Cited by 997Remote Sensing in AgricultureSoil erosion and sediment transportLand Use and Ecosystem Services

Proxy global assessment of land degradation

Open access
Bai, Z. G., Dent, D. L., Olsson, L., Schaepman, M. E.·2008·Soil Use and Management

Abstract

Abstract Land degradation is always with us but its causes, extent and severity are contested. We define land degradation as a long‐term decline in ecosystem function and productivity, which may be assessed using long‐term, remotely sensed normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) data. Deviation from the norm may serve as a proxy assessment of land degradation and improvement – if other factors that may be responsible are taken into account. These other factors include rainfall effects which may be assessed by rain‐use efficiency, calculated from NDVI and rainfall. Results from the analysis of the 23‐year Global Inventory Modeling and Mapping Studies (GIMMS) NDVI data indicate declining rain‐use efficiency‐adjusted NDVI on ca. 24% of the global land area with degrading areas mainly in Africa south of the equator, South‐East Asia and south China, north‐central Australia, the Pampas and swaths of the Siberian and north American taiga; 1.5 billion people live in these areas. The results are very different from previous assessments which compounded what is happening now with historical land degradation. Economic appraisal can be undertaken when land degradation is expressed in terms of net primary productivity and the resultant data allow statistical comparison with other variables to reveal possible drivers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00169.x

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Applying CM without vegetation covers may not fully prevent land degradation.

    “Therefore, applying CM without vegetation covers may not fully prevent land degradation”

    From Almond farm profitability under agroecological management in south-eastern Spain: Accounting for externalities and opportunity costs (2020) · cites this paper as Bai et al., 2008

    The Introduction describes vegetation cover as a measure of productivity, and the regional analysis discusses degradation across land-cover types. Neither passage addresses whether applying CM without vegetation cover prevents degradation; searches for CM and conservation measures found no such assessment in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Bai et al. (2008) found that nearly one-fifth of degraded land is cropland, an area equivalent to more than 20 percent of all cultivated areas.

    “Bai et al. (2008) also found that nearly one-fifth of this degraded land is cropland, an area equivalent to more than 20 percent of all cultivated areas.”

    From Mapping the world's degraded lands (2015) · cites this paper as Bai et al. (2008)

  • Wessels, Van Den Bergh, and Scholes (2012) were highly critical of the Bai et al. (2008) publication of GLADA results, especially in the humid tropics where results were described as fatally flawed and misleading.

    “Indeed, Wessels, Van Den Bergh, and Scholes (2012) commented on the Bai et al. (2008) publication of GLADA results, and was highly critical of their methods, especially in the humid tropics where results were described as fatally flawed and misleading.”

    From Mapping the world's degraded lands (2015) · cites this paper as Bai et al. (2008)

  • Bai et al. (2008) found that 16 percent of global land area is increasing in NPP, with 20 percent of total cropland area on an upward swing.

    “But at the same time, they also found that 16 percent of global land area is increasing in NPP, with 20 percent of total cropland area on an upward swing.”

    From Mapping the world's degraded lands (2015) · cites this paper as Bai et al. (2008)

  • Early GLADA results reveal a declining trend in NPP across 21 percent of the global land area, 2.7 billion ha, mainly in tropical Africa, Southeast Asia, China, north central Australia, the Pampas, and swaths of the boreal forest in Siberia and North America.

    “Early GLADA results reveal a declining trend in NPP across 21 percent of the global land area, 2.7 billion ha, mainly in tropical Africa, Southeast Asia, China, north central Australia, the Pampas, and swaths of the boreal forest in Siberia and North America.”

    From Mapping the world's degraded lands (2015) · cites this paper as Bai et al., 2008

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Livezy, R.E. & Chen, W.Y. 1983. Statistical field significance and its determination by Mote Carlo techniques. Monthly Weather Review, 111, 46-59.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bai, Z. G., Dent, D. L., Olsson, L., & Schaepman, M. E.
Affiliations
  • ISRIC - World Soil Information (NL)
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Corresponding author
Dent, D. L.
Venue
Soil Use and Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-08-22
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
223-234
ISSN
  • 0266-0032 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2743
OpenAlex
W2162414982
Cited by
987
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 68 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 81 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 88 · 2018: 63 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 63 · 2014: 64 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 36
FWCI
17.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Soil Use and Management (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil erosion and sediment transport
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Keywords
land degradation, NDVI, precipitation use efficiency, net primary productivity, GIMMS, remote sensing, rainfall effects on vegetation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review