Use this country model layer when performing analysis within a single country. This layer displays a single global land cover map that is modeled by country for the year 2050 at a pixel resolution of 300m. ESA CCI land cover from the years 2010 and 2018 were used to create this prediction.Variable mapped: Projected land cover in 2050.Data Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaMosaic Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaExtent: Global Cell Size: 300mSource Type: ThematicVisible Scale: 1:50,000 and smallerSource: Clark UniversityPublication date: April 2021What you can do with this layer?This layer may be added to online maps and compared with the ESA CCI Land Cover from any year from 1992 to 2018. To do this, add Global Land Cover 1992-2018 to your map and choose the processing template (image display) from that layer called “Simplified Renderer.” This layer can also be used in analysis in ecological planning to find specific areas that may need to be set aside before they are converted to human use.Links to the six Clark University land cover 2050 layers in ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World:There are three scales (country, regional, and world) for the land cover and vulnerability models. They’re all slightly different since the country model can be more fine-tuned to the drivers in that particular area. Regional (continental) and global have more spatially consistent model weights. Which should you use? If you’re analyzing one country or want to make accurate comparisons between countries, use the country level. If mapping larger patterns, use the global or regional extent (depending on your area of interest). Land Cover 2050 - GlobalLand Cover 2050 - RegionalLand Cover 2050 - CountryLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 GlobalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 RegionalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 CountryWhat these layers model (and what they don’t model)The model focuses on human-based land cover changes and projects the extent of these changes to the year 2050. It seeks to find where agricultural and urban land cover will cover the planet in that year, and what areas are most vulnerable to change due to the expansion of the human footprint. It does not predict changes to other land cover types such as forests or other natural vegetation during that time period unless it is replaced by agriculture or urban land cover. It also doesn’t predict sea level rise unless the model detected a pattern in changes in bodies of water between 2010 and 2018. A few 300m pixels might have changed due to sea level rise during that timeframe, but not many.The model predicts land cover changes based upon patterns it found in the period 2010-2018. But it cannot predict future land use. This is partly because current land use is not necessarily a model input. In this model, land set aside as a result of political decisions, for example military bases or nature reserves, may be found to be filled in with urban or agricultural areas in 2050. This is because the model is blind to the political decisions that affect land use.Quantitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomassCrop SuitabilityDistance to AirportsDistance to Cropland 2010Distance to Primary RoadsDistance to RailroadsDistance to Secondary RoadsDistance to Settled AreasDistance to Urban 2010ElevationGDPHuman Influence IndexPopulation DensityPrecipitationRegions SlopeTemperatureQualitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomesEcoregionsIrrigated CropsProtected AreasProvincesRainfed CropsSoil ClassificationSoil DepthSoil DrainageSoil pHSoil TextureWere small countries modeled?Clark University modeled some small countries that had a few transitions. Only five countries were modeled with this procedure: Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu.As a rule of thumb, the MLP neural network in the Land Change Modeler requires at least 100 pixels of change for model calibration. Several countries experienced less than 100 pixels of change between 2010 & 2018 and therefore required an alternate modeling methodology. These countries are Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu. To overcome the lack of samples, these select countries were resampled from 300 meters to 150 meters, effectively multiplying the number of pixels by four. As a result, we were able to empirically model countries which originally had as few as 25 pixels of change.Once a selected country was resampled to 150 meter resolution, three transition potential images were calibrated and averaged to produce one final transition potential image per transition. Clark Labs chose to create averaged transition potential images to limit artifacts of model overfitting. Though each model contained at least 100 samples of "change", this is still relatively little for a neural network-based model and could lead to anomalous outcomes. The averaged transition potentials were used to extrapolate change and produce a final hard prediction and risk map of natural land cover conversion to Cropland and Artificial Surfaces in 2050.39 Small Countries Not ModeledThere were 39 countries that were not modeled because the transitions, if any, from natural to anthropogenic were very small. In this case the land cover for 2050 for these countries are the same as the 2018 maps and their vulnerability was given a value of 0. Here were the countries not modeled:AndorraAntigua and BarbudaBarbadosCape VerdeComorosCook IslandsDjiboutiDominicaFaroe IslandsFrench GuyanaFrench PolynesiaGibraltarGrenadaGuamGuyanaIcelandJan MayenKiribatiLiechtensteinLuxembourgMaldivesMaltaMarshall IslandsMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldovaMonacoNauruSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSeychellesSurinameSvalbardThe BahamasTongaTuvaluVatican CityIndex to land cover values in this dataset:The Clark University Land Cover 2050 projections display a ten-class land cover generalized from ESA Climate Change Initiative Land Cover. 1 Mostly Cropland2 Grassland, Scrub, or Shrub3 Mostly Deciduous Forest4 Mostly Needleleaf/Evergreen Forest5 Sparse Vegetation6 Bare Area7 Swampy or Often Flooded Vegetation8 Artificial Surface or Urban Area9 Surface Water10 Permanent Snow and Ice

The average for 2021 based on 192 countries was 14.4 percent. The highest value was in Bangladesh: 60.5 percent and the lowest value was in Djibouti: 0.1 percent. The indicator is available from 1961 to 2022. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Use this global model layer when performing analysis across continents. This layer displays a global land cover map and model for the year 2050 at a pixel resolution of 300m. ESA CCI land cover from the years 2010 and 2018 were used to create this prediction.Variable mapped: Projected land cover in 2050.Data Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaMosaic Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaExtent: Global Cell Size: 300mSource Type: ThematicVisible Scale: 1:50,000 and smallerSource: Clark UniversityPublication date: April 2021What you can do with this layer?This layer may be added to online maps and compared with the ESA CCI Land Cover from any year from 1992 to 2018. To do this, add Global Land Cover 1992-2018 to your map and choose the processing template (image display) from that layer called “Simplified Renderer.” This layer can also be used in analysis in ecological planning to find specific areas that may need to be set aside before they are converted to human use.Links to the six Clark University land cover 2050 layers in ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World:There are three scales (country, regional, and world) for the land cover and vulnerability models. They’re all slightly different since the country model can be more fine-tuned to the drivers in that particular area. Regional (continental) and global have more spatially consistent model weights. Which should you use? If you’re analyzing one country or want to make accurate comparisons between countries, use the country level. If mapping larger patterns, use the global or regional extent (depending on your area of interest). Land Cover 2050 - GlobalLand Cover 2050 - RegionalLand Cover 2050 - CountryLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 GlobalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 RegionalLand Cover Vulnerability to Change 2050 CountryWhat these layers model (and what they don’t model)The model focuses on human-based land cover changes and projects the extent of these changes to the year 2050. It seeks to find where agricultural and urban land cover will cover the planet in that year, and what areas are most vulnerable to change due to the expansion of the human footprint. It does not predict changes to other land cover types such as forests or other natural vegetation during that time period unless it is replaced by agriculture or urban land cover. It also doesn’t predict sea level rise unless the model detected a pattern in changes in bodies of water between 2010 and 2018. A few 300m pixels might have changed due to sea level rise during that timeframe, but not many.The model predicts land cover changes based upon patterns it found in the period 2010-2018. But it cannot predict future land use. This is partly because current land use is not necessarily a model input. In this model, land set aside as a result of political decisions, for example military bases or nature reserves, may be found to be filled in with urban or agricultural areas in 2050. This is because the model is blind to the political decisions that affect land use.Quantitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomassCrop SuitabilityDistance to AirportsDistance to Cropland 2010Distance to Primary RoadsDistance to RailroadsDistance to Secondary RoadsDistance to Settled AreasDistance to Urban 2010ElevationGDPHuman Influence IndexPopulation DensityPrecipitationRegions SlopeTemperatureQualitative Variables used to create ModelsBiomesEcoregionsIrrigated CropsProtected AreasProvincesRainfed CropsSoil ClassificationSoil DepthSoil DrainageSoil pHSoil TextureWere small countries modeled?Clark University modeled some small countries that had a few transitions. Only five countries were modeled with this procedure: Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu.As a rule of thumb, the MLP neural network in the Land Change Modeler requires at least 100 pixels of change for model calibration. Several countries experienced less than 100 pixels of change between 2010 & 2018 and therefore required an alternate modeling methodology. These countries are Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu. To overcome the lack of samples, these select countries were resampled from 300 meters to 150 meters, effectively multiplying the number of pixels by four. As a result, we were able to empirically model countries which originally had as few as 25 pixels of change.Once a selected country was resampled to 150 meter resolution, three transition potential images were calibrated and averaged to produce one final transition potential image per transition. Clark Labs chose to create averaged transition potential images to limit artifacts of model overfitting. Though each model contained at least 100 samples of "change", this is still relatively little for a neural network-based model and could lead to anomalous outcomes. The averaged transition potentials were used to extrapolate change and produce a final hard prediction and risk map of natural land cover conversion to Cropland and Artificial Surfaces in 2050.39 Small Countries Not ModeledThere were 39 countries that were not modeled because the transitions, if any, from natural to anthropogenic were very small. In this case the land cover for 2050 for these countries are the same as the 2018 maps and their vulnerability was given a value of 0. Here were the countries not modeled:AndorraAntigua and BarbudaBarbadosCape VerdeComorosCook IslandsDjiboutiDominicaFaroe IslandsFrench GuyanaFrench PolynesiaGibraltarGrenadaGuamGuyanaIcelandJan MayenKiribatiLiechtensteinLuxembourgMaldivesMaltaMarshall IslandsMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldovaMonacoNauruSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSeychellesSurinameSvalbardThe BahamasTongaTuvaluVatican CityIndex to land cover values in this dataset:The Clark University Land Cover 2050 projections display a ten-class land cover generalized from ESA Climate Change Initiative Land Cover. 1 Mostly Cropland2 Grassland, Scrub, or Shrub3 Mostly Deciduous Forest4 Mostly Needleleaf/Evergreen Forest5 Sparse Vegetation6 Bare Area7 Swampy or Often Flooded Vegetation8 Artificial Surface or Urban Area9 Surface Water10 Permanent Snow and Ice

This dataset combines the work of several different projects to create a seamless data set for the contiguous United States. Data from four regional Gap Analysis Projects and the LANDFIRE project were combined to make this dataset. In the Northwestern United States (Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington and Wyoming) data in this map came from the Northwest Gap Analysis Project. In the Southwestern United States (Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah) data used in this map came from the Southwest Gap Analysis Project. The data for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Virginia came from the Southeast Gap Analysis Project and the California data was generated by the updated California Gap land cover project. The Hawaii Gap Analysis project provided the data for Hawaii. In areas of the county (central U.S., Northeast, Alaska) that have not yet been covered by a regional Gap Analysis Project, data from the Landfire project was used. Similarities in the methods used by these projects made possible the combining of the data they derived into one seamless coverage. They all used multi-season satellite imagery (Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived datasets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes were drawn from NatureServe’s Ecological System Classification (Comer et al. 2003) or classes developed by the Hawaii Gap project. Additionally, all of the projects included land use classes that were employed to describe areas where natural vegetation has been altered. In many areas of the country these classes were derived from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD). For the majority of classes and, in most areas of the country, a decision tree classifier was used to discriminate ecological system types. In some areas of the country, more manual techniques were used to discriminate small patch systems and systems not distinguishable through topography. The data contains multiple levels of thematic detail. At the most detailed level natural vegetation is represented by NatureServe’s Ecological System classification (or in Hawaii the Hawaii GAP classification). These most detailed classifications have been crosswalked to the five highest levels of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC), Class, Subclass, Formation, Division and Macrogroup. This crosswalk allows users to display and analyze the data at different levels of thematic resolution. Developed areas, or areas dominated by introduced species, timber harvest, or water are represented by other classes, collectively refered to as land use classes; these land use classes occur at each of the thematic levels. Six layer files are included in the download packages to assist the user in displaying the data at each of the Thematic levels in ArcGIS.

Description

This comprehensive dataset provides a wealth of information about all countries worldwide, covering a wide range of indicators and attributes. It encompasses demographic statistics, economic indicators, environmental factors, healthcare metrics, education statistics, and much more. With every country represented, this dataset offers a complete global perspective on various aspects of nations, enabling in-depth analyses and cross-country comparisons.

Key Features

Country: Name of the country.

Density (P/Km2): Population density measured in persons per square kilometer.

Abbreviation: Abbreviation or code representing the country.

Agricultural Land (%): Percentage of land area used for agricultural purposes.

Land Area (Km2): Total land area of the country in square kilometers.

Armed Forces Size: Size of the armed forces in the country.

Birth Rate: Number of births per 1,000 population per year.

Calling Code: International calling code for the country.

Capital/Major City: Name of the capital or major city.

CO2 Emissions: Carbon dioxide emissions in tons.

CPI: Consumer Price Index, a measure of inflation and purchasing power.

CPI Change (%): Percentage change in the Consumer Price Index compared to the previous year.

Currency_Code: Currency code used in the country.

Fertility Rate: Average number of children born to a woman during her lifetime.

Forested Area (%): Percentage of land area covered by forests.

Gasoline_Price: Price of gasoline per liter in local currency.

GDP: Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services produced in the country.

Gross Primary Education Enrollment (%): Gross enrollment ratio for primary education.

Gross Tertiary Education Enrollment (%): Gross enrollment ratio for tertiary education.

Infant Mortality: Number of deaths per 1,000 live births before reaching one year of age.

Largest City: Name of the country's largest city.

Life Expectancy: Average number of years a newborn is expected to live.

Maternal Mortality Ratio: Number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.

Minimum Wage: Minimum wage level in local currency.

Official Language: Official language(s) spoken in the country.

Out of Pocket Health Expenditure (%): Percentage of total health expenditure paid out-of-pocket by individuals.

Physicians per Thousand: Number of physicians per thousand people.

Population: Total population of the country.

Population: Labor Force Participation (%): Percentage of the population that is part of the labor force.

Tax Revenue (%): Tax revenue as a percentage of GDP.

Total Tax Rate: Overall tax burden as a percentage of commercial profits.

Unemployment Rate: Percentage of the labor force that is unemployed.

Urban Population: Percentage of the population living in urban areas.

Latitude: Latitude coordinate of the country's location.

Longitude: Longitude coordinate of the country's location.

Potential Use Cases

Analyze population density and land area to study spatial distribution patterns.

Investigate the relationship between agricultural land and food security.

Examine carbon dioxide emissions and their impact on climate change.

Explore correlations between economic indicators such as GDP and various socio-economic factors.

Investigate educational enrollment rates and their implications for human capital development.

Analyze healthcare metrics such as infant mortality and life expectancy to assess overall well-being.

Study labor market dynamics through indicators such as labor force participation and unemployment rates.

Investigate the role of taxation and its impact on economic development.

Explore urbanization trends and their social and environmental consequences.

U.S. Geological Survey scientists, funded by the Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program, developed a dataset of 2006 and 2011 land use and land cover (LULC) information for selected 100-km2 sample blocks within 29 EPA Level 3 ecoregions across the conterminous United States. The data was collected for validation of new and existing national scale LULC datasets developed from remotely sensed data sources. The data can also be used with the previously published Land Cover Trends Dataset: 1973-2000 (http:// http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/844/), to assess land-use/land-cover change in selected ecoregions over a 37-year study period. LULC data for 2006 and 2011 was manually delineated using the same sample block classification procedures as the previous Land Cover Trends project. The methodology is based on a statistical sampling approach, manual classification of land use and land cover, and post-classification comparisons of land cover across different dates. Landsat Thematic Mapper, and Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus imagery was interpreted using a modified Anderson Level I classification scheme. Landsat data was acquired from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) collection of images. For the 2006 and 2011 update, ecoregion specific alterations in the sampling density were made to expedite the completion of manual block interpretations. The data collection process started with the 2000 date from the previous assessment and any needed corrections were made before interpreting the next two dates of 2006 and 2011 imagery. The 2000 land cover was copied and any changes seen in the 2006 Landsat images were digitized into a new 2006 land cover image. Similarly, the 2011 land cover image was created after completing the 2006 delineation. Results from analysis of these data include ecoregion based statistical estimates of the amount of LULC change per time period, ranking of the most common types of conversions, rates of change, and percent composition. Overall estimated amount of change per ecoregion from 2001 to 2011 ranged from a low of 370 km2 in the Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion to a high of 78,782 km2 in the Southeastern Plains Ecoregion. The Southeastern Plains Ecoregion continues to encompass the most intense forest harvesting and regrowth in the country. Forest harvesting and regrowth rates in the southeastern U.S. and Pacific Northwest continued at late 20th century levels. The land use and land cover data collected by this study is ideally suited for training, validation, and regional assessments of land use and land cover change in the U.S. because it is collected using manual interpretation techniques of Landsat data aided by high resolution photography. The 2001-2011 Land Cover Trends Dataset is provided in an Albers Conical Equal Area projection using the NAD 1983 datum. The sample blocks have a 30-meter resolution and file names follow a specific naming convention that includes the number of the ecoregion containing the block, the block number, and the Landsat image date. The data files are organized by ecoregion, and are available in the ERDAS Imagine (.img) format. U.S. Geological Survey scientists, funded by the Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program, developed a dataset of 2006 and 2011 land use and land cover (LULC) information for selected 100-km2 sample blocks within 29 EPA Level 3 ecoregions across the conterminous United States. The data was collected for validation of new and existing national scale LULC datasets developed from remotely sensed data sources. The data can also be used with the previously published Land Cover Trends Dataset: 1973-2000 (http:// http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/844/), to assess land-use/land-cover change in selected ecoregions over a 37-year study period. LULC data for 2006 and 2011 was manually delineated using the same sample block classification procedures as the previous Land Cover Trends project. The methodology is based on a statistical sampling approach, manual classification of land use and land cover, and post-classification comparisons of land cover across different dates. Landsat Thematic Mapper, and Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus imagery was interpreted using a modified Anderson Level I classification scheme. Landsat data was acquired from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) collection of images. For the 2006 and 2011 update, ecoregion specific alterations in the sampling density were made to expedite the completion of manual block interpretations. The data collection process started with the 2000 date from the previous assessment and any needed corrections were made before interpreting the next two dates of 2006 and 2011 imagery. The 2000 land cover was copied and any changes seen in the 2006 Landsat images were digitized into a new 2006 land cover image. Similarly, the 2011 land cover image was created after completing the 2006 delineation. Results from analysis of these data include ecoregion based statistical estimates of the amount of LULC change per time period, ranking of the most common types of conversions, rates of change, and percent composition. Overall estimated amount of change per ecoregion from 2001 to 2011 ranged from a low of 370 square km in the Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion to a high of 78,782 square km in the Southeastern Plains Ecoregion. The Southeastern Plains Ecoregion continues to encompass the most intense forest harvesting and regrowth in the country. Forest harvesting and regrowth rates in the southeastern U.S. and Pacific Northwest continued at late 20th century levels. The land use and land cover data collected by this study is ideally suited for training, validation, and regional assessments of land use and land cover change in the U.S. because it’s collected using manual interpretation techniques of Landsat data aided by high resolution photography. The 2001-2011 Land Cover Trends Dataset is provided in an Albers Conical Equal Area projection using the NAD 1983 datum. The sample blocks have a 30-meter resolution and file names follow a specific naming convention that includes the number of the ecoregion containing the block, the block number, and the Landsat image date. The data files are organized by ecoregion, and are available in the ERDAS Imagine (.img) format.

The average for 2021 based on 196 countries was 656013 sq. km. The highest value was in Russia: 16376870 sq. km and the lowest value was in Monaco: 2 sq. km. The indicator is available from 1961 to 2022. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

China's land cover data set includes 5 products: 1) glc2000_lucc_1km_China.asc, a Chinese subset of global land cover data based on SPOT4 remote sensing data developed by the GLC2000 project. The data name is GLC2000.GLC2000 China's regional land cover data is directly cropped from global cover data. For data description, please refer to http : //www-gvm.jrc.it/glc2000/defaultGLC2000.htm 2) igbp_lucc_1km_China.asc, a Chinese subset of global land cover data based on AVHRR remote sensing data supported by IGBP-DIS, the data name is IGBPDIS; IGBPDIS data was prepared using the USGS method, using April 1992 to March 1992 The AVHRR data developed global land cover data with a resolution of 1km. The classification system adopts a classification system developed by IGBP, which divides the world into 17 categories. Its development is based on continents. Applying AVHRR for 12 months to maximize synthetic NDVI data, 3) modis_lucc_1km_China_2001.asc, a subset of MODIS land cover data products in China, the data name is MODIS; MODIS China's regional land cover data is directly cropped from global cover data, and its data description please refer to http://edcdaac.usgs.gov/ modis / mod12q1v4.asp. 4. umd_lucc_1km_China.asc, a Chinese subset of global land cover data based on AVHRR data produced by the University of Maryland, the data name is UMd; the five bands of UMd based on AVHRR data and NDVI data are recombined to suggest a data matrix, using Methodology carried out global land cover classification. The goal is to create data that is more accurate than past data. The classification system largely adopts the classification scheme of IGBP. 5) westdc_lucc_1km_China.asc, China ’s 2000: 100,000 land cover data organized and implemented by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, combined with Yazashi conversion (the largest area method), and finally obtained a land use data product of 1km across the country, data name WESTDC. WESTDC China's regional land cover data is based on the results of a 1: 100,000 county-level land resource survey conducted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The land use data were merged and converted into a vector (the largest area method). The Chinese Academy of Sciences resource and environment classification system is adopted. 2: Data format: ArcView GIS ASCII 3: Mesh parameters: ncols 4857 nrows 4045 xllcorner -2650000 yllcorner 1876946 cellsize 1000 NODATA_value -9999 4: Projection parameters: Projection ALBERS Units METERS Spheroid Krasovsky Parameters: 25 00 0.000 / * 1st standard parallel 47 00 0.000 / * 2nd standard parallel 105 00 0.000 / * central meridian 0 0 0.000 / * latitude of projection's origin 0.00000 / * false easting (meters) 0.00000 / * false northing (meters)

This data was derived from "1: 100,000 Land Use Data of China". Based on Landsat MSS, TM and ETM remote sensing data, 1: 100,000 Land Use Data of China was compiled within three years by a remote sensing scientific and technological team of 19 research institutes affiliated to the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which was organized by the “Remote Sensing Macroinvestigation and Dynamic Research on the National Resources and Environment", one of the major application programs in Chinese Academy of Sciences during the "Eighth Five-year Plan". This data adopts a hierarchical land cover classification system, which divides the country into 6 first-class categories (cultivated land, forest land, grassland, water area, urban and rural areas, industrial and mining areas, residential land and unused land) and 31 second-class categories. This is the most accurate land use data product in our country at present. It has already played an important role in national land resources survey, hydrology and ecological research.

Important Note: This item is in mature support as of June 2026 and will be retired in December 2026. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version.Use this country model layer when performing analysis within a single country. This layer displays a single global land cover map that is modeled by country for the year 2050 at a pixel resolution of 300m. ESA CCI land cover from the years 2010 and 2018 were used to create these predictions.Variable mapped: Projected land cover in 2050.Data Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaMosaic Projection: Cylindrical Equal AreaExtent: GlobalCell Size: 300mSource Type: ThematicVisible Scale: 1:50,000 and smallerSource: Clark UniversityPublication date: April 2021What you can do with this layer?This layer may be added to online maps and compared with the ESA CCI Land Cover from any year from 1992 to 2018. To do this, add Global Land Cover 1992-2018 to your map and choose the processing template (image display) from that layer called “Simplified Renderer.”This layer can also be used in analysis in ecological planning to find specific areas that may need to be set aside before they are converted to human use. Links to the six Clark University land cover 2050 layers in ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World:There are three scales (country, regional, and world) for the land cover and vulnerability models. They’re all slightly different since the country model can be more fine-tuned to the drivers in that particular area. Regional (continental) and global have more spatially consistent model weights. Which should you use? If you’re analyzing one country or want to make accurate comparisons between countries, use the country level. If mapping larger patterns, use the global or regional extent (depending on your area of interest). Land Cover 2050 GlobalLand Cover 2050 RegionalLand Cover 2050 CountryLand Cover Vulnerability Change 2050 GlobalLand Cover Vulnerability Change 2050 RegionalLand Cover Vulnerability Change 2050 CountryWhat these layers model (and what they don’t model)The model focuses on human-based land cover changes and projects the extent of these changes to the year 2050. It seeks to find where agricultural and urban land cover will cover the planet in that year, and what areas are most vulnerable to change due to the expansion of the human footprint. It does not predict changes to other land cover types such as forests or other natural vegetation during that time period unless it is replaced by agriculture or urban land cover. It also doesn’t predict sea level rise unless the model detected a pattern in changes in bodies of water between 2010 and 2018. A few 300m pixels might have changed due to sea level rise during that timeframe, but not many.The model predicts land cover changes based upon patterns it found in the period 2010-2018. But it cannot predict future land use. This is partly because current land use is not necessarily a model input. In this model, land set aside as a result of political decisions, for example military bases or nature reserves, may be found to be filled in with urban or agricultural areas in 2050. This is because the model is blind to the political decisions that affect land use.Quantitative Variables used to create Models BiomassCrop SuitabilityDistance to AirportsDistance to Cropland 2010Distance to Primary RoadsDistance to RailroadsDistance to Secondary RoadsDistance to Settled AreasDistance to Urban 2010ElevationGDPHuman Influence IndexPopulation DensityPrecipitationRegionsSlopeTemperatureQualitative Variables used to create Models BiomesEcoregionsIrrigated CropsProtected AreasProvinces Rainfed CropsSoil ClassificationSoil DepthSoil DrainageSoil pHSoil TextureWere small countries modeled?Clark University modeled some small countries that had a few transitions. Only five countries were modeled with this procedure: Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu.As a rule of thumb, the MLP neural network in the Land Change Modeler requires at least 100 pixels of change for model calibration. Several countries experienced less than 100 pixels of change between 2010 & 2018 and therefore required an alternate modeling methodology. These countries are Bhutan, North Macedonia, Palau, Singapore and Vanuatu. To overcome the lack of samples, these select countries were resampled from 300 meters to 150 meters, effectively multiplying the number of pixels by four. As a result, we were able to empirically model countries which originally had as few as 25 pixels of change.Once a selected country was resampled to 150 meter resolution, three transition potential images were calibrated and averaged to produce one final transition potential image per transition. Clark Labs chose to create averaged transition potential images to limit artifacts of model overfitting. Though each model contained at least 100 samples of "change", this is still relatively little for a neural network-based model and could lead to anomalous outcomes. The averaged transition potentials were used to extrapolate change and produce a final hard prediction and risk map of natural land cover conversion to Cropland and Artificial Surfaces in 2050.39 Small Countries Not ModeledThere were 39 countries that were not modeled because the transitions, if any, from natural to anthropogenic were very small. In this case the land cover for 2050 for these countries are the same as the 2018 maps and their vulnerability was given a value of 0. Here were the countries not modeled:AndorraAntigua and BarbudaBarbadosCape VerdeComorosCook IslandsDjiboutiDominicaFaroe IslandsFrench GuyanaFrench PolynesiaGibraltarGrenadaGuamGuyanaIcelandJan MayenKiribatiLiechtensteinLuxembourgMaldivesMaltaMarshall IslandsMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldovaMonacoNauruSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSeychellesSurinameSvalbardThe BahamasTongaTuvaluVatican City Index to land cover values in this dataset:The Clark University Land Cover 2050 projections display a ten-class land cover generalized from ESA Climate Change Initiative Land Cover.1 Mostly Cropland2 Grassland, Scrub, or Shrub3 Mostly Deciduous Forest4 Mostly Needleleaf/Evergreen Forest5 Sparse Vegetation6 Bare Area7 Swampy or Often Flooded Vegetation8 Artificial Surface or Urban Area9 Surface Water10 Permanent Snow and Ice

The average for 2022 based on 12 countries was 29.29 percent. The highest value was in Uruguay: 80.87 percent and the lowest value was in Suriname: 0.45 percent. The indicator is available from 1961 to 2022. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

The 2020 North American Land Cover 30-meter dataset was produced as part of the North American Land Change Monitoring System (NALCMS), a trilateral effort between Natural Resources Canada, the United States Geological Survey, and three Mexican organizations including the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía), National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of the Biodiversity (Comisión Nacional Para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad), and the National Forestry Commission of Mexico (Comisión Nacional Forestal). The collaboration is facilitated by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, an international organization created by the Canada, Mexico, and United States governments under the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation to promote environmental collaboration between the three countries. The general objective of NALCMS is to devise, through collective effort, a harmonized multi-scale land cover monitoring approach which ensures high accuracy and consistency in monitoring land cover changes at the North American scale and which meets each country’s specific requirements. This 30-meter dataset of North American Land Cover reflects land cover information for 2020 from Mexico and Canada, 2019 over the conterminous United States and 2021 over Alaska. Each country developed its own classification method to identify Land Cover classes and then provided an input layer to produce a continental Land Cover map across North America. Canada, Mexico, and the United States developed their own 30-meter land cover products; see specific sections on data generation below. The main inputs for image classification were 30-meter Landsat 8 Collection 2 Level 1 data in the three countries (Canada, the United States and Mexico). Image selection processes and reduction to specific spectral bands varied among the countries due to study-site-specific requirements. While Canada selected most images from the year 2020 with a few from 2019 and 2021, the Conterminous United States employed mainly images from 2019, while Alaska land cover maps are mainly based on the use of images from 2021. The land cover map for Mexico was based on land cover change detection between 2015 and 2020 Mexico Landsat 8 mosaics. In order to generate a seamless and consistent land cover map of North America, national maps were generated for Canada by the CCRS; for Mexico by CONABIO, INEGI, and CONAFOR; and for the United States by the USGS. Each country chose their own approaches, ancillary data, and land cover mapping methodologies to create national datasets. This North America dataset was produced by combining the national land cover datasets. The integration of the three national products merged four Land Cover map sections, Alaska, Canada, the conterminous United States and Mexico.

The Rural Access Index (RAI) is a measure of access, developed by the World Bank in 2006. It was adopted as Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator 9.1.1 in 2015, to measure the accessibility of rural populations. It is currently the only indicator for the SDGs that directly measures rural access.The RAI measures the proportion of the rural population that lives within 2 km of an all-season road. An all-season road is one that is motorable all year, but may be temporarily unavailable during inclement weather (Roberts, Shyam, & Rastogi, 2006). This dataset implements and expands on the most recent official methodology put forward by the World Bank, ReCAP's 2019 RAI Supplemental Guidelines. This is, to date, the only publicly available application of this method at a global scale.MethodologyReCAP's methodology provided new insight on what makes a road all-season and how this data should be handled: instead of removing unpaved roads from the network, the ones that are classified as unpaved are to be intersected with topographic and climatic conditions and, whenever there’s an overlap with excess precipitation and slope, a multiplying factor ranging from 0% to 100% is applied to the population that would access to that road. This present dataset developed by SDSN's SDG Transformation Centre proposes that authorities ability to maintain and remediate road conditions also be taken into account.Data sourcesThe indicator relies on four major items of geospatial data: land cover (rural or urban), population distribution, road network extent and the “all-season” status of those roads.Land cover data (urban/rural distinction)Since the indicator measures the acess rural populations, it's necessary to define what is and what isn't rural. This dataset uses the DegUrba Methodology, proposed by the United Nations Expert Group on Statistical Methodology for Delineating Cities and Rural Areas (United Nations Expert Group, 2019). This approach has been developed by the European Commission Global Human Settlement Layer (GHSL-SMOD) project, and is designed to instil some consistency into the definitions based on population density on a 1-km grid, but adjusted for local situations.Population distributionThe source for population distribution data is WorldPop. This uses national census data, projections and other ancillary data from countries to produce aggregated, 100 m2 population data. Road extentTwo widely recognized road datasets are used: the real-time updated crowd-sourced OpenStreetMap (OSM) or the GLOBIO’s 2018 GRIP database, which draws data from official national sources. The reasons for picking the latter are mostly related to its ability to provide information on the surface (pavement) of these roads, to the detriment of the timeliness of the data, which is restrained to the year 2018. Additionally, data from Microsoft Bing's recent Road Detection project is used to ensure completeness. This dataset is completely derived from machine learning methods applied over satellite imagery, and detected 1,165 km of roads missing from OSM.Roads’ all-season statusThe World Bank's original 2006 methodology defines the term all-season as “… a road that is motorable all year round by the prevailing means of rural transport, allowing for occasional interruptions of short duration”. ReCAP's 2019 methodology makes a case for passability equating to the all-season status of a road, along with the assumption that typically the wet season is when roads become impassable, especially so in steep roads that are more exposed to landslides.This dataset follows the ReCAP methodology by creating an passability index. The proposed use of passability factors relies on the following three aspects:• Surface type. Many rural roads in LICs (and even in large high-income countries including the USA and Australia) are unpaved. As mentioned before, unpaved roads deteriorate rapidly and in a different way to paved roads. They are very susceptible to water ingress to the surface, which softens the materials and makes them very vulnerable to the action of traffic. So, when a road surface becomes saturated and is subject to traffic, the deterioration is accelerated. • Climate. Precipitation has a significant effect on the condition of a road, especially on unpaved roads, which predominate in LICs and provide much of the extended connectivity to rural and poor areas. As mentioned above, the rainfall on a road is a significant factor in its deterioration, but the extent depends on the type of rainfall in terms of duration and intensity, and how well the roadside drainage copes with this. While ReCAP suggested the use of general climate zones, we argue that better spatial and temporal resolutions can be acquired through the Copernicus Programme precipitation data, which is made available freely at ~30km pixel size for each month of the year.• Terrain. The gradient and altitude of roads also has an effect on their accessibility. Steep roads become impassable more easily due to the potential for scour during heavy rainfall, and also due to slipperiness as a result of the road surface materials used. Here this is drawn from slope calculated from SRTM Digital Terrain data.• Road maintenance. The ability of local authorities to remediate damaged caused by precipitation and landslides is proposed as a correcting factor to the previous ones. Ideally this would be measured by the % of GDP invested in road construction and maintenance, but this isn't available for all countries. For this reason, GDP per capita is adopted as a proxy instead. The data range is normalized in such a way that a road maxed out in terms of precipitation and slope (accessibility score of 0.25) in a country at the top of the GDP per capita range is brought back at to the higher end of the accessibility score (0.95), while the accessibility score of a road meeting the same passability conditions in a country which GDP per capita is towards the lower end is kept unchanged.Data processingThe roads from the three aforementioned datasets (Bing, GRIP and OSM) are merged together to them is applied a 2km buffer. The populations falling exclusively on unpaved road buffers are multiplied by the resulting passability index, which is defined as the normalized sum of the aforementioned components, ranging from 0.25 to. 0.9, with 0.95 meaning 95% probability that the road is all-season. The index applied to the population data, so, when calculated, the RAI includes the probability that the roads which people are using in each area will be all-season or not. For example, an unpaved road in a flat area with low rainfall would have an accessibility factor of 0.95, as this road is designed to be accessible all year round and the environmental effects on its impassability are minimal.The code for generating this dataset is available on Github at: https://github.com/sdsna/rai

The average for 2024 based on 180 countries was 54 points. The highest value was in Finland: 100 points and the lowest value was in Venezuela: 0 points. The indicator is available from 1995 to 2024. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

This data was derived from "1: 100,000 Land Use Data of China". Based on Landsat MSS, TM and ETM remote sensing data, 1: 100,000 Land Use Data of China was compiled within three years by a remote sensing scientific and technological team of 19 research institutes affiliated to the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which was organized by the “Remote Sensing Macroinvestigation and Dynamic Research on the National Resources and Environment", one of the major application programs in Chinese Academy of Sciences during the "Eighth Five-year Plan". This data adopts a hierarchical land cover classification system, which divides the country into 6 first-class categories (cultivated land, forest land, grassland, water area, urban and rural areas, industrial and mining areas, residential land and unused land) and 31 second-class categories. This is the most accurate land use data product in our country at present. It has already played an important role in national land resources survey, hydrology and ecological research.

This dataset collection contains one or more tables sourced from the web site of Luke (Natural Resources Institute Finland) in the country of Finland. It provides information on land classes on forestry land covering an area of 1000 hectares.

This dataset is a raster format GeoTIFF representing the percentage of density in each pixel of the shrubs coverage. It is part of the Global Land Cover-SHARE (GLC-SHARE) database at the global level created by FAO, Land and Water Division in partnership and with contribution from various partners and institutions.

The shrubs covered area dataset includes any geographical area dominated by natural shrubs having a cover of 10% or more. Trees can be present in scattered form if their cover is less than 10%. Herbaceous plants can also be present at any density. The class includes shrub covered areas permanently or regularly flooded by inland fresh water. It excludes shrubs flooded by salt or brackish water in coastal areas (>07).

Supplemental Information:

GLC-SHARE provides a set of major thematic land cover layers resulting by a combination of "best available" high resolution national, regional and/or sub-national land cover databases with the weighted average land cover information derived from large-scale available datasets. The database is produced with a resolution of 30 arc second (1km). The approach implemented is based on the utilization of the Land Cover Classification System (LCCS) and SEEA (System of Environmental-Economic Accounting) legend systems for the harmonization of the various global, regional and national land cover legends. The major benefit of the GLC-SHARE product is its capacity to preserve the existing and available high resolution land cover information at the regional and country level obtained by spatial and multi-temporal source data, integrating them with the best synthesis of global datasets.

Preliminary validation campaign was performed using 1000 random points statistically distributed over each land cover classes. The database is distributed in the following eleven layers, in raster format (GeoTIFF ), whose pixel values represent the percentage of density coverage in each pixel of the land cover type. The dominant layer, representing the value of the dominant land cover type, is also available along with a legend in LYR ESRI format. Finally, information on each layer's source is retrievable in sources layer, by joining the raster values with an Excel table. 01-Artificial Surfaces 02-CropLand 03-Grassland 04-Tree Covered Area 05-Shrubs Covered Area 06-Herbaceous vegetation, aquatic or regularly flooded 07-Mangroves 08-Sparse vegetation 09-BareSoil 10-Snow and glaciers 11-Waterbodies

Contact points:

Metadata Contact: FAO GIS Manager

Resource Contact: Land and Water Officer FAO-NRL

Data lineage:

The land cover database is validated only using the high resolution remote sensing imagery present in Google Earth.

Resource constraints:

Reproduction and dissemination of material contained in GLC-SHARE Beta-Release v1.0 or educational, research, personal or other noncommercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders, provided FAO are fully acknowledged. No part of GLC-SHARE Beta-Release v1.0 data may be downloaded, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted by any means for resale or other commercial purposes without written permission of the copyright holders. If any information or resources on this site are attributed to a site or source external to FAO permission to use must be sought with FAO.

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. FAO declines all responsibility for errors or deficiencies in the database or software or in the documentation accompanying it, for program maintenance and upgrading as well as for any damage that may arise from them. FAO also declines any responsibility for updating the data and assumes no responsibility for errors and omissions in the data provided. Users are, however, kindly asked to report any errors or deficiencies in this product to FAO.

Online resources:

Download: GLC-Share - Shrubs Covered Area

Download: GLC-Share - Sources

Download: GLC-Share report

A direct internet link to access data relating to Tuvalu's forest cover hosts on the Mongabay website.

Mongabay is the world's most popular site for rainforest information and a well-known source of environmental news reporting and analysis.

This web application contains information from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, The U.S.G.S., The U.S. Census and BLM. The following information is in relation to the Surface Management Agency layer created by BLM: The Surface Management Agency (SMA) Geographic Information System (GIS) dataset depicts Federal land for the United States and classifies this land by its active Federal surface managing agency. The SMA feature class covers the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands. A Federal SMA agency refers to a Federal agency with administrative jurisdiction over the surface of Federal lands. Jurisdiction over the land is defined when the land is either: Withdrawn by some administrative or legislative action, or Acquired or Exchanged by a Federal Agency. This layer is a dynamic assembly of spatial data layers maintained at various federal and local government offices. The GIS data contained in this dataset represents the polygon features that show the boundaries for Surface Management Agency and the surface extent of each Federal agency’s surface administrative jurisdiction. SMA data depicts current withdrawn areas for a particular agency and (when appropriate) includes land that was acquired or exchanged and is located outside of a withdrawal area for that agency. The SMA data do not illustrate land status ownership pattern boundaries or contain land ownership attribute details. The SMA Withdrawals feature class covers the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands. A Federal SMA Withdrawal is defined by formal actions that set aside, withhold, or reserve Federal land by statute or administrative order for public purposes. A withdrawal creates a title encumbrance on the land. Withdrawals must accomplish one or more of the following: A. Transfer total or partial jurisdiction of Federal land between Federal agencies. B. Close (segregate) Federal land to operation of all or some of the public land laws and/or mineral laws. C. Dedicate Federal land to a specific public purpose. There are four major categories of formal withdrawals: (1) Administrative, (2) Presidential Proclamations, (3) Congressional, and (4) Federal Power Act (FPA) or Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Withdrawals. These SMA Withdrawals will include the present total extent of withdrawn areas rather than all of the individual withdrawal actions that created them over time. A Federal SMA agency refers to a Federal agency with administrative jurisdiction over the surface of Federal lands. Jurisdiction over the land is defined when the land is either: Withdrawn by some administrative or legislative action, or Acquired or Exchanged by a Federal Agency. This layer is a dynamic assembly of spatial data layers maintained at various federal and local government offices. The GIS data contained in this dataset represents the polygon features that show the boundaries for Surface Management Agency and the surface extent of each Federal agency’s surface administrative jurisdiction. SMA data depicts current withdrawn areas for a particular agency and (when appropriate) includes land that was acquired or exchanged and is located outside of a withdrawal area for that agency. The SMA data do not illustrate land status ownership pattern boundaries or contain land ownership attribute details. For more information on theProtected Areas Database (PAD-US) 3.0 Datalayer visit: https://www.usgs.gov/programs/gap-analysis-project/science/pad-us-data-download or U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Gap Analysis Project (GAP), 2022, Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) 3.0: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9Q9LQ4B.

This data was derived from "1: 100,000 Land Use Data of China". Based on Landsat MSS, TM and ETM remote sensing data, 1: 100,000 Land Use Data of China was compiled within three years by a remote sensing scientific and technological team of 19 research institutes affiliated to the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which was organized by the “Remote Sensing Macroinvestigation and Dynamic Research on the National Resources and Environment", one of the major application programs in Chinese Academy of Sciences during the "Eighth Five-year Plan". This data adopts a hierarchical land cover classification system, which divides the country into 6 first-class categories (cultivated land, forest land, grassland, water area, urban and rural areas, industrial and mining areas, residential land and unused land) and 31 second-class categories. This is the most accurate land use data product in our country at present. It has already played an important role in national land resources survey, hydrology and ecological research.