classification accuracy of
more than 90% at 90% confidence level. This map was
used as the master map for generating LULC map for
the year 1995 and 1985. A copy of this map is overlaid
on the 1995 IRS-LISS-I data. Uniform projection param-
eters have been maintained for both the vector as well as
the raster layers. The 2005 map LULC class polygons
fall over the same LULC class on to the satellite data of
1995. After careful observation, it is found that in few
cases the area of the polygons of a LULC class varied.
Depending upon the variability, the LULC polygon on the
Tropical Ecology
Fig. 1  Showing the location of study area in Arunachal Pradesh and its main administrative districts
map was edited to generate a new set of polygons. While
editing the polygons, it has been ensured that the changes
observed is properly discernable at 1:250K scale. Thus,
the master polygon was edited to create a new polygon
for different LULC categories from the image. During
polygon editing, classification scheme adopted by IGBP
has also been checked and maintained in the attribute
table. The edited copy is now treated as the LULC map
for 1995. Similarly for generation of 1985 LULC map,
LULC map of 1995 vector layer has been used as the mas-
ter map. After careful observation and depending upon
the variability of LULC feature on the Landsat MSS data
for 1985, the LULC polygon on the 1995 maps has been
edited to generate a new set of polygons for 1985.
Accuracy assessments
Accuracy was determined empirically by selecting a sam-
ple of pixels from the image and checking their labels
against classes determined from ground truth data. The
percentage of pixels from each class labeled in the image
correctly by the classifier was estimated as well as the
proportion of pixels from each class erroneously labeled
into every other class. These results were expressed in
tabular form refined to as the ‘error matrix’ (Lillesand
et al. 2008).
Post classification change detection
Recent literatures revealed that the post-classification change
detection method was found to be the most suitable for
detecting land use change (Jensen 2004; Torahil and Rai
2011; Sharma et al. 2012). In the post-classification tech-
nique, two images from different times are independently
classified. Cross tabulation analysis on a pixel-by-pixel basis
facilitated the determination of the quantity of conversions
from a particular land cover class to other land use catego-
ries and their corresponding area over the period evaluated
(Dewan and Yamaguchi 2009).
Results and discussion
LULC statistics
The LULC map at 1:250K scale, prepared for the study area
is shown in Fig. 2. In all, 12 LULC classes were mapped in
the study area. The distribution of these classes for each time
period i.e. 2005, 1995 and 1985 is given in Table 1. Forest
is the major LULC class in the study area. About 80% of the
geographical area was found to be under evergreen broad
leaf and mixed forest in the year 1985; about 77% in 1995
and about 75% in 2005. Crop land was the next important
land use class constituting about 6% of the geographical area
13

Fig. 2  The classification images
of LULC in Eastern Arunachal
Pradesh. a 1985, b 1995 and c
2005
in 1985; 9% in 1995 and more than 11% in 2005. The built-
up area was found to be 0.34% of geographical area in 1985;
0.43% in 1995 and over 0.46% in 2005.
Accuracy assessments
The overall classification accuracy for the LULC map of
the study area in 1985, 1995 and 2005 was 86.74%, 87.90%
and 88.18%, respectively. Producer’s accuracy in 1985
land cover map ranged from the 76.8% to 100%, while in
1995 land  cover map it ranged from 70.8 to 100%, and
82.9–100% for 2005 LULC map. User’s accuracy of individ-
ual classes ranged from 78.1 to 100% for in 1985 land cover
map, 77.3–100% for 1995, and 83.2–100% for 2005. The
level of accuracy (K value) was 0.85, 0.86 and 0.86 in 1985,
13
Tropical Ecology
1995 and 2005 land cover maps, respectively, which was
considered to be expectable (Landis and Koch 1977).
LULC change and land migration from 1985 to 2005
An important part of change detection studies is to deter-
mine the quantity of change which serves as a vital tool
in management decisions. The classification and quantifi-
cation of the images of the study area aided the detection
of changes in various LULC classes that took place during
study period. The statistics on LULC class distribution for
1985, 1995 and 2005 is presented in Table 1.
The transformation of LULC classes between 1985
and 1995 showed that cultivated area gained 201.41 km 2
and 171.38 km2 of land from evergreen broadleaf forest
Tropical Ecology

Table 1  LULC distribution in the study area and mixed forest categories (Table 2). Similarly built-up
LULC class Area ­(km ) 2 area also increased and maximum conversion of area was
recorded from these two forest categories. Similar pattern
1985 1995 2005
of LULC change was seen between 1995 and 2005 in the
Barren area 70.54 70.54 72.35 study (Table 3). A similar result has also been reported
Built-up 45.13 58.06 61.85 by Falcucci et al. (2007) from the Mediterranean basin,
Cultivated land 832.63 1249.39 1497.75 one of the leading significantly altered hotspots on Earth.
Evergreen broad leaf forest 9753.95 9539.44 9382.26 Turner et al. (1994) argued that under similar social and
Fallow land 62.06 43.82 43.55 economic conditions and by similar driving forces will
Grasslands 590.48 537.58 561.71 lead to similar patterns of LULC change. Evergreen
Mixed forest 1074.83 897.25 747.73 broadleaf and mixed forests show a further decline from
Plantation 22.83 22.83 28.35 9539.44 km2 and 897.25 km2 in 1995 to 9382.26 km2 and
Snow cover 285.81 285.86 285.86 747.73 km2 in 2005, respectively. The gain in cultivated
Scrublands 84.11 81.19 76.92 area between 1995 and 2005 is 248.32 km2. Built-up area
Water bodies 462.73 515.79 504.12 also increased further by 3.78 km2. The transformation of
Wastelands 297.89 281.43 320.75 LULC between 1995 and 2005 shows that cultivated area

Table 2  Land use change matrix in Eastern Arunachal Pradesh from 1985 to 1995
LULC BU CL FL PL EBF MF SL GL BL WL WB SI Area 1985 ­(km2)

BU 45.3 45.3
CL 0.0 829.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 2.6 832.3
FL 19.2 41.2 1.5 61.9
PL 22.9 22.9
EBF 4.1 201.4 2.5 9539.1 1.4 0.1 5.7 9754.2
MF 8.2 171.4 869.1 0.8 9.8 15.2 1074.4
SL 0.5 1.9 80.2 1.6 84.3
GL 18.0 21.5 513.8 12.0 25.3 590.6
BL 70.2 70.2
WL 3.0 0.2 3.5 14.3 241.8 34.8 297.7
WB 0.2 4.9 2.8 1.1 7.8 17.3 429.5 463.6
SI 285.7 285.7
Area 1995 (­ km2) 58.2 1249.4 43.7 22.9 9539.3 896.9 81.4 538.0 70.2 281.1 516.3 285.7 13,583.2

Table 3  Land use change matrix in Eastern Arunachal Pradesh from 1995 to 2005
LULC BU CL FL PL EBF MF SL GL BL WL WB SI Area 1995 ­(km2)

BU 58.2 58.2
CL 1234.1 6.3 0.1 0.8 2.5 5.6 1249.4
FL 1.3 42.4 43.7
PL 1.2 21.6 22.9
EBF 118.0 0.8 2.1 9375.4 18.6 2.6 6.5 1.1 2.6 11.7 9539.3
MF 3.8 131.7 0.1 728.0 11.9 0.7 6.0 14.8 896.9
SL 0.5 4.7 74.4 0.4 0.7 0.7 81.4
GL 3.8 514.6 7.7 11.9 538.0
BL 70.2 70.2
WL 0.5 11.4 253.1 16.1 281.1
WB 6.7 0.3 0.3 0.5 16.7 47.7 444.2 516.3
SI 285.7 285.7
Area 2005 ­(km2) 62.0 1497.7 43.5 28.4 9382.1 747.2 77.0 562.1 72.1 320.3 505.1 285.7 13,583.2

13
 Tropical Ecology

gained 117.97 km2 from evergreen broadleaf forests, while
mixed forest lost 131.67  km 2 areas to cultivated area.
Built-up area during the period 1995–2005 increased at the
loss of mixed forest. This signifies that with the increasing
pressure for extension of cultivated land, surrounding for-
est lands are encroached, hence their area were lost. Fur-
ther, LULC transformation between 1985 and 2005 reveals
that, in a period of 20 years the region has lost a total for-
est cover of 699.37 km2 (Table 4). Cultivated and built-up
area has increased by 665.41 km2 and 16.72 km2, respec-
tively. Of the total decrease in forest area, 615.81 km 2
areas migrated to cultivated lands and 15.99 km 2 areas
migrated to built-up. It reveals that an expansion in culti-
vated and built-up area and rapid decline in forest areas are
in continuous state in the region. Decrease in forest area
due to expansion of cropland and built-up was recorded
in the study area and similar results were also reported by
several workers from different regions (Reis 2008; Dewan
and Yamaguchi 2009).
Relationship of LULC change with topography
and population
The relationship between LULC classes and topography,
in the time period of 1985–2005, was analyzed by using
Digital Elevation Model (DEM). The results of analysis of
land cover performed according to elevation, are given in
Tables 5, 6 and 7. It shows that the built-up areas are mostly
located in the regions having altitudes of 0–500 m. This
is because of the fact that the region is highly uneven and
as a result of this irregular topology only plain areas can
be used as residential purpose and agricultural practices.
Higher concentration of built-ups in these areas could be
also due to the establishment of district headquarters. Again,

Table 4  Land use change matrix in Eastern Arunachal Pradesh from 1985 to 2005
LULC BU CL FL PL EBF MF SL GL BL WL WB SI Area 1985 ­(km2)

BU 45.3 45.3
CL 0.0 822.2 0.8 0.6 3.5 5.2 832.3
FL 21.1 40.2 0.2 0.4 61.9
PL 1.2 21.6 22.9
EBF 4.1 313.8 3.3 2.1 9380.6 18.6 2.6 8.0 1.1 3.5 16.6 9754.2
MF 11.9 302.0 0.1 715.6 4.6 0.7 16.8 22.7 1074.4
SL 0.5 2.1 4.4 74.2 0.4 0.6 2.1 84.3
GL 21.5 8.6 502.2 20.0 38.3 590.6
BL 70.2 70.2
WL 6.3 0.2 2.3 24.0 222.9 42.0 297.7
WB 0.2 7.5 0.3 0.3 2.1 0.2 22.4 52.8 377.9 463.6
SI 285.7 285.7
Area 2005 ­(km2) 62.0 1497.7 43.5 28.4 9382.1 747.2 77.0 562.1 72.1 320.3 505.1 285.7 13,583.2

BU built-up, CL cultivated area, FL fallow lands, PL plantations, EBF evergreen broadleaf forest, MF mixed forest, SL scrublands, GL grass-
lands, BL barren lands, WL wastelands, WB water bodies, SI snow/ice

Table 5  Land use/land cover LULC 0–500 m 500–1500 m 1500–2500 m 2500–3500 m 3500–5000 m

according to elevation in 1985
BL 0.72 11.70 18.80 29.69 9.63
BU 42.93 2.20 – – –
CL 804.18 27.22 0.85 0.39 –
EBF 2222.45 3975.53 2792.91 760.17 3.00
FL 62.06 – – – –
GL 325.80 6.01 3.68 227.38 27.63
MF 837.26 180.30 27.04 30.23 –
PL 22.83 – – – –
SI – – – 90.75 195.11
SL 51.58 10.35 13.23 8.95 –
WB 384.55 58.89 14.10 4.59 0.61
WS 288.12 9.74 0.02 – –

13
Tropical Ecology

Table 6  Land use/land cover LULC 0–500 m 500–1500 m 1500–2500 m 2500–3500 m 3500–5000 m

according to elevation in 1995
BL 0.72 11.70 18.80 29.69 9.63
BU 42.93 2.20 – – –
CL 804.18 27.22 0.85 0.39 –
EBF 2222.45 3975.53 2792.91 760.17 3.00
FL 62.06 – – – –
GL 325.80 6.01 3.68 227.38 27.63
MF 837.26 180.30 27.04 30.23 –
PL 22.83 – – – –
SI – – – 90.75 195.11
SL 51.58 10.35 13.23 8.95 –
WB 384.55 58.89 14.10 4.59 0.61
WS 288.12 9.74 0.02 – –

Table 7  Land use/land cover LULC 0–500 m 500–1500 m 1500–2500 m 2500–3500 m 3500–5000 m

according to elevation in 2005
BL 0.72 12.39 18.88 30.72 9.63
BU 59.44 2.40 – – –
CL 1458.67 37.25 1.44 0.39 –
EBF 1878.06 3951.58 2791.25 758.36 3.00
FL 43.55 – – – –
GL 297.00 6.02 3.68 227.38 27.63
MF 498.22 192.24 27.04 30.23 –
PL 28.35 – – – –
SI – – – 90.75 195.11
SL 41.75 11.22 14.23 9.72 –
WB 426.38 58.44 14.10 4.59 0.61
WS 310.33 10.40 0.02 – –

BU built-up, CL cultivated area, FL fallow lands, PL plantations, EBF evergreen broadleaf forest, MF
mixed forest, SL scrublands, GL grasslands, BL barren lands, WL wastelands, WB water bodies, SI snow/ice

these parts of the district share a common boundary with the
neighboring state Assam; easy transportation routes are also
available which connects the area to the other parts of the
country. During the preparation of LULC map, all the small
residential places < 56.25 ha were merged to the neighboring
LULC class and as such concentration of built-up areas in
other elevation are almost negligible or absent. According
to the LULC for 1985, it is seen that cultivated areas were
densely located in regions with 0–500 m of altitude which
gradually decreases with increase in altitude (Tables 5, 6, 7).
It is mainly because of the highly rugged terrain. Extreme
climatic condition in the high altitude areas and lower eco-
nomic status of the people further added to such a situa-
tion. It has been observed that in 1995 and 2005, cultivated
area increased mostly in the altitude between 0–500  m.
Marginal (9.97 km2) increase in cultivated area was also
recorded in the altitude between 500–1500 m, however, neg-
ligible increase above 1500 m altitude. This may be directly
attributed to increase in population and settlements in lower
elevation areas than in the high altitude areas because of
suitable habitable area and consequently increasing demand
for more agricultural areas. Likewise, combining both the
forests types, forest areas are denser in the regions between
0–1250  m of altitude. However, from 1985–2005 forest
areas showed a declining trend in the region. Almost all
the decline in forest areas can be found in the altitude from
0–1500 m. Mixed forest showed a marginal increase in for-
est area in 500–1500 m. While the forest in other altitudes
remains stable in the study period. Decline in the forest area
in lower altitude can be attributed to increase in agricultural
intensification in these areas due to increase in population
and settlements. Further, water bodies are mainly concen-
trated in the lower altitude areas. Wastelands showed a
declining trend with increase in altitude, whereas it increases
from 1985–2005 in altitude (0–500 m) mainly due to change
in the river course over time and consequently giving rise
to new wastelands. Plantation is restricted to 0–500 m alti-
tude. Snow areas were confined to 2500–5000 m altitude.

13

Grasslands on the other hand were decreased in the regions
with 0–500 m altitudes.
Population growth has long been considered a major fac-
tor leading to land use change (Lin and Ho 2003). In Eastern
Arunachal Pradesh, the population increased from 1981 to
2011. District wise population increase in the study area is
given in Table 8.
Evaluation of demographic characteristics and four
selected LULCC together revealed that with increase in
population there was increase in built-up and agricultural
areas and loss of forest cover. Total population and LULC
area for all the three times had been studied separately for
all the districts. The percentage population increase in
the Lower Dibang valley, Lohit and Changlang were found
to be 99.23%, 127.06% and 101.46%, respectively. Almost
all the district shows a similar pattern for population increase
and LULC change pattern. Built-up areas increased high-
est in Lower Dibang Valley i.e., from 8.08 km2 in 1985 to
20.05 km2 in 2005. Similarly, built-up area also increased in
Lohit and Changlang districts until 1995 but remain almost
stable in 2005. This may be due to smaller built-up areas and
dispersed in nature which cannot be mapped at the present
scale. Again increase in cultivated area shows an increas-
ing trend with the increase in population. Total increase of
cultivated area from 1985 to 2005 in Lower Dibang valley,
Lohit and Changlang was found to be 106.06%, 74.24% and
65.34%, respectively. Total increase in cultivated areas in
Lower Dibang valley was found comparatively higher than
Lohit and Changlang district, which could be attributed to
availability of larger suitable terrain for agriculture in Lower
Dibang Valley. Similarly both types of forest show a declin-
ing trend in all the three districts. Total decrease in evergreen
broadleaf forest in Lower Dibang valley, Lohit and Chang-
lang was found to be − 2.80, − 266.27 and − 102.63 km2,
respectively. However, mixed forest showed highest decline
in Lower Dibang Valley (i.e. − 649.57 km2) followed by
Changlang and Lohit district with − 14.96 and − 3.69 km2,
respectively.
Consequence of LULC change
The results of the study showed that over the years i.e.
1985–2005, large scale transformation of LULC changes
Table 8  Demographic change Districts Total population and population growth rate (%)
in the study area from 1981 to
2011 1981
Changlang 62,211 (50.00%)
Lower Dibang Valley 25,286 (123.22%)
Lohit 55,089 (61.61%)
Source: Census of India, 2011
a
 Provisional total population
13
Tropical Ecology
occurred in this part of the eastern Himalayan region. The
study further indicates that the region experiences a rapid
expansion in crop land and built-up area and decline in
forested area. Population increase is considered to be the
main driving force for agricultural and built-up expansion.
Topography is also found to shape the structure of LULC
change of the studied area. Fanan et al. (2011) reported that
built-up expansion may be directly attributed to population
growth and economic development. Large scale forested
landscape parcels have significantly been cleared to extend
the cultivated land. Demand of firewood supply is another
cause of forest clearing. Such a situation will consequently
lead to forest fragmentation, which in due course will lead
to a severe consequence to the surrounding environment
and also to the ecosystem functioning. Abdullah and Nak-
agoshi (2007) reported that forest fragmentation caused by
alteration in land use activities is the prime concern for
ecological sustainability in tropical countries. Valladares
et al. (2012) also argued that human induced landscape
fragmentation leading to loss of habitat are the critical
components threatening both biodiversity as well as the
ecosystem functioning. Similarly, Young (2009) com-
mented that the human transformations of LULC change
are a prime driver of the biodiversity loss. Again, Ming
and Xinmin (2002) stated that the change in LULC will
lead to local climate change inducing a decrease of precip-
itation and increase of temperature. As such Niyogi et al.
(2010) supported the evidence that agricultural intensifica-
tion and land use change caused a reduction in the Indian
summer monsoon rainfall. Similar analysis of temperature
data over the north eastern region of India showed a rising
trend (Jain et al. 2012). Further, Li et al. (2009) reported
that land use change can affect the intensity of flood fre-
quency, climate severity, run-off process and annual mean
discharge as a result of climate change. Hence, the whole
eastern Himalayan region is extremely susceptible to forest
degradation leading to habitat fragmentation and loss of
biodiversity, climate change resulting to warming trend,
increased weather variability, hydrological imbalances
such as more severe flooding and droughts, cuts in agricul-
tural productivity, etc. Thus in order to deal with the cur-
rent trend of population growth and consequently inducing
LULC change a proper understanding of the relationships
1991 2001 2011
95,530 (53.56%) 125,334 (31.29%) 147,951a (17.96%)
36,837 (45.68%) 50,378 (36.76%) 53,986a (7.01%)
92,588 (68.07%) 125,086 (36.10%) 145,538a (16.44%)
Tropical Ecology
between land use change pattern and its influencing drivers
is clearly essential.
Conclusions
This study assessed and monitored the changes in LULC
pattern in the eastern part of Arunachal Pradesh, India from
1985 to 2005 using remote sensing and GIS. The present
study revealed that topography of the area played a signifi-
cant role in shaping the land cover pattern of the region. The
major land cover in the study area is forest. However, during
the past decades, it has been observed that, there is a rapid
increase in other land use categories at the cost of forest
land. This change in LULC is caused mainly due to forest
degradation, rapid urbanization and agricultural expansion,
which can be directly linked to population increase. The
study also helps us in understanding variations in deforesta-
tion rates as well as the alteration and modification mecha-
nisms of various land cover types. Such land cover change
will induce habitat loss and fragmentation, which in due
course of time will have a profound impact on the provision
of ecosystem services and biodiversity, including both flora
and fauna of the region. Another consequence of such land
cover change will be the loss of native species and invasion
of invasive species. Subsequently, such land use changes
will also have significant impacts on the region’s climate.
Hence, there is a need for proper planning of various land
use schemes and its implementation strategies to meet the
increasing demands of basic human needs and welfare. Fur-
ther, studies on LULC monitoring, unified with improved
understanding of biophysical and socioeconomic factors
considering the location specific problem is needed to be
addressed in this part of the eastern Himalayan region.
Acknowledgements  This work was carried out as a part of “Land-use/
land cover change dynamics and impact of human dimension on Indian
river basins” project under the ISRO-Geosphere Biosphere Program.
Thanks are due to Dr. P. S. Roy, Project Director, for entrusting us the
job of carrying out the project in Brahmaputra river basin covering the
study area of this report.
References
Abdullah SA, Nakagoshi N (2007) Forest fragmentation and its correla-
tion to human land use change in the state of Selangor, peninsular
Malaysia. For Ecol Manag 241:39–48
Aguirre-Gutierrez J, Seijmonsbergen AC, Duivenvoorden JF (2012)
Optimizing land cover classification accuracy for change detec-
tion, a combined pixel-based and object-based approach in a
mountainous area in Mexico. Appl Geogr 34:29–37
Amin A, Fazal S (2012) Quantification of land transformation using
remote sensing and GIS techniques. Am J Geogr Inf Syst 1:17–28
Areendran G, Raj K, Mazumdar S, Joshi R, Puri K (2018) Land
use land cover mapping of Mouling national park in Arunachal
Pradesh, India using geospatial tools. Int J Sci Environ
6:696–705
Chakraborty K (2009) Vegetation change detection in Barak Basin.
Curr Sci 96:1236–1242
Debnath J, Das N, Ahmed I, Bhowmik M (2017) Chronological change
of land use/land cover of the Muhuri River Basin from 1972 to
2016, Tripura, North-East India. Indian J Sci Technol 10:1–18
Deka J, Tripathi OP, Khan ML (2011) A multi-temporal remote sensing
approach for monitoring changes in spatial extent of freshwater
lake of Deepor Beel Ramsar Site, a major wetland of Assam. J
Wetl Ecol 5:40–47
Deka J, Tripathi OP, Khan ML (2014) Study on land use/land cover
change dynamics through remote sensing and GIS—a case study
of Kamrup district, North East India. J Remote Sens GIS 5:55–62
Dewan AM, Yamaguchi Y (2009) Land use and land cover change
in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh: using remote sensing to promote
sustainable urbanization. Appl Geogr 29:390–401
Dubovyk O (2017) The role of Remote Sensing in land degradation
assessments: opportunities and challenges. Eur J Remote Sens
50:601–613
Duraisamy V, Bendapudi R, Jadhav A (2018) Identifying hotspots in
land use land cover change and the drivers in a semi-arid region
of India. Environ Monit Assess 190:2–21
Falcucci A, Maiorano L, Boitani L (2007) Changes in land-use/land-
cover patterns in Italy and their implications for biodiversity con-
servation. Landsc Ecol 22:617–631
Fanan U, Dlama KI, Oluseyi IO (2011) Urban expansion and vegetal
cover loss in and around Nigeria’s Federal Capital City. J Ecol
Nat Environ 3:1–10
Gaur MK, Pandey CB, Goyal RK (2016) Remote sensing applications
for natural resources management and monitoring. Scientific Pub-
lishers, Jodhpur
Gautam NC, Chennaiah GC (1985) Land-use and land-cover mapping
and change detection in Tripura using satellite LANDSAT data.
Int J Remote Sens 6:517–528
Geist HJ, Lambin EF (2002) Proximate causes and underlying driving
forces of tropical deforestation. Bioscience 52:143–150
Jain SK, Kumar V, Saharia M (2012) Analysis of rainfall and tem-
perature trends in northeast India. Int J Climatol. https​://doi.
org/10.1002/joc.3483
Jensen JR (2004) Digital change detection. Introductory digital image
processing: a remote sensing perspective. Prentice-Hall, New
Jersey
Khorram S (1987) Comparison of Landsat MSS and TM data for urban
land-use classification. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote 25:238–243
Kotoky P, Dutta MK, Borah GC (2012) Changes in landuse and land-
cover along the Dhansiri River channel, Assam—a remote sensing
and GIS approach. J Geol Soc India 79:61–68
Kushwaha SPS, Roy PS, Azeem A, Boruah P, Lahan P (2000) Land
area change and rhino habitat suitability analysis in Kaziranga
National Park, Assam. Tigerpaper 27:9–17
Lakshumanan C, Pradeep Kishore V, Viveganandan S, Krishnakumar
P, Muthusankar G (2012) Landuse/land cover dynamics study in
Nilgiris district part of Western Ghats, Tamilnadu. Int J Geomat
Geosci 2:911–923
Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The mesaurment of observer agreement
for categorical data. Biometrics 331:159–174
Lele NV, Joshi PK, Agarwal SP (2005) Remote sensing for forest cover
dynamics in North-East India—a review. Indian J For 28:217–224
Li Z, Liu W, Zhang X, Zheng F (2009) Impacts of land use change and
climate variability on hydrology in an agricultural catchment on
the Loess Plateau of China. J Hydrol 377:35–42
Lillesand TM, Kiefer RW, Chipman JW (2008) Remote sensing and
image interpretation. Wiley, Hoboken
13

Lin GCS, Ho SPS (2003) China’s land resources and land-use change:
insights from the 1996 land survey. Land Use Policy 20:87–107
Lopez RD, Frohn RC (2017) Remote sensing for landscape ecology:
new metric indicators, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Ming Z, Xinmin Z (2002) A theoretical analysis on the local cli-
mate change induced by the change of landuse. Adv Atmos Sci
19:45–63
Mishra PK, Rai A, Rai SC (2019) Land use and land cover change
detection using geospatial techniques in the Sikkim Himalaya,
India. Egypt J Remote Sens Space Sci. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ejrs.2019.02.001
Niyogi D, Kishtawal C, Tripathi S, Govindaraju RS (2010) Obser-
vational evidence that agricultural intensification and land use
change may be reducing the Indian summer monsoon rainfall.
Water Resour Res 46:1–17
Pawe CK, Saikia A (2018) Unplanned urban growth: land use/land
cover change in the Guwahati Metropolitan Area, India. Geo-
grafisk Tidsskrift-Danish J Geogr 118:88–100
Polasky S, Nelson E, Pennington D, Johnson KA (2011) The impact of
land-use change on ecosystem services, biodiversity and returns
to landowners: a case study in the state of Minnesota. Environ
Resour Econ 48:219–242
Rajeshwari D (2006) Management of the urban environment using
remote sensing and geographic information systems. J Hum Ecol
20:269–277
Reis S (2008) Analyzing land use/land cover changes using remote
sensing and GIS in Rize, North-East Turkey. Sensors 8:6188–6202
Sarma PK, Lahkar BP, Ghosh S, Rabha A, Das JP, Nath NK, Dey
S, Brahma N (2008) Land-use and land-cover change and future
implication analysis in Manas National Park, India using multi-
temporal satellite data. Curr Sci 95:23–227
13
Tropical Ecology
Sharma L, Pandey PC, Nathawat MS (2012) Assessment of land con-
sumption rate with urban dynamics change using geospatial tech-
niques. J Land Use Sci 7:135–148
Sharma R, Rimal B, Baral H, Nehren U, Paudyal K, Sharma S, Rijal
S, Ranpal S, Acharya RP, Alenazy AA, Kandel P (2019) Impact
of land cover change on ecosystem services in a tropical forested
landscape. Resources 8:1–13
Shrivastava S, Singh TP, Singh H, Kushwaha SPS, Roy PS (2002)
Assessment of large scale deforestation in Sonitpur district of
Assam. Curr Sci 82:1479–1484
Singh A (1989) Digital change detection techniques using remotely
sensed data. Int J Remote Sens 10:989–1003
Sreenivasulu G, Jayaraju N, Kumar MP, Prasad TL (2013) An analysis
on land use/land cover using remote sensing and GIS—a case
study in and around Vempalli, Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh,
India. Int J Sci Res Publ 3:1–4
Sundarakumar K, Harika M, Aspiya Begum SK, Yamini S, Balakrishna
K (2012) Land use and land cover change detection and urban
sprawl analysis of Vijayawada City using multitemporal landsat
data. Int J Eng Sci Technol 4:170–178
Torahil AA, Rai SC (2011) Land cover classification and forest change
analysis, using satellite imagery—a case study in Dehdez Area of
Zagros Mountain in Iran. J Geogr Inf Syst 3:1–11
Turner BL II, Meyer WB, Skole DL (1994) Global land-use/land-cover
change: towards an integrated study. Ambio 23:91–95
Valladares G, Cagnolo L, Salvo A (2012) Forest fragmentation leads
to food web contraction. Oikos 121:299–305
Young RH (2009) Land use and biodiversity relationships. Land Use
Policy 26:178–186