2008
DOI: 10.1556/comec.9.2008.2.4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Approaches to utilising QuickBird data for the monitoring of NATURA 2000 habitats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
28
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
28
1
Order By: Relevance
“…To fulfill the obligations of the EU Habitats Directive, the European Commission explicitly requests remote sensing tools as part of the NATURA 2000 habitat monitoring and the related surveillance scheme to be established by 2013 and demands reporting on the ‗conservation status' of the habitats on a six-year basis [3]. So far, several remote sensing studies have tackled NATURA 2000 monitoring concerns [4,5]; however, overall progress has been limited [3,6]. In October 2010, European scientists and policy stakeholders from the Commission's Directorate-General for the Environment convened for the HABISTAT conference to discuss the respective advancements achieved.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To fulfill the obligations of the EU Habitats Directive, the European Commission explicitly requests remote sensing tools as part of the NATURA 2000 habitat monitoring and the related surveillance scheme to be established by 2013 and demands reporting on the ‗conservation status' of the habitats on a six-year basis [3]. So far, several remote sensing studies have tackled NATURA 2000 monitoring concerns [4,5]; however, overall progress has been limited [3,6]. In October 2010, European scientists and policy stakeholders from the Commission's Directorate-General for the Environment convened for the HABISTAT conference to discuss the respective advancements achieved.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We can spectrally predict the vegetation continuum and a posteriori derive information from that. It crucially differs from common remote sensing based methods, where image pixels are classified according to different habitat types [12,83] or habitat quality parameters [12,15]. Therein, an image pixel is determined by one attribute that was a priori defined as a relevant ecological entity for the evaluation of habitat quality.…”
Section: Conservation Status Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thereby, an image pixel is linked to the structure of the site-specific ordination space that holds information such as the direction of habitat succession, the distribution of plant species, or, indirectly, about the abiotic gradients. Commonly, this information has to be defined before mapping and the conservation status assessment is based exactly on these defined categories [12,14]. The functional aggregation technique coupled with probability, pressure strength, and assessment predictions also allow a continuous interpolation of ordinated plot information.…”
Section: Conservation Status Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Multispectral data taken by spaceborne sensors (e.g., Landsat 7, ASTER, IKONOS, SPOT-5, Worldview-2, Quickbird-2, Rapideye) are useful for land cover assessments of from local to regional scale (depending on the spatial resolution). Such data are being used to assess habitat conditions for monitoring purposes (FÖRSTER et al 2008;FRANKE et al 2012;SPANHOVE et al 2012). Advanced studies investigate spectral characteristics of specific sensors for such tasks (e.g., SCHUSTER et al 2012), and addressed the suitability of multispectral data for an assessment of detailed floristic variation.…”
Section: Eo Capabilities For Mapping Natural Habitatsmentioning
confidence: 99%