1. Introduction
Social, economic, and biophysical variables have a significant impact on forest cover change [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]. Population growth, settlement expansion, infrastructural development, and farmland extension are the primary causes of deforestation [9,10,11,12,13]. Researchers around the world have also emphasized the effects of deforestation [14,15,16,17,18]. Weak policies, poverty, administrative disputes, and ambiguity over forest ownership and mining rights have been identified as significant causes of forest loss [14,15,16,17,18] Similarly, in mountainous regions, the use and conservation of natural resources are inextricably linked to population growth and the resulting risk of environmental deterioration [7,19,20,21,22,23,24]. In addition to the household dynamics mentioned above, the growth of human settlements and rises in livestock populations are the most dangerous drivers of forest cover change and habitat fragmentation [22,25,26,27,28]. Moreover, population growth is a fundamental cause of change in several other facets of life [2,14,16,29,30,31].
More than 200 million people depend on the HKH region’s woods for their livelihoods [18,32,33,34,35]. Forests in mountainous regions also help control and sustain carbon sinks, mitigate climate change, reduce soil erosion, preserve watersheds, and provide shelter and a steady supply of fresh water to people who live in highland and foreland areas [36,37,38]. Nevertheless, their role in supplying ecosystem services, such as clean water and biodiversity, has never been thoroughly quantified. Despite these advantages, the region’s forest resources are severely threatened, and deforestation frequently occurs for short-term financial gain without carefully considering the long-term effects [39,40,41,42]. Furthermore, in many mountainous rural localities, ownership of forests and issues of property rights have also emerged, leading to conflict situations and increasing the rate of the ongoing logging process [43,44]. These woodlands are found at an altitude of between 750 and 4500 m above sea level. Deforestation has increased in recent decades at lower altitudes, below 2400 m [22,40,45,46,47], highlighting that forests in countries of the Global South, such as Pakistan, have suffered greatly near human settlements [22,40,45,46,47]. Pakistan ranks second in the world for deforestation [48]. From 1981 to 2000, the yearly rate of forest loss in Pakistan reduced from 2.9 to 1.7% [7,19,49]. Nonetheless, the situation worsened, with annual forest cover change climbing to 2.4% between 2005 and 2010 [47,50,51,52]. In Pakistan, deforestation and afforestation are controversial and disputed, as official reports on both are not dependable and difficult to verify scientifically [14,53,54]. Ref. [53] studied the spatio-temporal patterns of forest cover changes in the country and illustrated that between 1990 and 2010, the forest cover declined from 95,000 to 75,000 ha. Similarly, the rate of deforestation in the Swat and Shangla districts in 2001–2009 was 1268 ha per year [14]. Several factors, including population growth, urbanization, and household dynamics, contribute to the increasing rate of forest degradation [10,12,13,21,25,27,52]. Apart from this, population density, demand for forest resources, land usage, and distance from human settlements are other major factors of deforestation [30,31,49]. Being a country of the Global South, Pakistan’s population growth and the expansion of settlements in mountainous forest areas have resulted in unparalleled rates of vegetation degradation [40,55,56,57]. Moreover, the increasing human population has led to causeless deforestation and is a significant driver of land use change in the investigated area and worldwide [4,5,8,21,22,37,52]. As the study area’s population increased, so did the extent of towns and agricultural lands, leading to overexploitation for domestic purposes. Despite the continuous decline in forest cover, however, Pakistan recently underwent a minor increase in forest area thanks to afforestation and regeneration developmental projects [7,44,58]. On the other hand, the socio-economic and environmental effects of changing forest cover are diverse and often mysterious.
To assess and evaluate forest cover change and quantify the pace of deforestation, a remote area in the western Himalayas—the Palas valley—has been selected. The main objectives of this study are to explore the impact of the growing population and the expansion of human settlements on forest cover change from 1980 to 2017, and to understand the natural resource base and the challenges posed by unplanned human growth without consideration for the fragile mountain environment. Furthermore, it will assist forest stakeholders in developing a strategy for management and sustainable use of the mountainous forest, as well as understanding the continuing changes in this isolated mountainous belt and their consequences on its ecological characteristics.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
Kohistan, which has been described as a “paradise of the earth”, is a territory situated in the HKH mountains of northern Pakistan. The western part is called Swat and the eastern Indus Kohistan. Palas valley, located in Indus Kohistan, extends from 34°54′ to 35°52′ N and 72°43′ to 73°57′ E. The valley is connected to Jalkot to the north, Naran (Mansehra district) to the east, Alai (Battagram district) to the south, and Pattan to the west.
The total geographical area of the valley is about 1400 km2, with elevations ranging from 700 to 5200 m above mean sea level. Administratively, it is one of the tehsils of Kohistan. Physiographically, Palas valley is dominated by the HKH mountains’ rugged and precipitous terrain, and it contains the most extensive and healthy natural forest in the HKH mountains (Figure 1). These mountains are covered in natural vegetation, with tree species varying greatly with altitude. In the high-altitude areas deodar, blue pine, kail, and fir spruce forests are present in abundance, while lower altitudes are rich in oak trees. Moreover, the high mountains are covered with thick forests of admirable quality which contain cedar, juniper, pine, fir, olea erruinea, chilghoza, oak, walnut and birch trees. The low-lying areas around the Indus River are characterized by the scrub and thorny forests of Palosa, while the remainder of the area, up to 3000 m in altitude, supports dense deodar and pine trees wherever the terrain is not too steep. The two main nala/rivulets, namely, Musha’Ga Nala and Sharakot Nala, drain into Palas valley. A few small streams of the valley at various locations meet the Musha’Ga. Gidar Nala, Gorkhal Nala, Tangai Nala, Pharor Gah, and Kundel Gah are the important tributaries on the western bank, while Moro Nala, Khab Sharial Nala, Sukai Ser Gah, Sing Khwar, Dewan Gah, and Kot Nala are on the eastern bank. Adjacent to Dumbela, the Musha’Ga splits into Kuz Khwar and Neela Nala.
In winter these streams shrink, but they swell significantly in summer after the highland snows melt. Climatically, Palas valley experiences both a dry sub-tropical and a temperate climate, with sharp local variation according to altitude and aspect. It is located between the northwestern Trans-Indus tract and the southeastern moist temperate valley of Kaghan. Due to its unique geography and elevation, the climate is always changing. At Pattan meteorological station, situated 739 m above mean sea level, in the summer the mean maximum temperature in June–July, the hottest months, is approximately 38 °C, and the average low is 22 °C. In winter, the average high is above 0 °C but not over 15 °C, while the average low is 6 °C in January. In summer, at higher elevations, it is cooler and more pleasant [59,60,61,62].
Most of the rain falls as snow on high peaks, and many of them, along with other high-altitude places, become glaciated in the winter. The monsoon brings the most rain to the study area, but less rain falls in the northeast due to the mountains. Also, due to the extensive rains in winter, the valley stays green and lush with thick forests, rich pastures, and a few small glaciers at higher elevations. From 2005 to 2015, the average rainfall recorded at the Patten meteorological station was 10 mm in the valley bottoms and 30–40 mm at higher altitudes. Northern Indus Kohistan is the only place in the area that does not get any rain during the summer monsoon season. Streams and rivers, on the other hand, are flooded in the summer due to the large quantity of water generated by the melting snow. During the winter, there is considerable snowfall, and the temperature is usually below freezing.
The population of the valley has increased substantially. In 1981, Palas was not declared as a tehsil and was part of the Pattan tehsil. The valley was declared a tehsil in 1998, with a population of 165,613 in 1998. From 1992 to 2017, it increased approximately fourfold, from 60,524 to 275,461. According to the Himalayan Jungle Project, in 1992, the inhabitants of the valley numbered 60,524 individuals. The average annual growth rate increased from 1.7% in 1998 to 3.4% in 2017 [63].
2.2. Methodology
This study used GIS and remote sensing data to assess the influence of population growth and settlement development on forest cover. Using Landsat and Sentinel satellite images for the years 1980 to 2017, the data was analyzed in ArcGIS 10.2.8 and ERDAS Imagine 2014 software. Pakistan’s Bureau of Statistics provided population figures. The timespan of this research is 37 years, from 1980 to 2017. Using relevant data, the following research periods were chosen: 1980–2000 and 2000–2017 [10,28,56]. Human settlement growth was examined using spatial approaches such as Euclidean distance and buffer analysis in ArcGIS. We built 1 km and 3 km buffers around each community in ArcMap. Using these buffers as a starting point, we were able to make changes to forest cover maps. For each map, the classification of settlement expansion was evaluated.
2.3. Image Processing and Analyses
Using ArcGIS together with ERDAS Imagine, the research region was extracted from the mosaic scenes by stacking the spectral bands for each image. Similarly, standard deviation stretch was applied to increase image visibility [14,54]. An infrared false-color composite was used for classifying the satellite images based on the standard LULC classes of printed sources. Six LULC classes were constructed (Table 1) [10,28,49,56]. Over 100 training samples were used to train the computer to generate signature files, using the same method as [28,64,65,66,67,68,69]. The area for each class was calculated using a supervised classification algorithm. Change detection maps for 1980 and 2017 were created using the reclassification and addition tools in ArcGIS. These maps show changes in forests and other LULC categories throughout the study. The nexus between expanding population, settlements, and forest cover change was examined using the ArcGIS proximity tool, with 1 km and 3 km settlement buffers.
2.4. Accuracy Assessment
An accuracy assessment was conducted using Landsat and Sentinel data from 1980, 2000, 2010, and 2017. Each data set had 453, 634, 726, and 378 reference points, respectively. Using stratified random sampling, over 100 points were assembled from each class. A shapefile of the point features was prepared for ground truth or reference points. The data from selected years were then converted to KMZ files and superimposed on Google Earth’s VHRS images. Using user and producer accuracy, and commission and omission errors, the agreement between categorized images and the ground truth was evaluated. The accuracy of the classified satellite images was more than 95% for 1980, 2000, and 2010, and 74% in 2017 (Table 2), with kappa coefficients of 0.99, 0.87, 0.99, and 0.69, respectively. In 2017, user and producer accuracy in all classified maps was greater than 95%, with the exception of agricultural land (68.62%), bare soil or rocks (45.94% and 27%), and water (69.56% and 61.53%).
3. Results
3.1. Forest Cover Change and Growing Population (1980–2017)
Population growth always leads to increased human activity, which is thought to be the cause of changes in forest cover. For example, population increase drives up fuel and food consumption. There is then a need to raise more crops to fulfill this demand. To do so, agriculture sectors need additional space, and therefore began encroaching on forests, leading to trees being felled and massive expanses of green woodland being turned into cultivated fields. With an average yearly growth rate of 2.70% and a population density of 104 persons per km2, the district of Kohistan saw its population increase from 465,237 in 1981 to 472,570 in 1998, and by 2017 it had reached 784,711. During the same periods, the study area’s forest cover declined from 36,942 ha (26.45%) in 1981 to 34,631.37 ha (24.79%) in 1998, and to 19,866.17 ha (14.22%) by 2017.
Similarly, Palas valley had 165,613 residents in 1998, making it the second most populous tehsil, with 275,461 inhabitants in 2017. A comparison of the research area’s population statistics against the forest cover shows that they are inversely correlated. Forest cover in the study area was at 27% in 1980, decreasing to 24.7% by 2000, and shirking again to 14.22% by 2017. During the research period, forest cover decreased by 12.2% while the population increased by 67.5%. Table 3 illustrates the population growth of the selected settlements from 1980 to 2017; Figure 2 indicates the LULC of the study area.
3.2. Forest Cover Changes within 1 km of the Settlement (1980–2017)
The population’s influence on forest cover decreases as we move away from villages and towns. The approach of using 1 and 3 km buffers around significant settlements allowed land use/cover data to be extracted and then the area under various LULC classes calculated. The study found that natural forest cover declined throughout the study period, whereas other LULC classes increased. The forest cover within 1 km of the settlements was 1271 ha in 1980, shrinking to 996 ha in 2000, and reducing again to 769 ha in 2017, a loss of 501.63 ha. Conversely, shrub/bush cover increased from 634 ha to 1120 and 1255 ha, respectively. The agricultural area surged from 10.44 to 65.58 ha throughout the research period, whereas barren land fell from 586 ha to 340 ha and 194 ha (Table 4, Figure 3).
The study area’s population grew from 54,237 in 1981 to 269,067 in 2017. Agribusiness and other economic activities expanded human settlements into distant alpine areas where agriculture and other economic activities were possible. Population growth and settlement expansion are closely linked to changes in forest cover. Agricultural land and shrub cover grew while other LULC classes were reduced. The expansion of cultivated land and shrub/bush cover may be at the expense of population growth. As the population grew, more land was cleared for cultivation and housing. The convergence between loss of forest cover and the surge in population shows the influence of demographic development and settlement extension on vegetation cover. Both hasten deforestation, as trees are cut down for housing construction, timber harvesting, and fuel. Furthermore, an increasing population necessitates additional land for cultivation.
3.3. Forest Cover Changes within 3 km of the Settlement (1980–2017)
The study further reveals that within 3 km of the villages, forest cover totaled 9511 ha in 1980, declined to 7822 ha by 2000, and shrunk again to 6004 ha by 2017. Conversely, shrub/bush cover grew from 6052 to 8837 ha by 2000 and increased again to 10,495 ha by 2017. Similarly, farming land grew from 150 to 395 ha by 2000 and surged again to 590 ha by 2017, whereas barren land declined from 4944 to 3846 ha during the study (Table 5, Figure 4).
Increased human population, land change, and other infrastructure development may all play a role in deforestation. In addition, people choose to live close to their farms for convenience, which contributes to the loss of plant cover around human settlements. The influence of population growth on vegetation cover is shown by declining forest cover. Furthermore, demographic development accelerates forest cover change due to increased demand for wood to build infrastructure and as fuel for cooking and heating. However, deforestation decreases slightly as you get further away from villages, as people tend to cut trees adjacent to their village for fuel and to build houses.
3.4. Spatio-Temporal Change in Forest Cover (1980–2017)
Table 4 summarizes the data on change in vegetation cover. It demonstrates a steady drop in plant cover in both forests and shrubs/bushes. From 1980 to 2000, the vegetation cover fell from 36,942 ha to 34,631.37 ha. Similarly, the next decade (2000–2010) saw a total loss of 10,500 ha of natural plant cover. From 2010 to 2017, there was an additional 6509 ha decline in vegetation cover (Figure 5). The change detection map of natural vegetation and other LULC illustrates that 73,317.8 ha (52.5%) of land was not changed to a different class. Significant changes were observed in the vegetation cover (6.8%), shrubs and bushes (12.3%) that were converted to bare land, while some barren land was restored to being forest cover (1.8%) and shrubs and bushes (2.1%). Similarly, 8% of forest cover was converted to shrub/bush land and 1% to agricultural land, with just 1% reverting to forest within the same period. Major forest cover changed from shrubs to bare soil/rocks, as shown by the study findings. However, forest cover decreased by 12.2% between 1980 and 2017. A 7% change to bare soil/rock changes of 7% was found. At the same time, there 3% snow/glacier cover reappeared, confirming the existence of glaciers in October 2017 and their nonexistence in 1980. As a result of changing forest cover and shrub/bush cover, agricultural land has increased.
4. Discussion
The results of this study confirm and validate the findings of other research conducted in the northern mountainous belt of Pakistan, namely, that with the passage of time, forest cover is continuously shrinking [10,14,21,28,52,53,56]. The rate of deforestation varies greatly depending on topography, accessibility, location, and the presence of forest resources. In 1980, Palas valley was thickly forested, but woodland declined steadily through to the year 2000. After 2010, the rate of forest cover change accelerated. The previous era saw a steady change. Overall forest cover declined by 12.1% over the research period, with a loss rate of 29% each year. Agricultural land grew by 1817 ha (1.3%) and shrub/ bush land by 21,402 ha (15.3%).
The findings of this study demonstrate the significance of population dynamics in changing plant cover in the Palas Valley of Kohistan, as many researchers have acknowledged in the HKH region and elsewhere [12,13,14,16,21,29,30,53,56]. Population growth and settlement expansion have major ecological implications [10,17,25,26,27,35,52]. Our results are similar to those of earlier studies conducted in the HKH [10,20,21,51,70]. According to [71,72], population growth has a direct effect on deforestation, since it raises the demand for resources such as energy, land, and food. Furthermore, deforestation can be linked to an increase in demand for firewood, agricultural land, and other forest-related items, according to the studies that show the effects of population expansion on forest cover change [7,12,19,28,73]. Ref. [73]’s study confirms that population expansion, as a driver of deforestation, results in increased deforested areas, reinforcing previous conclusions on the importance of household size, as shown by studies conducted in the Amazon [74,75,76,77]. There is a huge amount of deforestation in the HKH region, and the study area is no exception [13,48].
According to our results, forest cover within 1 and 3 km radii of the settlements was 1271 and 7822 ha, respectively, in 1980; this had reduced to 996 and 6004 ha by 2000, and to 274 and 788 ha, by 2017 [31,78,79,80,81]. Similarly, a study in Rupal Valley, south of Nanga Parbat, analyzed periodic pastoral migrations to high-altitude pastures as a strategy for utilizing the natural resources. According to their findings, the strategy of resource management was sustainable, despite the growth in population and livestock, as well as external modernizations that were rapidly affecting forest cover throughout the region [20,82]. These changes in population and settlement development cause changes in LULC in the study region, as confirmed by [7,21,83] in their studies. The examined area’s complexity and intensively changing aspects make it possible to assess environmental risk and several other elements affecting forest cover dynamics. The population of the district increased from 465,237 in 1981 to 472,570 in 1998, then to 784,711 (66%) in 2017 [63,84,85,86]. In particular, the Palas valley’s second most densely populated tehsil in 1998 (165,613) became the most populated in 2017 (275,461). The nexus between population increase, settlement expansion, and vegetation cover provides evidence for land and rural planners, environmentalists, and legislators as they make decisions balancing environmental, socio-economic, and political concerns. This study may help them.
The research revealed that although forest cover declined over time, the rate of change varied throughout the valley. Over the study period (1980–2017), the valley’s vegetation cover changed by 12.2%. The expanding population and nearby drivers are responsible for the rapid forest loss in the valley. However, population increase and proximal factors typically induce and intensify deforestation, as investigated by [7,12,13,17]. On the basis of our results, ground verification, and fieldwork, the authors attribute the change in forest cover to population growth and increasing livestock numbers; nevertheless, there are contradicting research investigations from both the Eastern Hindu Kush and the Himalaya [86,87,88], which found that population expansion benefited forest cover and other land uses. Similar to earlier research, our results demonstrate that population increase and settlement development are among the primary causes of forest cover change [31,78,79,80,81].
5. Conclusions
The present study concludes that forests and other types of land cover are affected by population growth, proximal causes, and biophysical changes. Population expansion, rising consumption of wood for fuel, and other factors all lead to deforestation. In Kohistan, housing units have almost doubled in number between 1980 and 2017. After 1980, the clearing of forest land for new housing and settlements changed the forest cover. In many regions of the world, including the study area, population increase is a key cause of forest degradation. Changes in demography and socioeconomics, as in the Hindu Raj mountains in northern Pakistan’s Roghani valley, have resulted in fluctuating plant cover. In this regard, forest cover change in the study area is positively related to growing population, settlement expansion, and household dynamics. Over the study period, forests were converted to agricultural and residential land use. In addition, population growth has resulted in rising demand for food. To accommodate the growing population’s requirements for food and housing, additional land has been cultivated, decreasing the vegetation cover. As time passes, the need for wood for household reasons, such as heating and cooking, increases, as people rely heavily on wood for warmth in the highlands. Growing populations and changing forest cover have been shown to be inversely linked. The study’s findings show that deforestation declines with greater distance from settlements. People fell trees close to villages/settlements for fuel, house-building, and so on. The vegetation cover in the study area was found to have gradually declined within 1 and 3 km radius of settlements. This may be attributed to population growth. As population increases, more land is cleared for cultivation and the expansion of settlements. Meanwhile, forest cover change is a complicated phenomenon with many other socio-economic and ecological drivers in addition to those previously stated.
Conceptualization, N.U.H., F.R. and I.T.; methodology, N.U.H., U.K., J.K., Z.A. and N.J.; validation, N.U.H., F.R., I.T., G.K. and H.T.J.; formal analysis, N.U.H., F.R. and I.T.; investigation, N.U.H. and F.R.; data curation, N.U.H., F.R., I.T. and G.K.; writing—original draft preparation, N.U.H., F.R., I.T. and G.K.; visualization N.U.H.; supervision, N.U.H., F.R. and I.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The authors declare that all the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.
The manuscript is part of the first author’s MPhil study at the University of Peshawar’s Department of Geography. The author acknowledges his dedicated supervisor and principal investigator, Fazlur Rahman for his valuable and scientific guidance, constructive criticism, and technical assistance. He also thanks the locals for their assistance, cooperation, and hospitality throughout the field study.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Enlarge this image.Figure 1. Physiography and location of Palas valley. Source: digital elevation model extracted from USGS and prepared in ArcGIS10.2.8.
Enlarge this image.Figure 2. 1980 Landsat MSS satellite image, and 2017 Sentinel-A satellite image: forest cover changes and growing population 1980–2017.
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. Land use/cover change within 1 km of the settlement. Source: classified images (1980, 2017).
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. Land use/cover change within 1 km of the settlement. Source: classified images (1980, 2017).
Enlarge this image.Figure 4. Land use/cover change within 3 km of settlement. Source: classified images (1980, 2000 and 2017).
Land use/cover class description.
| LULC Class | Description |
|---|---|
| Forest cover | Includes all types of natural forests. This class does not contain the deciduous trees often seen in agricultural areas. |
| Agriculture lands | Includes various types of arable land. |
| Shrubs/bushes | Includes grassland, shrubs, and bushes. |
| Bare soil/rocks | Includes zero land and bare rock and soil. |
| Snow cover/glaciers | Includes places with a permanent covering of snow and/or glacier. |
| Water bodies | Includes all types of waterways, including rivers and torrents. |
Classified imageries confusion matrixes (1980–2017).
| LULC | Forest | Agriculture | Shrub/Bushes | Bare Soil/Rocks | Glaciers/Snow | Total Ground Truth | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | 1980 | 2000 | 2017 | 1980 | 2000 | 2017 | 1980 | 2000 | 2017 | 1980 | 2000 | 2017 | 1980 | 2000 | 2017 | 1980 | 2000 | 2017 |
| Forest | 54 | 114 | 58 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 54 | 118 | 58 |
| Agriculture | 0 | 0 | 0 | 94 | 85 | 70 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 94 | 86 | 102 |
| Shrubs | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 91 | 114 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 91 | 117 | 56 |
| Bare soil | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 82 | 141 | 17 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 83 | 142 | 37 |
| Snow | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 32 | 122 | 79 | 32 | 122 | 79 |
| Total | 54 | 115 | 58 | 94 | 87 | 70 | 92 | 120 | 56 | 82 | 141 | 63 | 33 | 122 | 79 | 453 | 634 | 378 |
Selected major settlements in the study area.
| Major Settlement | Population | Increase | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1981 | 2000 | 2017 | 1981–2017 | % | |
| Bar Sherial | 5288 | 23,296 | 37,543 | 32,255 | 15.02 |
| Kuz Paro | 10,912 | 19,322 | 27,245 | 16,333 | 7.60 |
| Sharid | 5769 | 15,619 | 27,470 | 21,701 | 10.10 |
| Shalaken Abad | 6052 | 27,021 | 30,077 | 24,025 | 11.19 |
| Kolai | 2105 | 7742 | 50,784 | 48,679 | 22.66 |
| Shara Kot | 5244 | 26,981 | 38,155 | 32,911 | 15.32 |
| Mada Khel | 5954 | 8459 | 37,335 | 31,338 | 14.59 |
| Beach Bela | 12,913 | 20,974 | 20,458 | 7545 | 3.51 |
| Total | 54,237 | 149,414 | 269,067 | 214,787 | 100 |
Land use/cover change within 1 km of the settlement (1980, 2000 and 2017).
| LULC Classes | Year 1980 | Year 2000 | Year 2017 | Change | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Pixels | Area in ha | No. of Pixels | Area in ha | No. of Pixels | Area in ha | ||
| Forests | 3531 | 1271.16 | 11,076 | 996.84 | 76,953 | 769.53 | −501.63 |
| Agriculture | 29 | 10.44 | 589 | 53 | 6558 | 65.58 | 55.14 |
| Shrubs/bushes | 1763 | 634.68 | 12,454 | 1120.86 | 125,559 | 1255.59 | 620.91 |
| Bare soil/rock | 1630 | 586.8 | 3786 | 340.74 | 39,221 | 392.21 | −193.79 |
| Glacier/snow | 33 | 11.88 | 14 | 1.26 | 2972 | 29.72 | −17.84 |
Source: classified images (1980–2017).
Land use/cover change within 3 km of the settlement (1980, 2000 and 2017).
| LULC Classes | Year 1980 | Year 2000 | Year 2017 | Change | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Pixels | Area in ha | No. of Pixels | Area in ha | No. of Pixels | Area in ha | ||
| Forests | 26,420 | 9511.2 | 86,920 | 7822.8 | 600,405 | 6004 | −3507.2 |
| Agriculture | 418 | 150.48 | 4389 | 395 | 59,046 | 590.46 | 439.52 |
| Shrubs/bushes | 16,811 | 6051.96 | 98,195 | 8837.35 | 104,958 | 10,495.82 | 4443.86 |
| Bare soil/rock | 13,736 | 4944.96 | 45,614 | 4105.26 | 384,688 | 3846.88 | −1098.08 |
| Glacier/snow | 1574 | 566.64 | 780 | 70.2 | 29,487 | 294.87 | −271.13 |
Source: classified images (1980–2017).
References
1. Geist, H.J.; Lambin, E.F. Proximate Causes and Underlying Driving Forces of Tropical Deforestation. Bioscience; 2002; 52, pp. 143-150. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:PCAUDF]2.0.CO;2]
2. Nüsser, M. Understanding cultural landscape transformation: A re-photographic survey in Chitral, eastern Hindukush, Pakistan. Landsc. Urban Plan.; 2001; 57, pp. 241-255. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00207-9]
3. Wu, A.; Li, G.; Sun, T.; Liang, Y. Effects of industrial relocation on Chinese regional economic growth disparities: Based on system dynamics modeling. Chin. Geogr. Sci.; 2014; 24, pp. 706-716. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11769-014-0664-7]
4. Price, B.; Kaim, D.; Szwagrzyk, M.; Ostapowicz, K.; Kolecka, N.; Schmatz, D.R.; Wypych, A.; Kozak, J. Legacies, socio-economic and biophysical processes and drivers: The case of future forest cover expansion in the Polish Carpathians and Swiss Alps. Reg. Environ. Chang.; 2016; 17, pp. 2279-2291. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1079-z]
5. Dang, A.N.; Kawasaki, A. Integrating biophysical and socio-economic factors for land-use and land-cover change projection in agricultural economic regions. Ecol. Model.; 2017; 344, pp. 29-37. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.11.004]
6. Haq, N.U.; Rahman, F.; Tabassum, I. Mehran Forest cover dynamics in Palas Valley Kohistan, Hindu Kush-Himalayan Mountains, Pakistan. J. Mt. Sci.; 2021; 18, pp. 416-426. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-020-6093-4]
7. Hussain, K.; Rahman, F.; Ullah, I.; Ahmad, Z.; Schickhoff, U. Assessing the Impacts of Population Growth and Roads on Forest Cover: A Temporal Approach to Reconstruct the Deforestation Process in District Kurram, Pakistan, Since 1972. Land; 2022; 11, 810. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/land11060810]
8. Jakovac, C.C.; Junqueira, A.B.; Crouzeilles, R.; Peña-Claros, M.; Mesquita, R.C.G.; Bongers, F. The role of land-use history in driving successional pathways and its implications for the restoration of tropical forests. Biol. Rev.; 2021; 96, pp. 1114-1134. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/brv.12694]
9. Ali, T.; Suleri, A. Analysis of Myths and Realities of Deforestation in Northwest Pakistan: Implications for Forestry Extension. Int. J. Agric. Biol.; 2006; 8, pp. 107-110.
10. Zeb, A.; Hamann, A.; Armstrong, G.; Acuna-Castellanos, D. Identifying local actors of deforestation and forest degradation in the Kalasha valleys of Pakistan. For. Policy Econ.; 2019; 104, pp. 56-64. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.04.005]
11. Haq, N.U.; Haq, F.; Rahman, F.; Tabssum, I.; Ahmad, Z.; Tariqi, I.U. Extension of roads towards forest in Palas Valley Indus Kohistan, Hindu Kush-Himalayan Mountains, Pakistan. GeoJournal; 2021; 87, pp. 3307-3321. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10708-021-10437-y]
12. Aquilas, N.A.; Mukong, A.K.; Kimengsi, J.N.; Ngangnchi, F.H. Economic activities and deforestation in the Congo basin: An environmental kuznets curve framework analysis. Environ. Challenges; 2022; 8, 100553. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2022.100553]
13. Abugre, S.; Sackey, E.K. Diagnosis of perception of drivers of deforestation using the partial least squares path modeling approach. Trees For. People; 2022; 8, 100246. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2022.100246]
14. Qamer, F.M.; Abbas, S.; Saleem, R.; Shehzad, K.; Ali, H.; Gilani, H. Forest cover change assessment in conflict-affected areas of northwest Pakistan: The case of swat and shangla districts. J. Mt. Sci.; 2012; 9, pp. 297-306. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-009-2319-1]
15. Poudel, S.; Shaw, R. Demographic Changes, Economic Changes and Livelihood Changes in the HKH Region. Mountain Hazards and Disaster Risk Reduction; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 105-123.
16. Van Khuc, Q.; Tran, B.Q.; Meyfroidt, P.; Paschke, M.W. Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Vietnam: An exploratory analysis at the national level. For. Policy Econ.; 2018; 90, pp. 128-141. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.02.004]
17. Zeb, A. Spatial and temporal trends of forest cover as a response to policy interventions in the district Chitral, Pakistan. Appl. Geogr.; 2018; 102, pp. 39-46. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.12.002]
18. Wester, P.; Mishra, A.; Mukherji, A.; Shrestha, A.B. The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019.
19. Tole, L. Sources of Deforestation in Tropical Developing Countries. Environ. Manag.; 1998; 22, pp. 19-33. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s002679900081]
20. Nüsser, M. Change and Persistence: Contemporary Landscape Transformation in the Nanga Parbat Region, Northern Pakistan. Mt. Res. Dev.; 2000; 20, pp. 348-355. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1659/0276-4741(2000)020[0348:CAPCLT]2.0.CO;2]
21. Rahman, F.; Haq, F.; Tabassum, I.; Ullah, I. Socio-economic drivers of deforestation in Roghani Valley, Hindu-Raj Mountains, Northern Pakistan. J. Mt. Sci.; 2014; 11, pp. 167-179. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-013-2770-x]
22. Haq, N.; Rahman, F.; Tabassum, I. Dynamics of Forest Cover Changes in Hindu Kush-Himalayan Mountains Using Remote Sensing. Geospatial Modeling for Environmental Management; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022; pp. 281-307.
23. Ullah, S.; Gang, T.; Rauf, T.; Sikandar, F.; Liu, J.Q.; Noor, R.S. Identifying the socio-economic factors of deforestation and degradation: A case study in Gilgit Baltistan, Pakistan. Geojournal; 2020; 87, pp. 1657-1670. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10332-y]
24. Verma, A.; Schmidt-Vogt, D.; De Alban, J.D.T.; Lim, C.L.; Webb, E.L. Drivers and mechanisms of forest change in the Himalayas. Glob. Environ. Chang.; 2021; 68, 102244. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102244]
25. Robinson, B.E.; Holland, M.B.; Naughton-Treves, L. Does secure land tenure save forests? A meta-analysis of the relationship between land tenure and tropical deforestation. Glob. Environ. Chang.; 2014; 29, pp. 281-293. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.012]
26. Newman, M.E.; McLaren, K.P.; Wilson, B.S. Long-term socio-economic and spatial pattern drivers of land cover change in a Caribbean tropical moist forest, the Cockpit Country, Jamaica. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.; 2014; 186, pp. 185-200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.01.030]
27. Diniz, F.H.; Kok, K.; Hott, M.C.; Hoogstra-Klein, M. From space and from the ground: Determining forest dynamics in settlement projects in the Brazilian Amazon. Int. For. Rev.; 2013; 15, pp. 442-455. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1505/146554813809025658]
28. Hussain, K.; Haq, F.; Rahman, F. Shrinking greenery: Land use and land cover changes in Kurram Agency, Kohi Safid Mountains of north-western Pakistan. J. Mt. Sci.; 2018; 15, pp. 296-306. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-017-4451-7]
29. Ahmad, A.; Nizami, S.M. Carbon stocks of different land uses in the Kumrat valley, Hindu Kush Region of Pakistan. J. For. Res.; 2015; 26, pp. 57-64. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11676-014-0008-6]
30. Ullah, S.; Farooq, M.; Shafique, M.; Siyab, M.A.; Kareem, F.; Dees, M. Spatial assessment of forest cover and land-use changes in the Hindu-Kush mountain ranges of northern Pakistan. J. Mt. Sci.; 2016; 13, pp. 1229-1237. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-015-3456-3]
31. Kumar, R.; Kumar, A.; Saikia, P. Deforestation and Forests Degradation Impacts on the Environment. Environmental Degradation: Challenges and Strategies for Mitigation; Springer Publisher: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 19-46.
32. Shrestha, F.; Uddin, K.; Maharjan, S.B.; Bajracharya, S.R. Application of remote sensing and GIS in environmental monitoring in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region. AIMS Environ. Sci.; 2016; 3, pp. 646-662. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3934/environsci.2016.4.646]
33. Ullah, A.; Sam, A.S.; Sathyan, A.R.; Mahmood, N.; Zeb, A.; Kächele, H. Role of local communities in forest landscape restoration: Key lessons from the Billion Trees Afforestation Project, Pakistan. Sci. Total Environ.; 2021; 772, 145613. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145613]
34. Berger, F. Showing True Change of the Hindu Kush Himalaya Region through the Power of Photo Monitoring as a Visual Memory of Change. Hindu Kush-Himalaya Watersheds Downhill: Landscape Ecology and Conservation Perspectives; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 169-195. Available online: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-36275-1_9 (accessed on 10 February 2022). [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36275-1_9]
35. Johnson, E.; Mcdonald, K.; Spero, L.; Basu, A. Climate Change Impacts on Ecoregions in the Kangchenjunga Landscape of India, Bhutan, and Nepal Climate Change Impacts on Ecoregions in the Kangchenjunga Landscape of India, Nepal, and Bhutan 2022. Available online: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/172211 (accessed on 17 April 2022).
36. Gratzer, G.; Keeton, W.S. Mountain Forests and Sustainable Development: The Potential for Achieving the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda. Mt. Res. Dev.; 2017; 37, pp. 246-253. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-17-00093.1]
37. Uddin, K.; Gilani, H.; Murthy, M.S.R.; Kotru, R.; Qamer, F.M. Forest Condition Monitoring Using Very-High-Resolution Satellite Imagery in a Remote Mountain Watershed in Nepal. Mt. Res. Dev.; 2015; 35, pp. 264-277. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-14-00074.1]
38. Kohler Thomas, Maselli Daniel Mountains and Climate Change: From Understanding to Action 2009. Available online: http://events.arcosnetwork.org/uploads/WMF16/documents/32516.pdf (accessed on 8 December 2021).
39. Price, M.F.; Gratzer, G.; Duguma, L.A.; Kohler, T.; Maselli, D.; Romeo, R. Mountain Forests in a Changing World: Realizing Values, Addressing Challenges 2011. Available online: https://boris.unibe.ch/6755/1/FAO_Mountain-Forests-in-a-Changing-World.pdf (accessed on 11 February 2022).
40. Das, P.; Behera, M.D.; Murthy, M.S.R. Forest fragmentation and human population varies logarithmically along elevation gradient in Hindu Kush Himalaya—Utility of geospatial tools and free data set. J. Mt. Sci.; 2017; 14, pp. 2432-2447. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-016-4159-0]
41. Chettri, N.; Shakya, B.; Thapa, R.; Sharma, E. Status of a protected area system in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas: An analysis of PA coverage. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Manag.; 2008; 4, pp. 164-178. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3843/Biodiv.4.3:4]
42. Bajracharya, S.R.; Shrestha, B. The Status of Glaciers in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region; International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD): Kathmandu, Nepal, 2011; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.53055/icimod.551]
43. Azhar, R.A. Commons, Regulation, and Rent-Seeking Behavior: The Dilemma of Pakistan’s “Guzara” Forests. Econ. Dev. Cult. Chang.; 1993; 42, pp. 115-129. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/452067]
44. FAO. 2019 Forestry Sector Review: Pakistan; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2020.
45. Lambin, E.F.; Meyfroidt, P. Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA; 2011; 108, pp. 3465-3472. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1100480108]
46. Hansen, M.C.; DeFries, R.S.; Townshend, J.R.G.; Carroll, M.; Dimiceli, M.; Sohlberg, R.A. Global Percent Tree Cover at a Spatial Resolution of 500 Meters: First Results of the MODIS Vegetation Continuous Fields Algorithm. Earth Interact; 2003; 7, pp. 1-15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1175/1087-3562(2003)007<0001:GPTCAA>2.0.CO;2]
47. Ridder, R.M. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010; Forestry Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2007.
48. Awan, M.N.; Kabir, M.; Ahmad, S.; Huettmann, F. The Future of Biodiversity in the Changing Watersheds of Kashmir Himalaya, Pakistan: Conservation Challenges and Opportunities. Hindu Kush-Himalaya Watersheds Downhill: Landscape Ecology and Conservation Perspectives; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 113-133.
49. Shehzad, K.; Qamer, F.M.; Murthy, M.S.R.; Abbas, S.; Bhatta, L.D. Deforestation trends and spatial modelling of its drivers in the dry temperate forests of northern Pakistan—A case study of Chitral. J. Mt. Sci.; 2014; 11, pp. 1192-1207. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-013-2932-x]
50. Hasan, L. An Anatomy of State Failures in Forest Management in Pakistan. Pak. Dev. Rev.; 2007; 46, pp. 1189-1203. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30541/v46i4IIpp.1189-1203]
51. Ali, J.; Benjaminsen, T.A. Fuelwood, timber and deforestation in the Himalayas: The case of Basho Valley, Baltistan Region, Pakistan. Mt. Res. Dev.; 2004; 24, pp. 312-318. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1659/0276-4741(2004)024[0312:FTADIT]2.0.CO;2]
52. Haq, F.; Rahman, F.; Tabassum, I.; Ullah, I.; Sher, A. Forest Dilemma in the Hindu Raj Mountains Northern Pakistan: Impact of Population Growth and Household Dynamics. Small-Scale For.; 2018; 17, pp. 323-341. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11842-018-9390-9]
53. Qamer, F.M.; Shehzad, K.; Abbas, S.; Murthy, M.; Xi, C.; Gilani, H.; Bajracharya, B. Mapping Deforestation and Forest Degradation Patterns in Western Himalaya, Pakistan. Remote Sens.; 2016; 8, 385. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rs8050385]
54. Bukhari, S.S.B. Land Cover Atlas of Pakistan; Pakistan Forest Institute Peshawar: Peshawar, Pakistan, 2012; 140p.
55. Maier, D. The Great Myth: Why Population Growth Does Not Necessarily Cause Environmental Degradation and Poverty. Public Sphere; 2015; 3, pp. 150-157.
56. Qasim, M.; Hubacek, K.; Termansen, M.; Khan, A. Spatial and temporal dynamics of land use pattern in District Swat, Hindu Kush Himalayan region of Pakistan. Appl. Geogr.; 2011; 31, pp. 820-828. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.08.008]
57. Naeem, M.; Farid, H.U.; Madni, M.A.; Ahsen, R.; Khan, Z.M.; Dilshad, A.; Shahzad, H. Remotely sensed image interpretation for assessment of land use land cover changes and settlement impact on allocated irrigation water in Multan, Pakistan. Environ. Monit. Assess.; 2022; 194, pp. 1-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09732-5] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35031930]
58. Nazir, N.; Farooq, A.; Jan, S.A.; Ahmad, A. A system dynamics model for billion trees tsunami afforestation project of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in Pakistan: Model application to afforestation activities. J. Mt. Sci.; 2019; 16, pp. 2640-2653. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5076-1]
59. Barth, F. Indus and Swat Kohistan: An Ethnographic Survey. Studies Honouring the Centennial of the Universitetets Etnografiske Museum, Oslo 1857–1957; Universitetet i Oslo: Oslo, Norway, 1956; Volume 2.
60. Knudsen, A. Boundaries of Belongingness in the Palas Valley, Pakistan. Ph.D. Thesis; University of Bergen: Bergen, Norway, 2001.
61. Sinnott, M.; Rafiq, R.; Jackson, A.; Burnell, J. Royal Botanic Gardens Kew: Pakistan Expedition 1995. 1995; Available online: https://www.kew.org/search?textsearch=Pakistan+Expidition+1995 (accessed on 17 October 2022).
62. Michel, A.A.; Dichter, D. The North-West Frontier of West Pakistan: A Study in Regional Geography. Econ. Geogr.; 1969; 45, 90. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/143184]
63. GoP. Final Results of Census-2017 Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Available online: https://www.pbs.gov.pk/census-2017-district-wise/results/010 (accessed on 3 March 2022).
64. Brinkmann, K.; Noromiarilanto, F.; Ratovonamana, R.Y.; Buerkert, A. Deforestation processes in south-western Madagascar over the past 40 years: What can we learn from settlement characteristics?. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.; 2014; 195, pp. 231-243. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.06.008]
65. Gautam, A.P.; Shivakoti, G.P.; Webb, E.L. Forest Cover Change, Physiography, Local Economy, and Institutions in a Mountain Watershed in Nepal. Environ. Manag.; 2004; 33, pp. 48-61. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-0031-4]
66. Gong, P.; Pu, R.; Biging, G.S.; Larrieu, M.R. Estimation of forest leaf area index using vegetation indices derived from hyperion hyperspectral data. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens.; 2003; 41, pp. 1355-1362. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2003.812910]
67. Keuchel, J.; Naumann, S.; Heiler, M.; Siegmund, A. Automatic land cover analysis for Tenerife by supervised classification using remotely sensed data. Remote Sens. Environ.; 2003; 86, pp. 530-541. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00130-5]
68. Rogan, J.; Franklin, J.; Roberts, D.A. A comparison of methods for monitoring multitemporal vegetation change using Thematic Mapper imagery. Remote Sens. Environ.; 2002; 80, pp. 143-156. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00296-6]
69. Rozenstein, O.; Karnieli, A. Comparison of methods for land-use classification incorporating remote sensing and GIS inputs. Appl. Geogr.; 2011; 31, pp. 533-544. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.11.006]
70. Munawar, S.; Udelhoven, T. Land change syndromes identification in temperate forests of Hindukush Himalaya Karakorum (HHK) mountain ranges. Int. J. Remote Sens.; 2020; 41, pp. 7735-7756. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2020.1763509]
71. Leonard, H.J. Environment and the Poor: Development Strategies for a Common Agenda; Overseas Development Council: Washington, DC, USA, 1989.
72. Leonard, H.J. Divesting Nature’s Capital: The Political Economy of Environmental Abuse in the Third World; Holmes & Meier Punlishers: Broadway, NY, USA, 1985; 299.
73. Sydenstricker-Neto, J. Population and deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: A mediating perspective and a mixed-method analysis. Popul. Environ.; 2012; 34, pp. 86-112. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11111-012-0173-5]
74. Pan, W.K.; Bilsborrow, R.E. The use of a multilevel statistical model to analyze factors influencing land use: A study of the Ecuadorian Amazon. Glob. Planet. Chang.; 2005; 47, pp. 232-252. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2004.10.014]
75. VanWey, L.K.; D’Antona, O.; Brondízio, E.S. Household demographic change and land use/land cover change in the Brazilian Amazon. Popul. Environ.; 2007; 28, pp. 163-185. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11111-007-0040-y]
76. Walker, R.; Perz, S.; Caldas, M.; Silva, L.G.T. Land Use and Land Cover Change in Forest Frontiers: The Role of Household Life Cycles. Int. Reg. Sci. Rev.; 2002; 25, pp. 169-199. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016001760202500202]
77. Perz, S.G. Household demographic factors as life cycle determinants of land use in the Amazon. Popul. Res. Policy Rev.; 2001; 20, pp. 159-186. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1010658719768]
78. Sharma, P.; Rai, S. Carbon sequestration with land-use cover change in a Himalayan watershed. Geoderma; 2007; 139, pp. 371-378. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2007.02.016]
79. Gibbs, H.K.; Ruesch, A.S.; Achard, F.; Clayton, M.K.; Holmgren, P.; Ramankutty, N.; Foley, J.A. Tropical forests were the primary sources of new agricultural land in the 1980s and 1990s. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA; 2010; 107, pp. 16732-16737. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910275107]
80. Pandey, R. Forest biomass extraction for livestock feed and associated carbon analysis in lower Himalayas, India. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Chang.; 2011; 16, pp. 879-888. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11027-011-9300-3]
81. Hosonuma, N.; Herold, M.; De Sy, V.; De Fries, R.S.; Brockhaus, M.; Verchot, L.; Angelsen, A.; Romijn, E. An assessment of deforestation and forest degradation drivers in developing countries. Environ. Res. Lett.; 2012; 7, 044009. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044009]
82. Nusser, M.; Clemens, J. Impacts on Mixed Mountain Agriculture in the Rupal Valley, Nanga Parbat, Northern Pakistan. Mt. Res. Dev.; 1996; 16, 117. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3674006]
83. Ashraf, J.; Pandey, R.; de Jong, W. Assessment of bio-physical, social and economic drivers for forest transition in Asia-Pacific region. For. Policy Econ.; 2017; 76, pp. 35-44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.07.008]
84. GoP. District Census Report of Kohistan; Population Census Organization Statistics Division Government of Pakistan Islamabad: Islamabad, Pakistan, 1983.
85. GoP. District Census Report of Kohistan; Population Census Organization Statistics Division Government of Pakistan Islamabad: Islamabad, Pakistan, 2000.
86. Ives, J.D.; Messerli, B. Mountain Geoecology. The Evolution of Intellectually-Based Scholarship into a Political Force for Sustainable Mountain Development 1989. pp. 1-20. Available online: https://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c01/E6-14-02-08.pdf (accessed on 7 October 2021).
87. Rahman, F. Population growth and sustainability of common property resource management systems in the eastern Hindu Kush: The use of communal fodder resources in Mehlp Valley, North Pakistan. J. Mt. Sci.; 2009; 6, pp. 380-393. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-009-1006-6]
88. Fox, J. Forest Resources in a Nepali Village in 1980 and 1990: The Positive Influence of Population Growth. Mt. Res. Dev.; 1993; 13, 89. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3673646]
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Kontakiotis, George 2
; Hammad, Tariq Janjuhah 3
; Rahman, Fazlur 4 ; Iffat Tabassum 1 ; Khan, Usman 5 ; Khan, Jamil 1 ; Ahmad, Zahir 6
; Jamal, Naveed 1 1 Department of Geography, University of Peshawar, Peshawar 25100, KP, Pakistan
2 Department of Historical Geology-Paleontology, Faculty of Geology and Geoenvironment, School of Earth Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimiopolis, Zografou, 15784 Athens, Greece
3 Department of Geology, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Sheringal 18050, KP, Pakistan
4 Department of Urban & Regional Planning, University of Peshawar, Peshawar 25100, KP, Pakistan
5 Department for Innovation in Biological, Agro-Food and Forest Systems (DIBAF), University of Tuscia, Via SanCamillo de Lellis s.n.c., 01100 Viterbo, Italy
6 Department of Geography, Islamia University Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur 63100, PB, Pakistan