09
A GEOSPATIAL STUDY OF TRENDS AND PATTERNS OF BIOPHYSICAL
TRANSFORMATION IN THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND, INDIA
Sandesh Yadav1 and Shams Perwaiz2
Assistant Professor, Centre for Disaster Management, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India
2
Teacher, Sr. High School, Jokihat, Araria, Bihar, India
Email: shamsperwaizjmi@gmail.com

1

How to cite this paper:
Yadav Sandesh and Perwaiz
Shams (2022) A Geospatial
Study of Trends and Patterns ofBiophysical Transformation in
the State of Uttarakhand, India,
Journal of Global Resources,
Vol. 08 (02)DOI:
10.46587/JGR.2022.v08i02.009

Received: 05 March 2022
Reviewed: 25 April 2022
Revised: 23 May 2022
Final Accepted: 15 June 2022

Abstract: Inevitable process of urbanization is taking placeat much faster rate than ever before. It has engulfed all
possible regions across the globe in order to meet out thedemands of ever-increasing demographic pressure.
Urbanization involves anthropogenic activities likeconstruction of roads, railways, bridges, buildings (bothresidential and commercial) resulting in alteration oflandscape. Similar scenario is taking place in the States ofIndia but the most vulnerable ones are the mountainous
states located in close vicinity of the mighty Himalayas.
One such State is Uttarakhand which is facing thewidespread destruction of pristine environment due tovarious developmental processes taking place as a resultof urbanization. The vegetative destruction in order toprovide land area for construction of hotels, resorts,
ropeways and other constructions. The current
unsustainableurbanizationhas
triggeredmultidimensional problems like alteration of micro-climate,vegetation destruction, biodiversity degradation, habitat
fragmentation and many more in the study area. The
present study analyses trend and pattern of landscapealteration in the light of digital data viz Landsat - 4, 5 (TM)for 1990, 2000, 2010 and Landsat - 8 (OLI) for 2020. The‘change detection’ along with ‘rate of change of land per
year’ has been calculated and analyzed for various
categories of land use/land cover. In addition to this, builtup expansion during 1990-2020 have also been analyzed
and discussed. Lastly, study gives emphasis to bringurbanization process on the lines of sustainability andmake an appeal to promote ecological urbanization in the
study area.
Key words: Landscape Alteration, Ecological Urbanization,
Impervious Surface, Vegetation Destruction

Journal of Global Resources, July 2022, Volume 08 (02) Sandesh Yadav and Shams Perwaiz P a g e | 7 8

Introduction
Human beings and the environment are linked to each other through the reciprocal relationship(Mrash, 1864). In this relationship of ‘man and nature’, overuse of resources has degradedenvironment and resulted in land transformation (Turner, et. al., 1990). The landscape of theearth is altered either by natural changes or anthropogenic activities (various developmental
activities). Talking globally, then developed nations were early destroyers of forest while indeveloping nations exploitation paced up during the 20th century (Goldewijk, 2001). The everincreasing demographic and developmental pressure increased the demand for food, feed,
fuel and raw materials by manifolds. The urbanization and economic globalization haveresulted in expansion of grey infrastructure and shrinkage of vegetation cover at the global
level (Turner, 1994). Landscape alteration is taking place from time immemorial (Kato andYamaguchi, 2005). In ancient times, landscape was dominated by vegetation cover or forest
cover characterized by the most complex patterns. As soon as, human beings came into scenethen landscape alteration took place in the form of agricultural lands, and settlements or builtup. India experienced continuous decline in forest area from 32 percent (1880) to 20 percent(1980) (Rahman, 2007).
In the present scenario, most vulnerable situation is being faced by the States locatedin the region of the Himalayas of India. One such State is Uttarakhand which have experienced
fast pace of urbanization on one hand and deforestation on the other hand. The anthropogenic
activities like housing construction, roads & railways construction, industries, markets andbuildings (commercial and residential) marked the unsustainable urbanization in the State of
Uttarakhand. The present study assesses the scenario of landscape alteration andurbanization over the period of 1990 - 2020 that is 30 years. The study suggests the need of‘ecological urbanization’ in order to promote the process of development and urbanization on
the lines of sustainability.
Objectives of the Study• To analyze the trend and pattern of landscape alteration (1990-2020) in the study area.
• To analyze the change detection and land transformation for various categories of land
use/land cover (1990-2020) with special reference to built-up expansion in the study area.
Database and Methodology
The digital data in the form of satellite imagery (Landsat-4,5 and Landsat-8) for the years 1990,
2000, 2010 and 2020 have been used to carry out the present research study.
Table 01: Details of Satellite Imagery
Satellite

SensorDate

Landsat -4,5
TM
23/02/1990
Landsat-4, 5
TM
19/02/2000
Landsat-4,5TM
14/02/2010
Landsat-8
OLI
09/11/2020
Source: Landsat Manual, Various Issues

Details

Bands

Spatial(meters)

Thermal(meters)

Path

Row

Spectral

Thermal

30
30
30
30

120
120
120
100

146
146
146
147

40
40
40
40

1-5 & 7
1-5 & 7
1-5 & 71-9

6
6
6
10, 11

Study Area
The State of Uttarakhand is famous as ‘land of gods’ (Devbhoomi) and currently, it is major
tourist attraction due to picturesque natural scenic beauty and places of religious importance.
Geographically, it is located between 28º44' N - 31º28' N latitude and 77º35' E - 81º01' E
longitude. It comprises of 13 districts as administrative units. Though the State of Uttarakhand
is well known for pristine forests and region of ecological importance but in last few decades,
urbanization process resulted in clearing of large forest stretch in order to fetch land area for
Journal of Global Resources, July 2022, Volume 08 (02) Sandesh Yadav and Shams Perwaiz P a g e | 7 9

one or the other constructional activity. Under such circumstances, region is facing ecologicalimbalance, biodiversity loss, problem of habitat fragmentation along with intensification ofnatural disasters. Demographic pressure (10,086,292, census 2011) has created manifold
demands for housing, medical infrastructure, educational institutions, which have given rise tobuilt-up dominated landscape.
Figure 01: Location Map Study Area

Tools of Analysis‘Rate of Change Per Year’ is calculated by using the following formula (Chebet, 2013):
𝑅=
Where,𝑌−𝑋
𝑇

R = rate of change
Y = the area (km2) of the study area in the final year.
X = the area (km2) of the study area in the initial year.
T = the time difference in years

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Landscape Alteration
Landscape alteration in the State of Uttarakhand can be understood in terms of land use/ land
cover changes over the period of 1990-2020. The classes of land use/land cover taken for thepresent research study includes fallow land, agriculture land, built-up, snow cover, debris,
vegetation, water bodies and barren land. Figure shows the land use/land cover in the study
area during the years 1990, 2000, 2010 and 2020.
Table 1 shows fluctuating trend of land use/land cover for the period 1990-2020. The
area under the ‘fallow land’ shows mix trend as land area increases initially from 3.50 percent(1990) to 5.3 percent (2000) then decreases gradually to 4.2 percent (2010) and finally dipping
to 1.0 percent (2020). The agriculture land remains more or less constant around 6.8 percent
for the years 1990, 2000 and 2010 and increases to 8.6 percent in the year 2020. Built-up
shows inclined trend as the land area increases sharply from 0.47 percent (1990) to 1.08
percent (2020) and gradual increase to 1.0 percent (2010) and finally attaining the value of 1.6
percent (2020). The land area under snow cover shows declining trend with sharp decrease
from 24.94 percent (1990) to 21.8 percent (2000) and then keeps rolling around 21.5 percent(2010) and 21.4 percent (2020). The ‘Debris’ show inclined trend with land area increasing
Journal of Global Resources, July 2022, Volume 08 (02) Sandesh Yadav and Shams Perwaiz P a g e | 8 0

sharply from 1.11 percent (1990) to 2.9 percent (2020). The LULC category of vegetationshows mix trend with sharp decrease initially from 25.60 percent (1990) to 11.24 percent (2000)
then increasing to 28.3 percent (2010) and finally attaining the value of 29.8 percent (2020).
‘Water bodies’ shows inclined trend with marginal increase in land area from 0.28 percent(1990) to 0.5 percent (2020). Barren land shows mix trend with sharp increase initially from37.37 percent (1990) to 52.92 percent (2000) then decreases to 34.8 percent (2010) and 34.2
percent (2020).
Figure 02: Landscape alteration in the State of Uttarakhand (a) 1990 (b) 2000 (c) 2010 (d) 2020

Source: Landsat Imagery, 1990, 2000, 2010, 2020

Table 02: Uttarakhand, India: Land use/Land Cover Change during 1990-2020
LULC Classes

Fallow Land
Agriculture Land

1990
Area
Hectare%age
1875783.50360575
6.70

2000
Area
Hectare%age
2828865.3327025
6.8

Built-up
25410.4
0.4758316.4
Snow Cover
1341460 24.94 1172139
Debris59416.5
1.1171357.6
Vegetation
1377620 25.60
604106
Water Bodies
15000.1
0.28
15372
Barren Land2009880 37.37 2845738
Source: Calculated and compiled by the authors

1.08
21.8
1.3
11.24
0.29
52.92

2010
Area
Hectare%age
2251234.2
372493
6.8

2020
Area
Hectare%age
52000.2
1.0466132.2
8.6

52568
1156050
1592141520223
18909
1872360

86773.91149610156511160117725105.7
1839630

1.0
21.5
3.0
28.3
0.4
34.8

1.6
21.4
2.9
29.8
0.5
34.2

Change Detection in Land Use/Land Cover Categories
The ‘change detection’ analysis shows that agriculture land (-0.62 percent), snow cover (-3.15
percent) and vegetation (-14.39 percent) have experienced negative change during 1990-2000.
In other words, land area under the above-mentioned categories have decreased during 19902000. The decrease in land area is due to construction of houses (kachcha/pakka houses) inagriculture land. The encroachment of land for development activities like construction of roads
is yet another factor responsible for substantial decrease in agriculture land. The fast pace of
Journal of Global Resources, July 2022, Volume 08 (02) Sandesh Yadav and Shams Perwaiz P a g e | 8 1

urbanization and construction activities related to tourism sector like hotels, resorts, parks have
led to speed up the process of deforestation and thus, vast stretches of forest were cleared
confirming decrease in vegetation cover during 1990-2000. The decrease in land area undersnow cover can be attributed to climate change and global warming which have resulted in
shifting of snow line, melting of glaciers and other related impacts.
Table 03: Uttarakhand-‘Change detection’ land use/land cover categories, 1990-2020
LULC
Classes

1990-2000
Change in Area
Hectares%age
Fallow Land
95,308
1.77
Agriculture Land-33,550-0.62
Built-up
32,906
0.61
Snow Cover-169,321-3.15
Debris11,941.1
0.22
Vegetation-773,514-14.39Water Bodies
371.9
0.01
Barren Land
835,858
15.55
Source: Calculated and compiled by the authors

2000-2010
Change in Area
Hectares%age-57,763-1.07
45,4680.85-5,748.4-0.11-221,570-4.12
11,941.1
0.22
916,117
17.04
3,537
0.07
-973,378-18.102010-2020
Change in Area
Hectares%age-173,122.8-3.22
93,639.2
1.74
34,205.9
0.64-6,440-0.12-2,703-0.05
80,9541.50
6,196.6
0.12-32,730-0.61

The ‘change detection’ analysis during 2000-2010 shows that scenario of landscapealteration becoming much faster and decrease in land area have been recorded in other land
use/land cover categories other than those in 1990-2000. During the period 2000-2010, landarea under fallow land (-1.07 percent), built-up (-0.11 percent), snow cover (-4.12 percent) andbarren land (-18.10 percent) have decreased considerably. The decrease in fallow land canbe explained in terms of agriculture land. The useless fallow land after ploughing and tilling
was converted into agriculture land. Similarly, disasters like landslides destroy infrastructure
and resulted decrease in land area under built-up. Moreover, age-old buildings are demolishedas they can’t stand impact of disasters. The activities like afforestation and re-afforestation
were carried out which resulted decrease in land area under barren land category. The ‘change
detection’ analysis during 2010-2020 shows entirely different scenario of landscape alterationand land area under categories viz. fallow land (-3.22 percent), snow cover (-0.12 percent),
debris (-0.05 percent) and barren land (-0.61 percent). The land area under debris haveexperienced decreased due to one or the other reason.
Rate of Change Per Year of Land For Land Use/Land Cover Categories
The ‘rate of change per year’ of land during 1990-2000 was negative for agriculture land (3355 hectares per year), snow cover (-16932.1 hectares per year), vegetation (-77351.4
hectares per year) and positive for fallow land (+9530 hectares per year), built-up (+3290.6
hectares per year), debris (+1194.11 hectares per year), water bodies (+37.19 hectares peryear) and barren land (+83585.8 hectares per year). While during 2000-2010, fallow land, builtup and barren land experienced negative ‘rate of change per year’ of about -5776.3 hectares
per year, -5748.4 hectares per year and -97337.8 hectares per year respectively. The ‘rate ofchange per year’ got catalyzed for ‘snow cover’ and there was a loss of land of about -22157
hectares per year. The categories of vegetation and agriculture land experienced positive ‘rateof change per year’ of about +91611.7 hectares per year and +4546.8 hectares per year. The‘rate of change per year’ of land remains same for category ‘debris’. During 2010-2020, the‘rate of change per year’ of land gained pace for ‘fallow land’ with loss of -17312.28 hectares
per year. On the other hand, loss of land from snow cover and barren land got slow down
attaining value of - 644 hectares per year and - 3273 hectares per year. Contrary to this,agriculture land, built-up and water bodies experienced expansion at the rate of +9363.2
hectares per year, +3420 hectares per year and +619.66 hectares per year. Though thevegetation still experienced expansion but at a reduced rate of about +8095.4 hectares per
year.
Journal of Global Resources, July 2022, Volume 08 (02) Sandesh Yadav and Shams Perwaiz P a g e | 8 2

Table 04: Uttarakhand- ‘Rate Of Change Per Year’ of Land, 1990-2020
LULC Classes
1990-2000
Hectares
Fallow Land+9530.8
Agriculture Land-3355.0
Built-up+3290.6
Snow Cover-16932.1
Debris+1194.11
Vegetation-77351.4
Water Bodies+37.19
Barren Land
+83585.8
Source: Calculated and compiled by the authors‘Rate of Change per year’ of Land
2000-20102010-2020
HectaresHectares-5776.3-17312.28+4546.8+9363.92-5748.4+3420.59-22157.0-644.0+1194.11-270.3+91611.7+8095.4+353.7+619.66-97337.8-3273.0

1990-2020
Hectares-4519.3+29177.6+2045.5-6395+3236.5+7451.9+336.9-5675

The overall ‘rate of change per year’ of land during 1990-2020, the expansion of land took
place for agriculture land, built-up, debris, vegetation and water bodies at a rate of about+29177.6 hectares per year, +2045.5 hectares per year, +3236.5 hectares per year, +7451.9
hectares per year, and +336.9 hectares per year respectively. The categories which
experienced negative rate of change were fallow land (-4519.3 hectares per year), snow cover(-6395 hectares per year), barren (-5675 hectares per year).
Built-up Expansion
Built-up in simple terms refers to all sort of cultural features like houses, buildings (bothresidential and commercial), roads, bridges. As per the table 02, built-up coverage in the study
area was about 0.47 percent (1990), 1.08 percent (2000), 1.00 percent (2010) and 1.60 percent(2020). Thus, it can be observed that built-up expansion took place at an alarming pace andincreased from 0.47 percent (1990) to 1.60 percent (2020). Talking about the ‘change detection’(table 03) for built-up then positive growth of 0.61 percent was observed during 1990-2000
while during 2000-2010, built-up experienced negative growth of -0.11 percent due toafforestation or demolition of built-up structures due to natural hazards like landslides. Though
the period 2010-2020, the category of built-up experienced alarming growth of 1.74 percent
due to construction of houses under various governmental schemes, construction at tourist
spots and other developmental processes like road construction. The land transformation took
place at different pace during different time period. The ‘rate of change of land per year’ forbuilt-up was about +3290.6 hectares during 1990-2000 and came down to -5748.4 hectares
during 2000-2010. The land transformation again paced during 2010-2020 and +3420.59
hectares of land was gained by built-up category. On a whole, land transformation from othercategories of land use/land cover to built-up took place at an alarming rate of +2045.5 hectares
annually.
Figure 03: Built-up Expansion, Uttarakhand, 1990-2020

Journal of Global Resources, July 2022, Volume 08 (02) Sandesh Yadav and Shams Perwaiz P a g e | 8 3

Recommendations/Suggestion
The built-up expansion due to unsustainable urbanization have resulted in ‘anti-environmental’
development causing unprecedented loss of ecological assets, biodiversity losses and habitat
fragmentation. At this vary point, the concept of ‘ecological urbanization’ comes to rescue.
According to this concept, urbanization need to be carried out without disturbing the naturalenvironment in order to promote sustainable urbanization. This concept also helps in mitigating
future implications like urban floods, micro-climatic changes (Yadav, 2020) due to present
unsustainable urbanization. Now, the question arises that what are the ways through which we
can promote ‘ecological urbanization’? Answering this question, first we need to make ‘green
building certification’ (LEED/GRIHA) for mega projects like construction of campuses of
educational institutions, hospitals, hotels in order to promote 3R (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle)(Yadav et.al., 2020). Constructional activities on agricultural land need to be discouraged inorder to ensure good food production. Adoption and promotion of ecotourism in order to cause
minimum possible damage to environment and wildlife. In addition to this, use of electricvehicles needs to be promoted in order to minimize vehicular pollution and promotesustainability for one and all.
Conclusion
The unsustainable and unprecedented growth of urbanization in the study area has led to
disturbance in ecological balance. The cascading effect of ecologically disturbed surroundings
can be seen in the form of intensification and increased frequency of disasters like forest fires,
landslides, mud flow. In addition to this, enormous built-up expansion has altered local heatbudget in the study area which in lieu have led to change in pattern of snowfall and otherprominent activities. Under such circumstances, the community people along with concerned
governmental authorities need to opt sustainable and eco-friendly ways of development inorder to promote sustainable urbanization, environmentally friendly activities, horticulture andmany other practices to restore the ecological balance.
References
1. Chebet, C. (2013). An Assessment of land Use and Land Cover in and Around Kakamega
Forest In Kenya Using GIS and Remote Sensing, Journal of Emerging Trends inEngineering and Applied Sciences, Vol.4, 1, 46-53.
2. Kato, S. and Yamaguchi, Y. (2005). Analysis of Urban Heat Island Effect Using ASTER
and ETM+ Data: Separation of Anthropogenic Heat Discharge and Natural Heat Radiationfrom Sensible Heat Flux, Remote Sensing of Environment, Vol.99, 1-2, pp.44-54.
3. Klein Goldewijk, K. (2001). Estimating Global Land Use Change Over the Past Years. The
HYDE Database, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 15(2), 417-433.
4. Marsh, G.P. (1864). Man and Nature, Charles Scribner Editors, New York, pp.656.
5. Rahman, A. (2007). Application of Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques for Urban
Environmental Management and Sustainable Development of Delhi, India, Applied remote
Sensing for Urban Planning, Governance and Sustainability, Springer - Verlag Publishers,
New York, pp.165-197.
6. Turner, B.L. II, Clark, W.C., Kates, R.W., Richards, J.F., Mathews, J.T., and Meyer, W.B.
eds. (1990). The Earth as Transformed by Human Action. Cambridge University Press,
New York, pp.173.
7. Turner, B.L. (1994). Local faces, Global Flows: The Role of Land Use and Land Cover in
Global Environment Change, Land Degradation and Development, Vol.5, pp.71-78.
8. Yadav, Sandesh (2020). Urban Environment and Micro-climatic Changes (A Geo-spatial
Study), Lab Academia Publication, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, India.
9. Yadav, Sandesh et.al. (2020). Urban Built-up and Leader in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) Certification: A Case Study of NCT of Delhi, India, Journal of Global
Resources (JGR), Vol. 6(01), pp.81-88

Journal of Global Resources, July 2022, Volume 08 (02) Sandesh Yadav and Shams Perwaiz P a g e | 8 4