Skip to main content
Log in

Modeling susceptibility to deforestation of remaining ecosystems in North Central Mexico with logistic regression

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Forestry Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Determining underlying factors that foster deforestation and delineating forest areas by levels of susceptibility are of the main challenges when defining policies for forest management and planning at regional scale. The susceptibility to deforestation of remaining forest ecosystems (shrubland, temperate forest and rainforest) was conducted in the state of San Luis Potosi, located in north central Mexico. Spatial analysis techniques were used to detect the deforested areas in the study area during 1993–2007. Logistic regression was used to relate explanatory variables (such as social, investment, forest production, biophysical and proximity factors) with susceptibility to deforestation to construct predictive models with two focuses: general and by biogeographical zone. In all models, deforestation has positive correlation with distance to rainfed agriculture, and negative correlation with slope, distance to roads and distance to towns. Other variables were significant in some cases, but in others they had dual relationships, which varied in each biogeographical zone. The results show that the remaining rainforest of Huasteca region is highly susceptible to deforestation. Both approaches show that more than 70% of the current rainforest area has high and very high levels of susceptibility to deforestation. The values represent a serious concern with global warming whether tree carbon is released to atmosphere. However, after some considerations, encouraging forest environmental services appears to be the best alternative to achieve sustainable forest management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alix-Garcia J. 2007. A spatial analysis of common property deforestation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 53: 141–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcand JL, Guillaumont P, Jeanneney SG. 2008. Deforestation and the real exchange rate. Journal of Development Economics, 86: 242–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Averna-Valente RO, Vettorazzi CA. 2008. Definition of priority areas for forest conservation through the ordered weighted averaging method. Forest Ecology and Management, 256: 1408–1417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailis R, Berrueta V, Chengappa C, Dutta K, Edwards R, Masera O, Still D, Smith KR. 2007. Performance testing for monitoring improved biomass stove interventions: experiences of the Household energy and health project. Energy for Sustainable Development, 11(2): 57–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett K, Kasischke ES, McGuire AD, Turetsky MR, Kane ES. 2010. Modeling fire severity in black spruce stands in the Alaskan boreal forest using spectral and non-spectral geospatial data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 114: 1494–1503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beguería S. 2006. Changes in land cover and shallow landslide activity: A case study in the Spanish Pyrenees. Geomorphology, 74: 196–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattarai K, Conway D, Yousef M. 2009. Determinants of deforestation in Nepal’s Central Development Region. Journal of Environmental Management, 91: 471–488.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boletta PE, Ravelo AC, Planchuelo AM, Grilli M. 2006. Assessing deforestation in the Argentine Chaco. Forest Ecology and Management, 228: 108–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braimoh AK, Onishi T. 2007. Geostatistical techniques for incorporating spatial correlation into land use change models. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 9: 438–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvo-Alvarado J, McLennan B, Sánchez-Azofeita A, Garvin T. 2009. Deforestation and forest restoration in Guanacaste, Costa Rica: Putting conservation policies in context. Forest Ecology and Management, 258: 931–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chai SL, Tanner E, McLaren K. 2009. High rates of forest clearance and fragmentation pre- and post-National Park establishment: The case of a Jamaican montane rainforest. Biological Conservation, 142: 2484–2492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapa-Bezanilla D, Sosa-Ramírez J, de Alba-Ávila A. 2008. Multitemporal study on forest fragmentation in sierra Fria, Aguascalientes, Mexico. Madera y Bosques, 14(1): 37–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury RR. 2006. Landscape change in the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve, Mexico: Modeling the driving forces of smallholder deforestation in land parcels. Applied Geography, 26: 129–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culas RJ. 2007. Deforestation and the environmental Kuznets curve: An institutional perspective. Ecological Economics, 61: 429–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronkleton P, Barton D, Medina G. 2011. Community forest management and the emergence of multiscale-governance institutions: lessons for REDD+ development from Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia. Forests, 2: 451–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dendoncker N, Rounsevell, M. Bogaert, P. 2007. Spatial analysis and modelling of land use distributions in Belgium. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 31: 188–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng X, Jiang Q, Zhan J, He S, Lin Y. 2010. Simulation on the dynamics of forest area changes in Northeast China. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 20(4): 495–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Echeverria C, Coomes DA, Hall M, Newton AC. 2008. Spatially explicit models to analyze forest loss and fragmentation between 1976 and 2020 in southern Chile. Ecological Modelling, 212: 439–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO. 2010. Global Forest Resource Assessment 2010. FAO Forestry Paper 163. p.378. Available at www.fao.org.forestry/fra2010.

  • Flamenco-Sandoval A, Ramos MM, Masera OM. 2007. Assessing implications of land-use and land-cover change dynamics for conservation of a highly diverse tropical rain forest. Biological Conservation, 138: 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freitas SR, Hawbaker TJ, Metzger JP. 2010. Effects of roads, topography, and land use on forest cover dynamics in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 259: 410–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller DO, Meijaard, EM, Christy L, Jessup TC. 2010. Spatial assessment of threats to biodiversity within East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Applied Geography, 30(3): 416–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García M, Riaño D, Chuvieco E, Danson, FM. 2010. Estimating biomass carbon stocks for a Mediterranean forest in central Spain using LiDAR height and intensity data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 114: 816–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gönen M. 2007. Analyzing receiver operating characteristic curves with SAS. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc, p.134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel L. 2008. Model assessment with ROC curves. The Encyclopedia of Data Warehousing and Mining. 2nd Edition. Pennsylvania: Idea Group Publishers, p.16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu Z, Lo CP. 2007. Modeling urban growth in Atlanta using logistic regression. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 31: 667–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P. 1993. Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm?. Ecology, 74(6): 1659–1673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long H, Wu X, Wang W, Dong G. 2008. Analysis of urban-rural land-use change during 1995–2006 and its policy dimensional driving forces in Chongqing, China. Sensors, 8: 681–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallinis G, Koustias N. 2008. Spectral and spatial based classification for broad scale land cover mapping based on logistic regression. Sensors, 8: 8067–8085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez ML, Pérez-Maqueo O, Vázquez G, Castillo-Campos G, García-Franco J, Mehltreter K, Equihua M, Landgrave R. 2009. Effects of land use change on biodiversity and ecosystem services in tropical montane cloud forests of Mexico. Forest Ecology and Management, 258: 1856–1863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Návar J. 2011. The spatial distribution of aboveground biomass in tropical forests of Mexico. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems, 13: 149–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pineda-Jaimes NB, Bosque-Sendra J, Gómez-Delgado M, Franco PR. 2010. Exploring the driving forces behind deforestation in the state of Mexico (Mexico) using geographically weighted regression. Applied Geography, 30(4): 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pineda-Jaimes NB, Bosque-Sendra J, Gómez-Delgado M, Plata-Rocha W. 2008. Analysis of land use changes in the State of Mexico using regression analysis and GIS: an approach to the deforestation processes. Investigaciones Geográficas Boletín del Instituto de Geografía UNAM, 69: 33–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pompa-García M, Antonio-Némiga X, Carrasco-Mejorado JA, Mendoza-Briseño MA. 2011. Spatial patterns of soil degradation in Mexico. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(5): 1109–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyes-Hernández H, Aguilar-Robledo M, Aguirre-Rivera JR, Fortanelli-Martínez J. 2008. Spatial configuration of land use/land cover in the Pujal Coy Project Area, Huasteca Potosina Region, Mexico. AMBIO, 37(5): 381–389.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Romieu I, Riojas-Rodríguez H, Marrón-Mares AT, Schilmann A, Pérez-Padilla R, Masera O. 2009. Improved biomass stove intervention in rural México. Impact on the respiratory Health of Women. American Journal of Respiratory and Clinical Care Medicine, 180: 649–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford GN, Bebi P, Edwards PJ, Zimmermann NE. 2008. Assessing land-use statistics to model land cover change in a mountainous landscape in the European Alps. Ecological Modelling, 212: 460–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rzedowski J. 1963. El extremo boreal del bosque tropical siempre verde en norteamerica continental. Plant Ecology, 11(4): 173–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. 2004. SAS/STAT 9.1 User’s Guide. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA. p. 5121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sifuentes-Amaya R, Ramírez-Valverde G. 2010. Effects of specifying an incorrect model for logistic regression, with two independent correlated variables. Agrociencia, 44: 197–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velázquez A, Mas JF, Palacio-Prieto JL, Bocco G. 2002. Land cover mapping to obtain a current profile of deforestation in Mexico. Unasylva, 53: 37–40.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Miranda-Aragón.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Miranda-Aragón, L., Treviño-Garza, E.J., Jiménez-Pérez, J. et al. Modeling susceptibility to deforestation of remaining ecosystems in North Central Mexico with logistic regression. Journal of Forestry Research 23, 345–354 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-012-0230-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-012-0230-z

Keywords

Navigation