Evaluation of Urban Sprawl Pattern in The Tribal-Dominated Cities of Jharkhand State, India

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/233314215
Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern in the tribal-dominated cities of

Jharkhand state, India
Article in International Journal of Remote Sensing · November 2011

DOI: 10.1080/01431161.2010.527391
CITATIONS READS
33 771
4 authors:
Amit Kumar Arvind Chandra Pandey

Central University of Jharkhand Central University of Jharkhand
79 PUBLICATIONS 435 CITATIONS 140 PUBLICATIONS 1,189 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Najmul Hoda Ayyemperumal THILLAI Jeyaseelan

Jharkhand Space Applications Centers National Remote Sensing Centre
3 PUBLICATIONS 75 CITATIONS 174 PUBLICATIONS 490 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Monitoring spatio-temporal dynamics of above ground biomass of forests ecosystems using airborne L & S band SAR images View project
Forest fire hotspot analysis View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ayyemperumal THILLAI Jeyaseelan on 19 May 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [National Remote Sensing Agency]
On: 11 January 2013, At: 02:00
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Remote

Sensing
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tres20
Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern

in the tribal-dominated cities of
Jharkhand state, India
a b a
Amit Kumar , Arvind Chandra Pandey , Najmul Hoda & A. T.
a
Jeyaseelan
a
Jharkhand Space Applications Center, Department of Information
Technology, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India
b
Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi, India
Version of record first published: 26 Sep 2011.
To cite this article: Amit Kumar , Arvind Chandra Pandey , Najmul Hoda & A. T. Jeyaseelan (2011):
Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern in the tribal-dominated cities of Jharkhand state, India,
International Journal of Remote Sensing, 32:22, 7651-7675
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2010.527391
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
International Journal of Remote Sensing
Vol. 32, No. 22, 20 November 2011, 7651–7675
Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern in the tribal-dominated cities

of Jharkhand state, India
AMIT KUMAR†, ARVIND CHANDRA PANDEY*‡, NAJMUL HODA†

and A. T. JEYASEELAN†
†Jharkhand Space Applications Center, Department of Information Technology,
Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India
‡Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi, India
Downloaded by [National Remote Sensing Agency] at 02:00 11 January 2013
(Received 1 May 2009; in final form 5 August 2010)
The patterns of urban sprawl over a 20-year period presented in the study indicate
unplanned development in the urban agglomerations of Ranchi, Jamshedpur and
Dhanbad. The visual interpretation of Landsat (1986, 1991, 1996 and 2001) and
IRS-P6 (2005) was used to map land use/land cover and analyse urban sprawl.
The saturation of urban areas within municipal limits, along with pressure from
the growing population, resulted in the densification of the core urban areas within
Dhanbad and Jamshedpur. Comparatively, Ranchi exhibited a very high rate of
built-up growth with a reducing population density, indicating a low density of
built-up development. The development of built-up land at the expense of agri-
cultural land in Ranchi Urban Agglomeration indicates poor land-transformation
practices. An area of 103.6 km2 (165.66% growth) was transformed to built-up
land in these cities during 1986–2005. Any future built-up development of these
agglomerations should involve the use of the government city development plan.
1. Introduction
Urban land-use transformations can be considered as a negative impact of urban
sprawl, especially in the tribal-dominated regions, as the population in these areas
depends on primary activities like horticulture, agriculture and allied activities for
their livelihood (cattle farming, collections of forest products, etc.). Urban-sprawl
areas with a mixture of urban and rural land uses are increasing in the suburbs of
the mega-cities (Hara et al. 2004) and this may result in land-use changes. These
land-use changes are causing serious environmental problems. Sprawl and associated
activities degrade environmental resources such as surface water and ground water
quality. Sprawling land-use transformation patterns have been linked to rapid popula-
tion growth (U.S. Bureau of the Census 2002). Transformation of natural vegetation
to other land uses, such as crop cultivation and urban development, presents the most
important threat to biodiversity (Wessels et al. 2002, Durieux et al. 2008).
Climate change in Asia has highlighted the pressures on natural resources and
the environment associated with rapid urbanization, industrialization and economic
development (IPCC 2007). The urbanization process in India and its pace of growth
*Corresponding author. Email: arvindchandrap@yahoo.com

International Journal of Remote Sensing
ISSN 0143-1161 print/ISSN 1366-5901 online © 2011 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2010.527391
7652 A. Kumar et al.
have accelerated over the past 90 years (Saxsena 2003). The increased urbaniza-
tion has led to a multifold rise in the amount of air pollution associated with the
transportation, energy and industrial sectors (Pandey 2003).
Satellite remote sensing has the capability of providing spatial information of a large
area in a time sequence. It has been widely used and recognized as a powerful and
effective tool for detecting land-use/land-cover (LULC) changes (Ehlers et al. 1990,
Irish 1990, Treitz et al. 1992, Westmoreland and Stow 1992, Harris and Ventura 1995,
Welch et al. 1998). It provides cost-effective multispectral and multi-temporal data,
which can be converted to information valuable for understanding and monitoring
land-development patterns (Geymen and Baz 2008). Remote-sensing methods are also
very effective in the analysis of urban change (Ridd and Liu 1998, Masek et al. 2000,
Hostert and Diermayer 2003, Forsythe 2004), and, along with geographical informa-
tion systems (GIS), they are considered as effective tools for visualizing, monitoring
and quantifying objects of interest at the scale of the district, as well as at the city level
(Hai and Yamaguchi 2007).
Much research has been done to study urban land-use change aiming at monitoring
urban expansion (Ridd and Liu 1998, Masek et al. 2000, Yeh and Li 2001, Civco et
al. 2002, Yang 2002, Thomas et al. 2003) and understanding the dynamics of urban
growth (Batty et al. 1999, Torrens and Alberti 2000, Barnes et al. 2001, Hurd et al.
2001, Epstein et al. 2002), as well as explaining the location and trajectories of urban
land-use change across space and time (Seto et al. 2002, Seto and Liu 2003, Geymen
and Baz 2008).
In Jharkhand, only 2.25% of the total area is urbanized (Census of India 2001).
Rapid urbanization and unprecedented population growth rates in the cities of
tribal-population-dominated regions in Jharkhand state have induced changes in the
land-use pattern, especially in the fringe areas of major cities. The complexity in the
land-use transformation and urban sprawl is influenced by the Chotanagpur Tenancy
Act 1908 and the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act 1949 (Bijoy 2003), which prevent the
transfer and sale of tribal land to a non-tribal person in Jharkhand state. This causes
an unplanned acquisition/purchase of such land by land developers of the tribal com-
munity. In Jharkhand, the mono-cropping system is practised, in which crops are
grown mostly during the monsoon seasons, that is, kharif (mid-June to mid-October).
Also the low yield due to undulating terrain with low soil fertility and less irriga-
tion facility causes low production per unit area, that is, 3228 kg ha−1 (Directorate of
Agriculture 2006). The farmers’ economic conditions are poor, which compels them
to sell their land to land developers belonging to the tribal community, especially in
the fringe areas of the cities. Also the sudden increase in land prices in the vicinity
of the state capital and industrial cities in Jharkhand cause agricultural lands to be
sold to land developers for built-up development. This has resulted in unplanned low
density built-up development on the periphery of urban built-up land, primarily over
agricultural land. The urbanization process has also intensified after the setting up
of modern industries, especially in the vicinity of the state capital. People have been
uprooted, their land has been taken to make space for the sites of various industries
and now there is the problem of their relief and rehabilitation (Priyadarshi and Dutt
2000). The unplanned pattern of urban development in the newly emerged state of
Jharkhand calls for an immediate perspective planning of cities and towns. Satellite
images are a prerequisite for evaluating urban sprawl and resulting land-use dynamics.
The objective of this paper is to analyse the spatio-temporal dynamics of the built-
up environment and land-use transformation in three major urban agglomerations in
Urban sprawl in Jharkhand 7653
Jharkhand state – Ranchi, Jamshedpur and Dhanbad – during the period 1986–2005.
Multi-sensor satellite data and GIS techniques were used to generate land-use/land-
statistics cover at five different time intervals (1986, 1991, 1996, 2001 and 2005) to
study the dynamic growth patterns of these cities. Further, population statistics of
these cities during these periods were compared with corresponding spatial dynam-
ics to evaluate the pressure of population growth on urban land-use transformation
patterns.
2. The study area

In the present study, three urban agglomerations in Jharkhand, each with a popu-
lation of ∼1 × 106 (see figure 1), comprising Ranchi (321.24 km2 ), Dhanbad (76.72
km2 ) and Jamshedpur (149.64 km2 ), were analysed for urban sprawl and land-use
transformation patterns. Although different in size, these three urban agglomerations
are related, as they are the only cities with a population of ∼1 × 106 and they are the
most developed and growing cities within the state. Jamshedpur and Dhanbad are
industrial townships, whereas Ranchi is fast becoming a business township. The delin-
eation of the agglomeration boundaries was done on the basis of continuous built-up
development in the peripheral area of the city until 2005 and the municipal boundary
provided by the respective municipal/notified area authority.
The term ‘urban agglomeration’ refers to the population contained within the con-
tours of a contiguous territory inhabited at urban density levels without regard to
administrative boundaries. It usually incorporates the population in a city or town, as
Dhanbad urban agglomeration

N 0 2 4 km
Ranchi urban agglomeration

0 2 4 km
Jameshedpur urban agglomeration
0 2 4 km
INDEX
Road
Railway track
Municipal area
Urban agglomeration
Water body
Figure 1. Location map.

well as that in the suburban areas outside but adjacent to the city boundaries (United
Nations Population Division 2007a). According to the Census of India (2001), the
core town or at least one of the constituent towns of an urban agglomeration must be
a statutory town, and the total population of all the constituents should be ≥20 000
(as per the 1991 Census).
The study area taken up for Ranchi Urban Agglomeration (RUA) is spread over
321.24 km2 and is located between 23◦ 13 –23◦ 27 N and 85◦ 11 –85◦ 26 E. It is situated
at an altitude of 645 m above mean sea level on the Chotanagpur plateau in the
Ranchi district with a population of 990 000 in 2005 (United Nations Population
Division 2007b). The Ranchi Municipal Corporation occupies an area of 174.85 km2
within RUA.
Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration (JUA) is spread over an area of 149.64 km2 and
is located between 22◦ 42 –22◦ 51 N and 86◦ 04 –86◦ 16 E. It is situated in the East
Singhbhum and Saraikela-Kharsawan districts on the Chotanagpur plateau at an ele-
vation of 135 m above mean sea level with a population of 1 239 000 in 2005 (United
Nations Population Division 2007b). The Jamshedpur town was under Notified Area
Committee, which is equivalent to Municipal Corporation. The Notified area in
Jamshedpur occupies an area of 62.72 km2 within JUA.
Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration (DUA) covers an area of 76.72 km2 and is located
between 23◦ 45 –23◦ 50 N and 86◦ 22 –86◦ 29 E in Dhanbad district at an elevation of
222 m above mean sea level. It is popularly known as the coal capital of India and
is the second largest city in the state of Jharkhand with a population of 1 189 000 in
2005 (United Nations Population Division 2007b). Dhanbad Municipal Corporation
occupies an area of 22.83 km2 within DUA.
3. Data used and methodology

Urban sprawl and related land-use transformation studies require spatio-temporal
data to evaluate LULC dynamics over the time period. Therefore, in the present
study, the satellite images of Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) were used for the
years 1986, 1991 and 1996; Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+ ) was
used for 2001; and Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) P6 Linear Imaging Self Scanning
(LISS)-IV (Indian Space Research Organization, Bangalore, India) was used for 2005
(see table 1). Although in monitoring urban growth patterns high-resolution satellite
data are being used, lower-resolution sensors such as Landsat TM also have their
place as a tool in urban planning (Carlson 2003), as they provide the facility to map
the urban spatial patterns across space and time. The output urban growth map is a
powerful visual and quantitative assessment of the kinds of urban growth that have
occurred across a landscape (Wilson et al. 2003).
Table 1. Details of satellite images used in the study.
Sensor type Path-row Month of acquisition Spatial resolution (m)
Landsat TM 104–44 March 1986 30

Landsat TM 140–44 February 1991 30
Landsat TM 140–44 November 1996 30
Landsat ETM+ 140–44 November 2001 15
IRS P6-LISS IV 1791–82 and 6906–61 February 2005 5.8
False colour composite (FCC) images were generated using spectral bands of
infrared (IR), R (Red), G (Green) through R, G, B (Blue) combination using ERDAS
IMAGINE (ERDAS, Inc., Norcross, GA, USA). The high-resolution satellite images
of LISS-IV (2005) were geometrically rectified using Survey of India topographical
maps, and after that, satellite images were re-projected to the universal transverse
mercator (UTM) coordinate system with World Geodetic System (WGS)-84 datum.
The geo-rectified LISS-IV images were used as reference image to register the remain-
ing satellite images used in the study (see figure 2). The images were georeferenced by
selecting adequate ground control points to achieve root-mean-square (RMS) errors
of <0.5. The digital data were displayed on the colour monitor as FCC, and vari-
ous LULC classes were delineated. An on-screen visual interpretation technique was
used to delineate the spatial distribution of various LULC units. The first-level LULC
classification system (Anderson et al. 1976) was adopted with only four classes of
LULC, that is, built-up, agricultural land, water bodies and others. The built-up class
includes constructed areas such as residential area, commercial complexes, institutions
and slums. The land primarily used for agricultural activities was categorized under
agricultural land. River, ponds, canals and so on were identified under the water-body
category. Lands other than the above classes, including forest, mine, rocky and barren
land, were assigned to the ‘others’ category. Elements of image interpretation – namely
tone, texture, shape, size, pattern, location and association – were used during the
LISS-IV 2005 Topographical map ο TM 1986

(Survey of India) ο TM 1991
ο TM 1996
ETM+
Geo-referencing 2001
Image-to-image
Geo-referenced LISS-IV 2005
registration
Visual interpretation Ground truth
LULC classes Post-field updating
LULC map ο Population data (UNPD)

1986–1991–1996–2001–2005 ο Municipal boundary
LULC area statistics
Urban growth analysis
LULC dynamics
Comparative evaluation of RUA, JUA and DUA
Figure 2. Methodology flow chart.

Note: UNPD, United Nations Population Division.
visual interpretation. Initially, LISS-IV satellite images of the year 2005 were inter-
preted in which all the LULC categories could be identified accurately due to a high
spatial resolution of about 5.8 m. Selective field checks were conducted to authenticate
the mapped LULC categories. Image characteristics were related to field characteris-
tics to develop interpretation keys for LULC categories. While recognizing the features
of the remaining satellite images from preceding years, LISS-IV image information
was used as the base data, so that details in the satellite images of coarser spatial reso-
lution could be mapped more accurately. The minimum mappable unit (MMU) for a
LISS-IV satellite image was 0.1 ha, which is equivalent to 6 pixels × 6 pixels, whereas
for TM and ETM+ , it was 0.3 ha.
The vectors derived from the digitization of various LULC units mapped from
satellite images were checked for accuracy assessment of visual classification. For this
purpose, the LULC vectors were converted to raster data and the Kappa coefficient
was used to make an accuracy assessment of land-use classifications (Peng et al. 2008).
Based on selective field checks during August 2008, the overall classification accuracy
of the LULC map derived from the satellite image for 1986–2005 was determined,
which ranged from 90% to 95% in Ranchi, 88% to 92% in Jamshedpur and 90% to
92% in Dhanbad. The Kappa coefficient for these cities ranged from 0.87 to 0.93 in
Ranchi, 0.82 to 0.90 in Jamshedpur and 0.87 to 0.89 in Dhanbad. Any wrong identi-
fication of pixels was corrected and the revised classification maps of LULC for these
cities were used for the area calculation.
4. Results and discussion

4.1 Ranchi Urban Agglomeration
4.1.1 Land-use dynamics. During 1986–2005, the built-up land in RUA expanded
from 55.44 km2 to 114.15 km2 . The growth of built-up land during this two-decade
period was 105.9%, indicating that in RUA the built-up land expanded by twice its size
in the last 20 years. In different periods during 1986–2005, the growth of built-up land
was not gradual but episodic. In 1986–1991, it was 19.1%, whereas in the later 1991–
1996 period, it had increased to 28.8% followed by a smaller increase (11.03%) during
1996–2001 (see table 2(a)). During 2001–2005, it increased again to 20.8% within only
a 4-year period. The increase in built-up growth during 2001–2005 could be attributed
to the formation of Ranchi as the state capital of Jharkhand in 2000.
The rate of change of LULC classes varies across different observation periods.
The major impact was observed over built-up and agricultural land (see figure 3(a)).
During 1986–2005, the area of built-up land increased by 58.71 km2 , whereas agri-
cultural land decreased by 53.78 km2 . This clearly depicts that the growing urban
sprawl was directly encroaching on the agricultural land in Ranchi suburban areas.
The area classified as ‘water bodies’ also decreased, reflecting human intervention
through built-up development causing an increased demand for water. This area was
squeezed to 9.62 km2 in 2005 from 14.74 km2 in 1986 – a loss of 34.7%, which probably
reflects the negative impact of land transformations. The area in the ‘others’ category
has not shown any significant change.
4.1.2 Sprawl inside and outside the municipal area. The growth rate of built-up land
was unsystematic during the last two decades (1986–2005). Built-up growth was iden-
tified mainly along the National Highways (NH) and not confined to the municipal
Table 2(a). Land-use/land-cover statistics of Ranchi Urban Agglomeration.
Agricultural land Built-up Water body Others
Area Area Growth Area Area Growth Area Area Growth Area Area Growth
Year (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%)
1986 248.86 77.47 – 55.44 17.26 – 14.74 4.59 – 2.20 0.69 –

1991 239.16 74.45 −3.90 66.04 20.56 19.12 13.96 4.35 −5.29 2.08 0.65 −5.45
1996 220.54 68.65 −7.79 85.10 26.49 28.86 13.56 4.22 −2.87 2.05 0.64 −1.44
2001 212.37 66.11 −3.70 94.49 29.41 11.03 12.05 3.75 −11.14 2.33 0.72 13.66
2005 195.08 60.73 −8.14 114.15 35.53 20.81 9.62 2.99 −20.17 2.39 0.74 2.58
Urban sprawl in Jharkhand
Total change −53.78 – −21.61 58.71 – 105.9 −5.12 – −34.74 0.19 – 8.64
7657
7658
Table 2(b). Land-use/land-cover statistics of Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration.
Year (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%)
1986 7.58 5.07 – 82.53 55.15 – 8.76 5.85 – 50.77 33.93 –

1991 6.82 4.56 −10.03 88.26 58.98 6.94 8.15 5.45 −6.96 46.41 31.01 −8.59
1996 5.93 3.96 −13.05 94.56 63.19 7.14 7.45 4.97 −8.59 41.70 27.87 −10.15
A. Kumar et al.
2001 4.64 3.10 −21.75 100.97 67.48 6.78 7.50 5.01 0.67 36.52 24.41 −12.42
2005 3.80 2.54 −18.10 109.66 73.28 8.61 6.83 4.56 −8.93 29.35 19.61 −19.63
Total change −3.78 – −49.87 27.13 – 32.87 −1.93 – −22.03 −21.42 – −42.19
Table 2(c). Land-use/land-cover statistics of Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration.
Year (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%) (km2 ) (%) (%)
1986 39.80 51.88 – 19.41 25.30 – 1.10 1.43 – 16.41 21.39 –

1991 36.56 47.65 −8.14 23.58 30.74 21.48 1.26 1.64 14.55 15.32 19.96 −6.64
1996 34.08 44.42 −6.78 27.50 35.84 16.62 1.42 1.85 12.70 13.72 17.88 −10.44
2001 31.14 40.59 −8.63 31.68 41.29 15.20 1.28 1.67 −9.86 12.62 16.45 −8.02
2005 26.62 34.70 −14.52 37.17 48.45 17.33 1.43 1.86 11.72 11.50 14.99 −8.87
Total change −13.18 – −33.12 17.76 – 91.50 0.33 – 30.00 4.91 – −29.92
7659
(a) (b)
300 120
LULC area (km2)
LULC area (km2)

100
200 80
60
100 40
20
0 0
1986 1991 1996 2001 2005 1986 1991 1996 2001 2005
Year Year
Agricultural land Built-up Water body Others Agricultural land Built-up Water body Others
(c)
60
LULC area (km2)
40
20
0
1986 1991 1996 2001 2005
Year
Agriculture land Built-up Water body Others
Figure 3. Land-use/land-cover dynamics during 1986–2005 in (a) Ranchi Urban Agglo-

meration, (b) Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration and (c) Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration.
area. In the early periods of study, growth was mainly within the municipal limit, but
in later stage, it expanded to outside the municipal limit (see table 3 and figure 4(a)).
The built-up land outside the municipal limit increased from 8.78 km2 to 27.27 km2 ,
a growth of 210.59% in 1986–2005, whereas inside the municipal limit, the built-up
land increased from 46.66 km2 to 86.88 km2 during the same period, a growth of
86.19%. The much higher rate of built-up land growth outside the municipal limit, as
well as along the major roads, was unplanned and haphazard, being primarily directed
towards fulfilling the residential and commercial needs of the growing population in
the region.
4.1.3 Spatial form of sprawl. The urban development patterns in RUA during
1986–2005 represented a ribbon sprawl pattern that exhibited growth along major
transportation corridors (NH-33 and NH-75) outwards from the urban core, espe-
cially north-east, north and south of the city (figure 5). The Kanke and Hatia
reservoirs and military cantonment in the north and north-east restricted built-up
growth in their vicinity. Current trends show that future growth will take place near
Ratu, Buti, Namkum–Tatisilwai and Hatia.
4.1.4 Urban sprawl and population. The population of RUA during 1986–2005
increased by 441 000 persons, a growth of 80.32% (United Nations Population
Division 2007b). In contrast to this high population growth in RUA, the popula-
tion density decreased from 9903 persons/km2 in 1986 to 8673 persons/km2 in 2005
(United Nations Population Division 2007b). This shows that the built-up area has
expanded at a very fast rate with a low density development primarily at the city
periphery. This represents a dispersed type of development mainly along the highways
and surrounding suburban areas (Theobald 2001).
Table 3. Built-up area inside and outside municipal limits in major urban agglomerations.
Ranchi Urban Agglomeration Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration
Built-up Built-up Built-up
Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside

Urban municipal municipal Urban notified notified Urban municipal municipal
Year area (km2 ) limit (km2 ) limit (km2 ) area (km2 ) area (km2 ) area (km2 ) area (km2 ) limit (km2 ) limit (km2 )
1986 55.44 8.78 46.66 82.53 33.73 48.80 19.41 6.94 12.47
1991 66.04 10.17 55.87 88.26 36.96 51.308 23.58 9.12 14.46
1996 85.10 15.81 69.29 94.56 41.35 53.21 27.50 12.01 15.49
2001 94.49 20.79 73.70 100.97 46.70 54.27 31.56 15.52 16.16
2005 114.15 27.27 86.88 109.66 53.72 55.94 36.97 20.09 17.08
Total change 58.71 18.49 40.22 27.13 19.99 7.14 17.56 13.15 4.61
Notes: Municipal Area of Ranchi – 174.85 km2 . Notified Area of Jamshedpur – 62.73 km2 . Municipal Area of Ranchi – 22.83 km2 .
7661
(a) (b)
100 60
Area (km2)
Area (km2)
40
50
20
0 0
1986 1991 1996 2001 2005 1986 1991 1996 2001 2005
Year Year
Inside municipal area Outside municipal area Inside notified area Outside notified area
(c)
25
20
Area (km2)
15
10
5
0
1986 19911996 2001 2005
Year
Inside municipal area Outside municipal area
Figure 4. Sprawl within and outside (a) Ranchi municipal area, (b) Jamshedpur notified area
and (c) Dhanbad municipal area during 1986–2005.
N N N
(a.i) (b.i) (c.i)
0 2.5 5 km 0 3.75 7.5 km 0 5 10 km
N N N
(a.ii) (b.ii) (c.ii)
0 2.5 5 km 0 3 6 km 0 2.5 5 km
Index Road Built-up in 2005 Built-up in 1996 Built-up in 1986 Municipal boundary
Important locations Railway Built-up in 2001 Built-up in 1991 Water body Boundary of Urban Agglomeration
Figure 5. IRS-LISS IV satellite images of 2005 (a.i), (b.i), (c.i) and built-up growth during
1986–2005 in the urban agglomerations of Ranchi, Jamshedpur and Dhanbad (a.ii), (b.ii) and
(c.ii).
It should be noted that, during the decade 1991–2001, the population in RUA
increased by 237 000, a growth of 39.04% (see table 4), which was higher than both
the country’s (31.38) and Jharkhand state’s (28.36%) population growth. These built-
up expansions, together with the rise in population from 549 000 to 990 000, indicate
a high demand for ground water, which could have an adverse effect on water bod-
ies in the Ranchi urban area. According to the United Nations Population Division
(2007b), the population of RUA will increase to 1 251 000 in 2015 and 1 567 000 in
2025. To meet the requirement of land to accommodate the increasing populations,
built-up land would need to increase drastically in the coming years.
4.1.5 Land-use transformation. The built-up land expanded mainly at the expense
of agricultural land in RUA during 1986–2005. This transformation was more appar-
ent in 1991–1996 and 2001–2005 compared to 1986–1991 and 1996–2001 (see table 5).
The agricultural land to built-up land transformation revealed that an area of 2.89 km2
of agricultural land was transformed into built-up land every year during 1986–2005.
The period 2001–2005 was apparently associated with infrastructure development
after the creation of Ranchi as the state capital in November 2000 (Krishna and Mitra
2007). The land-use transformation from ‘others’ to ‘built-up land’ was not significant
in RUA.
4.2 Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration

4.2.1 Land-use dynamics. The built-up growth monitored through multi-temporal
satellite data revealed that the development was gradual during 1986–2005 in JUA.
The built-up land expanded from 82.53 km2 to 109.66 km2 in the period of 1986–2005,
a growth of 32.87% (27.13 km2 ) (see table 2(b) and figure 3(b)). The high increase in
built-up growth in 2001–2005 reflects the mounting pressure over agricultural land,
which reduced from 7.58 km2 in 1986 to 3.80 km2 in 2005, a loss of 49.87%. Water
bodies also reduced from 8.76 km2 to 6.83 km2 during 1986–2005, a loss of 22.03%.
The ‘others’ LULC class remarkably reduced from 50.77 km2 to 29.35 km2 in 1986–
2005, a negative growth of 42.19%.
4.2.2 Sprawl inside and outside the notified area. During 1986–2005, major expan-
sion took place outside the notified area. The built-up land outside the notified area
increased from 33.73 km2 to 53.72 km2 , a growth of 59.26% in 1986–2005, whereas
inside the municipal limit, the built-up land increased from 48.80 km2 to 55.94 km2
during the same period, a growth of only 14.63% (see table 3 and figure 4(b)).
4.2.3 Spatial form of sprawl. The city expanded towards the south along the railway
track and towards rail-road junctions. Its growth was restricted towards the north and
west by the rivers Subarnarekha and Kharkai, as well as the presence of undulating
terrain in the east of JUA. These limiting factors in built-up development provided
more opportunity for urban growth towards the south of the city, mainly along the
major highway. JUA exhibits ribbon pattern development mainly in the south of the
notified area (figure 5).
7664
Table 4. Population characteristics in major urban agglomerations.
Population density Population density Population density

Year Population (×103 ) (people/km2 ) Population (×103 ) (people/km2 ) Population (×103 ) (people/km2 )
1986 549 9903 735 8905 734 37816

1991 607 9191 817 9256 805 34132
1996 712 8367 938 9919 915 33270
A. Kumar et al.
2001 844 8931 1081 10705 1046 33144

2005 990 8673 1239 11298 1189 32160
Total change 441 −1230 504 2393 455 −5656
Table 5. Land-use transformation in major urban agglomerations (area in km2 ).
Period
1986–1991 1991–1996 1996–2001 2001–2005 1986–1991 1991–1996 1996–2001 2001–2005 1986–1991 1991–1996 1996–2001 2001–2005
Agricultural 10.31 18.94 9.36 19.38 0.91 0.92 1.08 0.88 2.86 2.74 3.08 3.62
land to
built-up
Others to – – – – 4.36 4.91 5.46 7.58 2.22 1.16 0.98 1.93
built-up
Total 10.31 18.94 9.36 19.38 5.27 5.83 6.54 8.46 5.08 3.91 4.07 5.55
7665
4.2.4 Urban sprawl and population. The population of JUA increased by 504 000
during 1986–2005 (United Nations Population Division 2007b), a growth of 68.5%,
whereas the growth of built-up expansion was 32.87% in the same period. It indicates
that the population pressure increased immensely in JUA, as the population density
also increased from 8905 persons/km2 to 11 298 persons/km2 during 1986–2005 (see
table 4). Over these two decades (1986–2005), JUA observed a built-up growth of
only 7.14 km2 inside the notified area, which signifies the densification of the popula-
tion within the city core area. According to the United Nations Population Division
(2007b), the population of JUA could increase to 1 548 000 in 2015 and 1 933 000 in
2025.
4.2.5 Land-use transformation. In JUA, the major land-use transformation took

place from ‘others’ to the ‘built-up’ category, with an overall conversion of 22.31 km2
(growth of 411.2%) during 1986–2005 (see table 5). The ‘others’ to ‘built-up’ land
transformation was never <4 km2 during each observation period, with the greatest
recognized during 2001–2005 being a transformation of 7.57 km2 . Spatially, these con-
versions took place in the south of the notified area. The land-use transformation from
‘agriculture’ to ‘built-up’ was insignificant as compared to ‘others’ to ‘built-up’ land
conversion. Land-use transformation revealed that only 18.9 ha of agricultural land
was converted to built-up land every year in comparison to the conversion of 115.9 ha
of land from the ‘others’ category to built-up land every year during 1986–2005.
4.3 Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration

4.3.1 Land-use dynamics. Built-up land in DUA increased from 19.41 km2 in 1986
to 37.17 km2 in 2005. The growth of built-up land during this two-decade period
was 91.5%, indicating a twofold increase in built-up land between 1986 and 2005 (see
table 2(c)). The built-up growth was significant in 1986–1991, with a growth of 21.48%.
In later periods, it reduced to 16.62% and 15.20% during 1991–96 and 1996–2001,
respectively. In 2001–2005, the growth rate increased to 17.33% (see figure 3(c)). The
decrease in growth rate during 1996–2001 and a sudden increase in 2001–2005 may be
attributed to population pressure related to sociopolitical changes with the emergence
of the Jharkhand region as a separate state. Agricultural land reduced from 39.80 km2
to 26.62 km2 during 1986–2005, an overall decrease of 33.12%. The land use in the
‘others’ category also reduced from 16.41 km2 to 11.50 km2 during 1986–2005 (a loss
of 29.92%), whereas there was a minor increase in water bodies from 1.10 km2 in 1986
to 1.43 km2 in 2005, an increase of 30%.
4.3.2 Sprawl inside and outside the notified area. The increase in built-up land out-
side the municipal limit was comparatively more than that of built-up development
inside the municipal confinement, although less growth was observed in both regions
(see table 3). The built-up land outside the municipal limit increased from 6.94 km2
to 20.09 km2 , a growth of 189.48% during 1986–2005, whereas inside the municipal
limit, the built-up land increased from 12.47 km2 to 17.08 km2 during 1986–2005, a
growth of only 36.98% (see figure 4(c)). There was a substantial decrease in growth
(from 15.95% to 5.69%) inside the municipal limit, which may be due to the satura-
tion of the city core area for built-up development. The increasing population pressure
therefore led to built-up expansion in the outer regions of municipal area at scattered
locations.
4.3.3 Spatial form of sprawl. The leapfrog urban sprawl pattern was observed in
DUA, showing patches of urban growth that are widely separated from each other and
from the boundaries of the main urbanized area (figure 5). The National Highway-2
(NH-2) and NH-32 in the north of the city provides a favourable condition for built-
up development, whereas the pressure of active coalmine areas in the south of DUA
restricts the growth of the city.
4.3.4 Urban sprawl and population. The population of DUA increased by 455 000
between 1986 and 2005 (see table 4). The population increased from 734 000 in 1986
to 1 189 000 in 2005 (United Nations Population Division 2007b), indicating a growth
of 61.9% in comparison to the built-up growth of 91.51%. The population density also
decreased from 37 816 persons/km2 to 32 160 persons/km2 during 1986–2005. This
revealed that the DUA was facing a dispersed sprawl where population pressure was
directed more towards outside the urban municipal area. The population of urban
agglomeration of Dhanbad was 1 189 000 in 2005 and that could increase to 1 482 000
in 2015 and 1 852 000 in 2025 (United Nations Population Division 2007b).
4.3.5 Land-use transformation. An area of 18.60 km2 of land was converted into
built-up land during 1986–2005 (see table 5). The agricultural land to built-up land
transformation was 12.31 km2 during this period. In 1986–1991, the agricultural
land to built-up land transformation was 2.86 km2 , which decreased slightly in
1991–1996 (i.e. 2.74 km2 ), whereas in later periods, that is, 1996–2001 and 2001–2005,
it increased to 3.08 km2 and 3.62 km2 , respectively. A total area of 6.30 km2 in
the ‘others’ class was transformed into built-up land during 1986–2005, a growth of
183.6%. Approximately 31.5 ha of ‘others’ land and 61.5 ha of agricultural land were
transformed into built-up land every year during the 20-year period 1986–2005.
5. Comparative assessment
5.1 Urban sprawl
The comparative evaluation of land-use transformation and concomitant urban
sprawl among the three selected urban agglomerations (see figure 6(a)) revealed that
the greatest spatial expansion took place in RUA (58.72 km2 ) followed by JUA
(27.13 km2 ) and DUA (17.76 km2 ). With reference to built-up growth, RUA (105.89%)
experienced the greatest growth followed by DUA (91.49%) and JUA (32.87%) (see
table 3). The annualized growth rate indicated an increase after 2001 in all three urban
agglomerations (see table 6 and figure 7). JUA was always characterized by the lowest
rates of growth (1.14–2.15%), whereas RUA exhibits a fluctuating pattern of annual
growth rate, with a high rise (5.77%) during 1991–1996 and a fall (2.20%) during
1996–2001. In comparison, DUA exhibits a gradual decrease from 1986 (4.29%) until
2001 (3.04%). The migration of people from tribal-dominated rural areas to urban
centres due to economic development would cause an increase in population and
resultant built-up growth of urban centres in Jharkhand state. The ribbon sprawl-
ing pattern appeared in RUA and JUA, with built-up development along highways
(a) (b)
Built-up area increase (%)
Built-up area increase (%)

40 35
30
30 25
20
20
15
10 10
5
0 0
1986–91 1991–96 1996–2001 2001–05 1986–91 1991–96 1996–2001 2001–05
Time period Time period
RUA JUA DUA RUA JUA DUA
(c)
160
Built-up area (km2)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Population (×103)
RUA JUA DUA
Figure 6. (a) Built-up growth, (b) built-up increase and (c) scatter diagram for the built-up
land and population in the major urban cities of Jharkhand during 1986–2005.
and major roads, whereas a leapfrog sprawling pattern was observed in DUA, with
built-up development at scattered locations away from the city core area (see figure 5).
The total built-up development of 103.6 km2 (with a growth of 165.66%) took place
in three major urban agglomerations in Jharkhand state during 1986–2005, in which
49.8% of development occurred outside the municipal/notified area boundary. This
signifies an unplanned development pattern around major cities in Jharkhand. The
chaotic development trend in the peripheral areas of major cities leads to difficulties
in resource allocation within the agglomeration of unplanned and planned units of
urban land. During the 20-year period 1986–2005, built-up development was quite
remarkable outside the municipal limit of these cities. The urban area outside the
municipal/notified limit increased in RUA by 18.49 km2 , in JUA by 12.99 km2 and
in DUA by 13.15 km2 . There is more scope for development within the municipal
limit of Ranchi city, whereas saturation due to the high built-up density within the
municipal/notified boundary of Dhanbad and Jamshedpur would require an exten-
sion of the municipal/notified area limit in these two cities for better infrastructure
planning and sustainable development.
There was a marginal fluctuation in the trend of urban area increase in JUA (see
figure 6(b)), whereas a declining trend was observed in DUA until 1996 and thereafter
a gradual increase was seen. In comparison to DUA and JUA, RUA exhibited an
episodic up-and-down trend during 1991–1996 and 1996–2001 respectively. This high
fluctuating trend of built-up growth clearly indicates that such sprawl was induced by
certain anthropogenic factors. The increase in the post-2001 period can be related to
the development of Ranchi as the state capital.
5.2 Population
The population growth trend revealed a similar pattern in DUA and JUA, whereas
the built-up development indicates a much higher growth for DUA (91.5%) as
Table 6. Annual increase in built-up area during 1986–2005.
Area (km2 ) Area (km2 ) Area (km2 )
Total Annual Annual Total Annual Annual Total Annual Annual

Period change increase growth (%) change increase growth (%) change increase growth (%)
1986–1991 10.60 2.12 3.82 5.73 1.14 1.38 4.17 0.83 4.29
1991–1996 19.06 3.81 5.77 6.30 1.26 1.42 3.92 0.78 3.32
1996–2001 9.39 1.87 2.20 6.41 1.28 1.35 4.18 0.83 3.04
2001–2005 19.66 4.91 5.20 8.69 2.17 2.15 5.49 1.37 4.33
7669
Built-up area growth (%)

8
0
1986–91 1991–96 1996–2001 2001–05
Time period
RUA JUA DUA
Figure 7. Annual built-up growth rates in the major urban agglomerations of Jharkhand
during 1986–2005.
compared to JUA (32.87%), and clearly indicates very high population pressure in
the urban areas of Dhanbad (see figure 8(b)).The development trend within and
outside the municipal limit is correlated with the declining trend in population
growth in Dhanbad, which can be related to a high increase in built-up develop-
ment outside the municipal area by 13.15 km2 in comparison to 4.61 km2 within
the municipal boundary (see table 3). This possibly indicates an outward migra-
tion of the population from the urban core area. Figure 8(a) shows the trend of
urban population density in these cities of Jharkhand state. Of the areas studied in
this paper, Dhanbad had the highest population density since 1986 but exhibited a
significant decline in population density over the 20-year observation period. In com-
parison, insignificant up-and-down trends were observed in both RUA and JUA.
DUA therefore resembles the urban sprawl development of the dispersed type. In
relation to urban population density, RUA exhibited a decline of 1230 persons/km2
(see table 4). A highly significant decline in population density was detected in DUA
(a decrease of 5656 persons/km2 ), which could be attributed as low-density built-
up development outside the municipal/notified area. On the contrary, in JUA, the
urban population density increased by 2393 persons/km2 , indicating a densifica-
tion of the population inside the urban core and excess inward migration from the
surrounding area.
(a) (b)
Population increase (%)
40000 20
Population density
(persons/ km2)
30000 15
20000 10
10000 5
0 0
1986 1991 1996 2001 2005 1986–91 1991–96 1996–2001 2001–05
Year Time period
RUA JUA DUA RUA JUA DUA
Figure 8. (a) Population density and (b) population increase in the major urban agglomera-
tions of Jharkhand during 1986–2005.
5.3 Urban sprawl and population

Table 4 shows that, among the three cities, RUA faced the greatest spatial spread
(58.72 km2 ) with the lowest increase in population of 441 000 people. With reference
to population increase, JUA faced the greatest population increase (504 000 people).
The population characteristics were more or less the same in DUA and JUA, possi-
bly due to their industrial importance, whereas Ranchi emerged as a business township
and state capital in the later period with comparatively less industrial growth (Krishna
and Mitra 2007, Sarkar 2007). The correlation between population and built-up devel-
opment revealed that Ranchi observed a higher rate of sprawl (see figure 6(c)), whereas
the sprawl in Dhanbad was less but there was more population pressure per unit
of built-up area. It should be noted that, during the 20-year period, the population
density decreased in RUA, which resembles more the horizontal expansion of the
urban area.
5.4 Land-use transformation

In terms of land-use transformation, an area of 103.6 km2 was transformed into built-
up land during 1986–2005 in the three urban agglomerations (see table 5), of which
71.5% was developed at the cost of agricultural land, 28.63% at the expense of ‘other’
non-built-up land and 0.80% was originally a water body. The greatest transforma-
tion of land to built-up land occurred in RUA (57.99 km2 ) followed by JUA (26.10
km2 ) and DUA (18.61 km2 ) (see table 5). Figure 9 clearly indicates that during the
two-decade period, RUA observed the greatest land transformation to built-up land
as compared to JUA and DUA. The fluctuating transformation pattern in Ranchi
explains that the built-up growth, as well as land transformation, was induced by
certain socio-political factors.
In RUA, only agricultural land was converted to built-up land (100%), whereas the
total agricultural land lost in DUA and JUA was 66% and 15% respectively, which
possibly indicates judicious and planned land-use transformation in JUA as compared
to the other two urban areas (see figure 9). In RUA, the land transformation exhibited
an episodic significant upward trend between 1991–1996 and 2001–2005. Such a high
increase in land transformation points towards growing stress over land and water
resources. With reference to the trends in land-use transformations, it is apparent that
25
20
Area (km2)
15
10
0
1986–91 1991–96 1996–2001 2001–05
Time period
RUA JUA DUA
Figure 9. The transformation of agricultural and other land use to built-up land use in the
major urban agglomerations of Jharkhand during 1986–2005.
JUA and DUA exhibited a gradual shift towards built-up development, whereas RUA
exhibited a sudden up-and-down trend in built-up development. The built-up land
growth exhibited abnormally high growth in RUA during 1991–1996 as compared to
the other two urban agglomerations.
6. Conclusion
JUA and DUA exhibit similar population growth trends, which showed a signifi-
cant increase during 1986–1996 and thereafter remained more or less constant during
1996–2005. In comparison, RUA showed a very high increase during 1986–1996, an
insignificant increase during 1996–2001 and a significant decrease during 2001–2005.
When observed with reference to the built-up land, RUA showed a significant increase
during 2001–2005. Such an opposing trend between population and built-up devel-
opment possibly indicates more industrial or business land development rather than
residential. RUA faced more sprawl as compared to population growth, indicating low
density expansion of the urban area. Bearing in mind the land-use transformation in
RUA involved 100% of the built-up development taking place on agricultural land,
this expansion probably indicates the unplanned and haphazard development of the
city’s built-up land. In JUA and DUA, there was more population increase as com-
pared to built-up growth. The high population pressure in these two cities may lead to
resource scarcity with the deterioration of the urban environment.
The expansion of the built-up area beyond the administrative limits could lead to
unregulated physical expansion of these urban agglomerations. If these urban agglom-
erations are not managed and planned under strict regulations, with the introduction
of development charges and property tax outside the municipal area, which primar-
ily includes areas with freehold properties with no property-tax liabilities towards the
government, these cities would face complex urban problems. The study demonstrates
the use of remote sensing and GIS techniques in accurate evaluation of pattern of
growth of the major cities in spatial and temporal dimensions. The results obtained
clearly indicated a need for judicious land-use transformation, as well as the formula-
tion of urban development policy with an emphasis on the sustainable utilization of
land and water resources during urban expansion planning.
Acknowledgement
The authors thank the chief editor and anonymous referees for their valuable
comments and suggestions, which helped to improve the manuscript.
References
ANDERSON, J.R., HARDY, E.E., ROACH, J.T. and WITMER, R.E., 1976, A land use and land cover
classification system for use with remote sensor data. Geological Survey Professional
Paper, No. 964 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office). Avai-
lable online at: http://www.ncrs.fs.fed.us/4153/deltawest/landcover/AndersonDoc.pdf
(accessed 15 November 2008).
BARNES, K.B., MORGAN, J.M., III, ROBERGE, M.C. and LOWE, S., 2001, Sprawl development:
its patterns, consequences, and measurement. Towson University. Available online
at: http://chesapeake.towson.edu/landscape/urbansprawl/download/Sprawl_white_
paper.pdf (accessed 11 February 2009).
BATTY, M., XIE, Y. and SUN, Z., 1999, The dynamics of urban sprawl. Working Paper Series,
Paper 15, Center for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London. Available
online at: http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/publications/workingPaperDetail.asp?ID=15
(accessed 11 February 2009).
BIJOY, C.R., 2003, A history of discrimination, conflict, and resistance. Available online at:
http://www.pucl.org/Topics/Dalit-tribal/2003/adivasi.htm (accessed 18 March 2009).
CARLSON, T., 2003, Application of remote sensing to urban problems. Remote Sensing of
Environment, 86, p. 3.
CENSUS OF INDIA, 2001, Office of the Registrar General, India, New Delhi. Available online
at: http://urbanindia.nic.in/moud/theministry/subordinateoff/tcpo/UAS_TOWN/
DEFINITIONS.PDF (accessed 15 November 2008).
CIVCO, D.L., HURD, J.D., WILSON, E.H., ARNOLD, C.L. and PRISLOE, M.P., Jr., 2002,
Quantifying and describing urbanizing landscapes in the northeast United States.
ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 68, pp. 1083–1090.

DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, 2006, District-wise yearly report 2006, Jharkhand State.
DURIEUX, L., LAGABRIELLE, E. and NELSON, A., 2008, A method for monitoring building
construction in urban sprawl areas using object-based analysis of Spot 5 images and
existing GIS data. Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 63, pp. 399–408.
EHLERS, M., JADKOWSKI, A.M., HOWARD, R. and BROSTUEN, D., 1990, Application of spot
data for regional growth analysis and local planning. Photogrammetric Engineering and
Remote Sensing, 56, pp. 175–180.
EPSTEIN, J., PAYNE, K. and KRAMER, E., 2002, Techniques for mapping suburban sprawl.
Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 63, pp. 913–918.
FORSYTHE, K.W., 2004, Pansharpened Landsat 7 imagery for improved urban area classifica-
tion. Geomatica, 58, pp. 23–31.
GEYMEN, A. and BAZ, I., 2008, Monitoring urban growth and detecting land-cover changes
on the Istanbul metropolitan area. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 136, pp.
449–459.
HAI, P.M. and YAMAGUCHI, Y., 2007, Use of remote sensing to monitor urbanization of Hanoi.
International Journal of Geoinformatics, 3.
HARA, Y., TAKEUCHI, K. and OKUBO, S., 2004, Urbanization linked with past agricultural land
use patterns in the urban fringe of a deltaic Asian mega-city: a case study in Bangkok.
Remote Sensing of Environment, 89, pp. 434–443.
HARRIS, D.M. and VENTURA, S.J., 1995, The integration of geographic data with remotely
sensed imagery to improve classification in an urban area. Photogrammetric Engineering
and Remote Sensing, 61, pp. 993–998.
HOSTERT, P. and DIERMAYER, E., 2003, Employing LANDSAT MSS, TM and ETM+ for map-
ping 3 decades of urban change in Berlin, Germany. The International Archives of
the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol. XXXIV-
7/W9. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium Remote Sensing of Urban
Areas, 27–29 June 2003, Regensburg, Germany, pp. 225–228.
HURD, J.D., WILSON, E.H., LAMMEY, S.G. and CIVCO, D.L., 2001, Characterisation of forest
fragmentation and urban sprawl using time sequential Landsat Imagery. In Proceedings
in ASPRS Annual Convention, 23–27 April 2001, St. Louis, MO. Available online
at: http://resac.uconn.edu/publications/tech_papers/index.html (accessed 15 October
2008).
IPCC, 2007, Climate Change 2007: Synthesis report. An assessment of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, pp. 49–50. Available online at: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/
assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf (accessed 15 October 2008).
IRISH, R., 1990, Geocoding satellite imagery for GIS use. GIS World, pp. 59–62.
KRISHNA, A.P. and MITRA, S.K., 2007, Geoinformatics based environmental quality assess-
ment of physical parameters of urbanization: case study of Ranchi city, India. In
Proceedings of Map Asia, 14–16 August, 2007, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Available
online at: http://www.gisdevelopment.net/proceedings/mapasia/2007/Urban%20and%

20Town%20Planning/ma07148.pdf (accessed 4 January 2009).
MASEK, J.G., LINDSAY, F.E. and GOWARD, S.N., 2000, Dynamics of urban growth
in Washington DC metropolitan area, 1973–1996, from Landsat observations.
International Journal of Remote Sensing, 21, pp. 3473–3486.
PANDEY, V.C., 2003, Sustainable Development in South Asia (Delhi: Kalpaz).
PENG, J., WU, J., YIN, H., LI, Z., CHANG, Q. and MU, T., 2008, Rural land use change dur-
ing 1986–2002 in Lijiang, China, based on remote sensing and GIS data. Sensors, 8,
pp. 8201–8223.
PRIYADARSHI, N. and DUTT, K.L., 2000, Social and gender issues in the stone quarries
around Ranchi City, Jharkhand, India. Unpublished report. Available online at:
http://www.asmasiapacific.org/asm_gender.php (accessed 28 December 2008).
RIDD, M.K. and LIU, J., 1998, A comparison of four algorithms for change detection in an
urban environment. Remote Sensing of Environment, 63, pp. 95–100.

SARKAR, S., 2007, Responding to rapid fringe growth of Ranchi: necessity for planning inter-
vention. In Proceedings of 55th National Town and Country Planning Congress, 9–11
January 2007, Kochi, Kerala.
SAXSENA, A., 2003, Remote sensing and GIS in assessing physical transformation of Bhopal
city, India. Map Asia 2003.
SETO, K.C. and LIU, W., 2003, Comparing ARTMAP neural network with the maximum
likelihood classifier for detecting urban change. Photogrammetric Engineering Remote
Sensing, 69, pp. 981–990.
SETO, K.C., WOODCOCK, C.E., HUANG, X., LU, J. and KAUFMANN, R.K., 2002, Monitoring
land use change in the Pearl River delta using Landsat TM. International Journal of
THEOBALD, D.M., 2001, Quantifying urban and rural sprawl using the sprawl index. In Annual
Association of American Geographers Conference, 2 March 2001, New York.
THOMAS, N., HENDRIX, C. and CONGALTON, R.G., 2003, A comparison of urban map-
ping methods using high-resolution digital imagery. Photogrammetric Engineering and
TORRENS, P.M. and ALBERTI, M., 2000, Measuring sprawl. Working Paper No. 27, Centre
for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College, London. Available online at:
http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/working_papers/paper27.pdf (accessed 11 February 2009).
TREITZ, P.M., HOWARTH, P.J. and GONG, P., 1992, Application of satellite and GIS technol-
ogy for land-use mapping at the rural urban fringe: a case study. Photogrammetric
Engineering and Remote Sensing, 58, pp. 439–448.
UNITED NATIONS POPULATION DIVISION, 2007a, World urbanization prospects: the
2007 revision population database. Available online at: http://esa.un.org/wup/
source/country.aspx (accessed 8 November 2008).
UNITED NATIONS POPULATION DIVISION, 2007b, World urbanization prospects: the 2007 revi-
sion population database. Available online at: http://esa.un.org/unup/p2k0data.asp
(accessed 8 November 2008).
U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS, 2002, Sprawl city, U.S. Bureau of the Census. Available online at:
http://www.sprawlcity.org/action_pres.html (accessed 10 November 2008).
WELCH, R., REMILLARD, M. and SLACK, R.B., 1998, Remote sensing and geographic informa-
tion system techniques for aquatic resource evaluation. Photogrammetric Engineering
and Remote Sensing, 54, pp. 177–185.
WESSELS, K.J., REYERS, B., JAARSVELD, A.S.V. and RUTHERFORD, M.C., 2002, Identification
of potential conflict areas between land transformation and biodiversity conservation
in north-eastern South Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, pp. 157–178.
WESTMORELAND, S. and STOW, D.A., 1992, Category identification of change of land-
use polygons in an integrated image processing/geographic information system.
WILSON, E.H., HURD, J.D., CIVCO, D.L., PROSLOE, M.P. and ARNOLD, C., 2003, Development
of a geospatial model to quantify, describe and map urban growth. Remote Sensing of
Environment, 86, pp. 275–285.
YANG, X., 2002, Satellite monitoring of urban spatial growth in the Atlanta metropolitan area.
YEH, A.G. and LI, X., 2001, Measurement and monitoring of urban sprawl in rapidly growing
region using entropy. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 67, pp. 83–89.
View publication stats

Evaluation of Urban Sprawl Pattern in The Tribal-Dominated Cities of Jharkhand State, India

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Evaluation of Urban Sprawl Pattern in The Tribal-Dominated Cities of Jharkhand State, India

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation of Urban Sprawl Pattern in The Tribal-Dominated Cities of Jharkhand State, India

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern in the tribal-dominated cities of

Article in International Journal of Remote Sensing · November 2011

Amit Kumar Arvind Chandra Pandey

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Najmul Hoda Ayyemperumal THILLAI Jeyaseelan

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Forest fire hotspot analysis View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Remote

Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2010.527391

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

Evaluation of urban sprawl pattern in the tribal-dominated cities

AMIT KUMAR†, ARVIND CHANDRA PANDEY*‡, NAJMUL HODA†

(Received 1 May 2009; in final form 5 August 2010)

*Corresponding author. Email: arvindchandrap@yahoo.com

2. The study area

Dhanbad urban agglomeration

Ranchi urban agglomeration

Figure 1. Location map.

3. Data used and methodology

Table 1. Details of satellite images used in the study.

Sensor type Path-row Month of acquisition Spatial resolution (m)

Landsat TM 104–44 March 1986 30

LISS-IV 2005 Topographical map ο TM 1986

Visual interpretation Ground truth

LULC classes Post-field updating

LULC map ο Population data (UNPD)

LULC area statistics

Urban growth analysis

Comparative evaluation of RUA, JUA and DUA

Figure 2. Methodology flow chart.

4. Results and discussion

Table 2(a). Land-use/land-cover statistics of Ranchi Urban Agglomeration.

Agricultural land Built-up Water body Others

1986 248.86 77.47 – 55.44 17.26 – 14.74 4.59 – 2.20 0.69 –

Table 2(b). Land-use/land-cover statistics of Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration.

Agricultural land Built-up Water body Others

1986 7.58 5.07 – 82.53 55.15 – 8.76 5.85 – 50.77 33.93 –

Table 2(c). Land-use/land-cover statistics of Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration.

Agricultural land Built-up Water body Others

1986 39.80 51.88 – 19.41 25.30 – 1.10 1.43 – 16.41 21.39 –

LULC area (km2)

Figure 3. Land-use/land-cover dynamics during 1986–2005 in (a) Ranchi Urban Agglo-

Ranchi Urban Agglomeration Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration

Built-up Built-up Built-up

Outside Inside Outside Inside Outside Inside

0 2.5 5 km 0 3.75 7.5 km 0 5 10 km

4.2 Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration

Table 4. Population characteristics in major urban agglomerations.

Ranchi Urban Agglomeration Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration

Population density Population density Population density

1986 549 9903 735 8905 734 37816

2001 844 8931 1081 10705 1046 33144

Table 5. Land-use transformation in major urban agglomerations (area in km2 ).

Ranchi Urban Agglomeration Jamshedpur Urban Agglomeration Dhanbad Urban Agglomeration