Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Spatial Conservation Prioritisation of Threatened Forest Ecosystems in Myanmar

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Deforestation, fragmentation and fires are habitat transformers and responsible for loss of biodiversity. This study attempts to evaluate threat status of forest ecosystems by determining regional-level hot spots of deforestation, fragmentation and fires in Myanmar. The states of Ayeyarwady, Mandalay and Nay Pyi Taw have the highest annual rate of deforestation from 2005 to 2016. There is a significant reduction in spatial extent of large core forest. Mandalay and Nay Pyi Taw had shown more than 20% of loss in large core forest from 2005 to 2016. Geospatial analysis indicates all the major forest types were affected by fires during 2003 to 2017. The study found that dry deciduous forests were highly affected by fires. More than 60% of the forest area of Magway, Mandalay, Chin, Kayah, Kayin and Shan had found to be under forest fire hot spot. Comparative spatial assessment was carried out on fire hot spots, deforested and fragmented landscapes to provide overview of priority conservation areas. The study identified five states in Myanmar affected by multiple threats and categorised as Conservation Priority Hot Spot I, eight states as Conservation Priority Hot Spot II and two states as low-risk areas categorised as Conservation Priority Hot Spot III. The analysis of hot spots of deforestation, fragmentation and fires provides a consistent way of ecosystem monitoring and biodiversity conservation in Myanmar. The study demonstrates repeatable earth observations as an important prerequisite for sustainable forest management in Myanmar.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker, P. J., & Bunyavejchewin, S. (2009). Fire behaviour and fire effects across the forest landscape of continental Southeast Asia. In Tropical fire ecology (pp. 311–334). Springer, Berlin.

  • Biswas, S., Vadrevu, K. P., Lwin, Z. M., & Lasko, K. (2015). Factors controlling vegetation fires in protected and non-protected areas of Myanmar. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0124346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dudgeon, D. (2002). The most endangered ecosystems in the world? Conservation of riverine biodiversity in Asia. Internationale Vereinigung für theoretische und angewandte Limnologie: Verhandlungen, 28(1), 59–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (2006). Global forest resource assessment 2005 progress towards sustainable forest management. Rome: UN Food and Agriculture Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (2011). Assessing forest degradation-towards the development of globally applicable guidelines. Forest Resources Assessment Working Paper. 177.

  • FAO. (2015). Global forest resource assessment. Rome: UN Food and Agriculture Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadgil, M. (1990). India’s deforestation: Patterns and processes. Society and Natural Resources, 3, 131–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getis, A., & Ord, J. K. (1992). The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geographical Anlaysis, 24(3), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/.

  • Htun, N. Z., Mizoue, N., Kajisa, T., & Yoshida, S. (2009). Deforestation and forest degradation as measures of Popa Mountain Park (Myanmar) effectiveness. Environmental Conservation, 36(3), 218–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

  • Lim, C. L., Prescott, G. W., De Alban, J. D. T., Ziegler, A. D., & Webb, E. L. (2017). Untangling the proximate causes and underlying drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Myanmar. Conservation Biology, 31(6), 1362–1372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, F. J., Huang, C., Pang, Y., Li, M., Song, D. X., Song, X. P., et al. (2016). Assessment of the three factors affecting Myanmar’s forest cover change using Landsat and MODIS vegetation continuous fields data. International Journal of Digital Earth, 9(6), 562–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moloney, K. A., & Levin, S. A. (1996). The effects of disturbance architecture on landscape-level population dynamics. Ecology, 77(2), 375–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Da Fonseca, G. A., & Kent, J. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403(6772), 853–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puyravaud, J. P. (2003). Standardizing the calculation of the annual rate of deforestation. Forest Ecol Manag, 177, 593–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, C. S., Khuroo, A. A., Harikrishna, P., Saranya, K. R. L., Jha, C. S., & Dadhwal, V. K. (2014). Threat evaluation for biodiversity conservation of forest ecosystems using geospatial techniques: A case study of Odisha, India. Ecological Engineering, 69, 287–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, C. S., Pasha, S. V., Satish, K. V., Unnikrishnan, A., Chavan, S. B., Jha, C. S., et al. (2019). Quantifying and predicting multi-decadal forest cover changes in Myanmar: A biodiversity hotspot under threat. Biodiversity and Conservation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01714-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, N., Armenteras, D., Molowny-Horas, R., & Retana, J. (2012). Patterns and trends of forest loss in the Colombian Guyana. Biotropica, 44(1), 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez, J. P., Clark, K. M., Baillie, J. E., et al. (2011). Establishing IUCN red list criteriafor threatened ecosystems. Conservation Biology, 25, 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNCCD. (2005). The union of Myanmar ministry of forest. Myanmar: Yangon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unnikrishnan, A. (2018). Threat evaluation of forest ecosystems in Myanmar using geospatial techniques. M.Phil. Dissertation. Cochin University, Kerala.

  • Vadrevu, K. P. R. (2011). Vegetation fire in the Asian Region: Satellite observational needs and priorities. Global Environmental Research, 15(1), 65–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogt, P., Riitters, K., Estreguil, C., Kozak, J., Wade, T., & Wickham, J. (2007). Mapping spatial patterns with morphological image processing. Landscape Ecology, 22, 171e177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, P. S., & Pickett, S. T. A. (1985). Natural disturbance and patch dynamics: An introduction. In S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (Eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics (pp. 3–13). Cambridge: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikramanayake, E., Dinerstein, E., Loucks, C., & Olson, D. (2001). Terrestrial ecoregions of the Indo-Pacific: A conservation assessment (p. 643). Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work has been carried out as part of ISRO’s National Carbon Project. We gratefully acknowledge ISRO-DOS Geosphere Biosphere Programme for supporting this research. We are thankful to Director, NRSC, Deputy Director, RSA, NRSC, and Group Director, FEG, NRSC, for suggestions and encouragement.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Sudhakar Reddy.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reddy, C.S., Unnikrishnan, A., Asra, M. et al. Spatial Conservation Prioritisation of Threatened Forest Ecosystems in Myanmar. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 47, 1737–1749 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-019-01025-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-019-01025-2

Keywords

Navigation