Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
1 result(s) for "Portuguese authoritative thematic data"
Sort by:
Thematic Comparison between ESA WorldCover 2020 Land Cover Product and a National Land Use Land Cover Map
This work presents a comparison between a global and a national land cover map, namely the ESA WorldCover 2020 (WC20) and the Portuguese use/land cover map (Carta de Uso e Ocupação do Solo 2018) (COS18). Such a comparison is relevant given the current amount of publicly available LULC products (either national or global) where such comparative studies enable a better understanding regarding different sets of LULC information and their production, focus and characteristics, especially when comparing authoritative maps built by national mapping agencies and global land cover focused products. Moreover, this comparison is also aimed at complementing the global validation report released with the WC20 product, which focused on global and continental level accuracy assessments, with no additional information for specific countries. The maps were compared by following a framework composed by four steps: (1) class nomenclature harmonization, (2) computing cross-tabulation matrices between WC20 and the Portuguese map, (3) determining the area occupied by each harmonized class in each data source, and (4) visual comparison between the maps to illustrate their differences focusing on Portuguese landscape details. Some of the differences were due to the different minimum mapping unit ofCOS18 and WC20, different nomenclatures and focuses on either land use or land cover. Overall, the results show that while WC20 detail is able to distinguish small occurrences of artificial surfaces and grasslands within an urban environment, WC20 is often not able to distinguish sparse/individual trees from the neighboring cover, which is a common occurrence in the Portuguese landscape. While selecting a map, users should be aware that differences between maps can have a range of causes, such as scale, temporal reference, nomenclature and errors.