Next Article in Journal
Uncovering the Hidden Numbers of Nature in the Standard Accounts of Society: Application to a Case Study of Oak Woodland dehesa and Conifer Forest Farms in Andalusia-Spain
Previous Article in Journal
Spatial Distribution and Structural Characteristics for Haloxylon ammodendron Plantation on the Southwestern Edge of the Gurbantünggüt Desert
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/f12050637
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Mangrove Forest Landcover Changes in Coastal Vietnam: A Case Study from 1973 to 2020 in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An Provinces

by
Huong Thi Thuy Nguyen
1,2,*,
Giles E. S. Hardy
1,
Tuat Van Le
3,
Huy Quoc Nguyen
3,
Hoang Huy Nguyen
2,
Thinh Van Nguyen
2 and
Bernard Dell
1,4
1
Agriculture and Forest Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch 6150, Australia
2
Silviculture Research Institute, Vietnamese Academy of Forest Sciences, Duc Thang, Bac Tu Liem, Ha Noi 11910, Vietnam
3
Institute of Ecology and Works Protection, Vietnam Academy for Water Resources, 267 Chua Boc, Dong Da, Ha Noi 11910, Vietnam
4
Forest Protection Research Centre, Vietnamese Academy of Forest Sciences, Duc Thang, Bac Tu Liem, Ha Noi 11910, Vietnam
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2021, 12(5), 637; https://doi.org/10.3390/f12050637
Submission received: 30 March 2021 / Revised: 13 May 2021 / Accepted: 15 May 2021 / Published: 18 May 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Inventory, Modeling and Remote Sensing)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Mangrove forests can ameliorate the impacts of typhoons and storms, but their extent is threatened by coastal development. The northern coast of Vietnam is especially vulnerable as typhoons frequently hit it during the monsoon season. However, temporal change information in mangrove cover distribution in this region is incomplete. Therefore, this study was undertaken to detect change in the spatial distribution of mangroves in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces and identify reasons for the cover change. Landsat satellite images from 1973 to 2020 were analyzed using the NDVI method combined with visual interpretation to detect mangrove area change. Six LULC classes were categorized: mangrove forest, other forests, aquaculture, other land use, mudflat, and water. The mangrove cover in Nghe An province was estimated to be 66.5 ha in 1973 and increased to 323.0 ha in 2020. Mangrove cover in Thanh Hoa province was 366.1 ha in 1973, decreased to 61.7 ha in 1995, and rose to 791.1 ha in 2020. Aquaculture was the main reason for the loss of mangroves in both provinces. Overall, the percentage of mangrove loss from aquaculture was 42.5% for Nghe An province and 60.1% for Thanh Hoa province. Mangrove restoration efforts have contributed significantly to mangrove cover, with more than 1300 ha being planted by 2020. This study reveals that improving mangrove restoration success remains a challenge for these provinces, and further refinement of engineering techniques is needed to improve restoration outcomes.

1. Introduction

Mangroves are intertidal wetlands occurring along tropical, subtropical, and warm-temperate coastlines. These forests provide valuable ecosystem services including preventing erosion [1], providing habitat for fisheries species [2], protecting coastal communities from extreme weather events [3,4], and storing large reserves of blue carbon, thus helping to mitigate global climate change [5]. The services provided by mangroves are threatened by anthropogenic processes, including deforestation [6] and sea-level rise [7,8]. Historically, mangroves were subject to high deforestation rates of up to 3.6% per annum [9]. However, since the turn of the millennium, global mangrove deforestation rates have slowed, with annual loss rates of 0.2–0.7% [10,11]. Lower rates of loss are due to near-total historical loss of forest patches in some regions, improved conservation practices [11] and improvements in large-scale monitoring techniques that provide more accurate estimates of cover and loss than were historically available [10,12]. The historic assessments contain reporting errors resulting from the inclusion of features without mangrove cover such as small creeks, mudflats, and salt pans. The majority of recent mangrove loss occurs in Southeast Asia, where ~50% of the remaining global mangrove forest area is located, with nations such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and Myanmar continuing to show losses of 0.26%, 0.41%, and 0.70% per year, respectively [10].
In Vietnam, mangroves were reported to cover 408,500 ha (1.2% of the country) in 1943 [13]. However, this area has declined dramatically over 50 years. In the northern parts of Vietnam, from Mong Cai to Do Son, the mangrove area decreased by 17,094 ha from 1964 to 1997 [14]. In the Red River plain, 4640 ha of mangroves were lost from 1975 to 1991, followed by a further 7430 ha in 1993 [14]. The coastal zone of southern Vietnam witnessed little change in mangrove area (from 250,000 to 210,000 ha) from 1950 to 1960; yet, the mangrove area declined to 92,000 ha by 1975 due to aerial spraying of herbicides by the American military in the period of 1962 to 1972 [15]. According to FAO [16], in the 1990s mangrove forests in Vietnam covered only 73,000 ha. In this context and to preserve this unique ecosystem, the authorities and NGOs have taken actions to replant the lost mangroves. Up to 2005, about 130,168 ha of mangroves were planted with state and NGO funds [17]. With reforestation and afforestation efforts, the total mangrove forests in Vietnam increased from 209,741 ha (0.63% of the country) in 2006 [18] to 262,000 ha (0.42% of the country) in 2010 [16], and 270,000 ha in 2015 [16]. An assessment of the status of the plantings [19] revealed that 65% were monocultures, and generally, they were poor in biomass and biodiversity. However, according to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD [20]), the area of mangroves in Vietnam was only 235,569 ha in 2019. Discrepancies between reports in the total area of mangroves may reflect the methods used to audit the mangrove estate. In the past, spatial information on the status of mangroves was undertaken using traditional field surveys. Logistically and practically speaking, mangrove swamps are extremely difficult to access. Remote sensing technology is an effective solution to these problems of accessibility and accuracy. Accurate long-term monitoring and mapping of mangroves are essential to support coastal zone management and planning programs in Vietnam.
Mangrove forests in northern Vietnam play a vital role in reducing the impacts of natural disasters, for example, typhoons and storms, which are frequent occurrences in the monsoon season. According to Wang, Mahul [21], about ten tropical typhoons hit the Vietnamese coast every year, often causing severe damage. The Emergency Events Database indicates that the economic damage associated with storms has been rapidly growing in Vietnam [22]. From 1977 to 2017, typhoons with wind speeds above 20 knots struck the country 105 times. It is estimated that about 62% of the population and 44% of the country are affected by typhoons, which kill some 250 people every year [23]. Most large typhoons occur on the coast of northern Vietnam [24] and the landfall frequency of storms has risen significantly in this part of the country [22]. Consequently, mangrove restoration in this region has received special attention from the government and international organizations since the 1990s, and many restoration projects have been undertaken. However, there is a lack of reliable data on mangrove extent, mangrove loss, and assessment of restoration projects for much of the coastline in this part of Vietnam. Furthermore, the integration of mangrove restoration projects with engineering solutions is not well documented.
Remote sensing is an effective tool to characterize and monitor mangrove change over a range of spatial and temporal scales. Remote-sensing techniques have demonstrated a high potential to detect, identify, map, and monitor mangrove conditions and changes over the last three decades, which is reflected in the large number of scientific papers published on this topic [25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]. In Vietnam, remote sensing is used to monitor and evaluate mangrove ecosystems for mangrove forest management. However, most of these activities have concentrated on mangroves in the Mekong Delta [30,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45] and fewer studies have been conducted in northern Vietnam. Most projects in northern Vietnam are concentrated in the highly developed Red River delta (Region 1 [46]) [47,48,49,50,51] and Hai Phong (Region 1) [52,53,54,55,56]. In the less urbanized coastal southern part of Region 2, mangrove change has either not been documented (Nghe An province) or is limited to the reforestation of mangrove forests from 2005 to 2018 in two districts in Thanh Hoa province [57].
Thus, gaps remain in the documentation of mangrove extent and change for parts of northern Vietnam. While yearly reports on the status of mangroves are prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, most of these reports are based on mapping using traditional rudimentary methods, which are complicated, laborious, and time-consuming [58,59]. For example, where it was not possible to undertake surveys by boat or by land grids, topographic maps were used with binoculars in the field to try to delineate mangrove boundaries. Furthermore, the construction of a mangrove forest map requires high accuracy and up-to-date information. Therefore, this study was carried out to understand how the mangrove ecosystems in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces have been altered over the past 47 years. The outcomes will help local authorities to manage coastal mangrove forests more effectively and efficiently in the future. The objectives were to:
(i)
determine the spatial extent of the mangrove forest in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces using remotely-sensed satellite data;
(ii)
estimate changes in the spatial extent of the forest in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces from 1973 to 2020; and
(iii)
document the factors responsible for the changes in the areal extent of the mangrove forest.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The study covered all the mangrove areas in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces in northern Vietnam. The coastlines of these provinces are vulnerable, and coastal erosion along with depositional forces have increased due to unusual climatic fluctuation and human activity. The provinces have a tropical monsoon climate that is influenced by the Gulf of Tokin and the North Central Coast’s tropical climate, and they experience between six to eight typhoons annually. This area has an average annual precipitation of 1700 mm with distinct dry (November–April) and wet (May–October) seasons, and an average temperature from 23 to 24 °C. The lowest temperature in the study area can be <5 °C, and the highest temperature can reach 41 °C. The latitude range of the study’s coastal line is 18°37′45″ N–19°54′42″ N.
There are 24 districts in Thanh Hoa and 18 districts in Nghe An, of which mangrove forests are found in eight, namely Hau Loc, Hoang Hoa, Nga Son, and Tinh Gia districts (Thanh Hoa province); and Vinh city, Nghi Loc, Dien Chau, and Quynh Luu districts (Nghe An province). The study accessed the change in mangrove cover and other land-uses related to mangroves in these eight districts. As the mangroves occupy two geographical regions in Hoang Hoa, Tinh Gia, Nghi Loc, and Quynh Luu districts, the study area was broken into 12 mangrove zones in this research (Figure 1).

2.2. Image Selection

Multiple temporal satellite images were used to classify land use and land cover (LULC) in 7 years (1973, 1988, 1995, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020) (Table 1). The oldest available Landsat image in the research location was in 1973. The year 1988 was selected around the Doi Moi Policy, which was executed in 1986. The third period (1995) related to changes in land policy (executed 1993) and the 327 Program (1993–1998). Changes in land policy (executed 2003), 661 Program (1998–2010), and the end of some NGO mangrove efforts were reasons for selecting the year 2005. The fifth period (2010) covered the early implementation of the Forestry Development Strategy (2006–2020). Most of the mangrove restoration projects funded by the Vietnam government commenced in 2015.
The tidal cycle, tidal inundation, and cloud cover are important coastal features to consider before selecting remote sensing images for mangrove mapping. These factors have the potential to significantly bias mangrove mapping results [60]. Fortunately, optical remote sensing data, including Landsat data, offer time-series remotely-sensed images, which provide more options to avoid the effects of tidal inundation on the accuracy of mangrove mapping [60,61]. Additionally, knowledge of tidal levels at the time of the acquired remotely-sensed images can be used to help eliminate errors [62]. In this study, tidal tables together with information of local tidal regimes obtained from local people during the field survey were synthesized to help select images for mangrove mapping.
We also used secondary data for mangrove afforestation and change analysis. The 2015 land cover map and forest cover maps (1983, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015) with map scales of 1:50,000 were obtained from the Thanh Hoa and Nghe An departments of Agriculture and Rural Development. Legal documents [63,64,65,66] and other relevant documents [67,68] concerning mangrove management and development in the study area were reviewed. Also, to better understand the management status of mangrove forests and any historical changes across time, local records were examined to confirm the presence of mangroves in the past.

2.3. Data Pre-Processing

Landsat 1 Level-1 images were downloaded from the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Landsat (5 and 8) Level-2 images were obtained from EROS Science Processing Architecture (ESPA). The Landsat (5 and 8) Level-2 images were then used to classify the reflectance data using the NDVI method in combination with visual interpretation. Meanwhile, Landsat 1 Level-1 images were pre-processed using the linear contrast stretch and histogram equalization stretch methods [69] to improve the quality of images before visual interpretation. These processes were undertaken with ArcGIS 10.3.
A polygon was created and then used to define the areas of mangrove forests in the pre-processed Landsat images. These images were clipped to extract the areas of interest (the total AOI was about 32,000 ha) where mangrove forests were more likely to be present (e.g., low-lying areas, intertidal zones, estuaries, and rivers), and to exclude large areas where mangrove forests do not occur (e.g., far inland, highlands, and open ocean) before the image classification was undertaken.

2.4. Land Cover Classification

The mapping unit used for this study was at a scale of 1/150,000. This scale was chosen as it was most suitable for Landsat 8 and Landsat 5 images. To construct thematic land cover maps, including mangrove forest maps, this study mainly used NDVI [26] combined with the visual interpretation approach. NDVI was selected because it is one of the most widely used change detection indices for cultivated land [70] and vegetation monitoring [71]. Threshold values of NDVI for each land cover type were determined and then used to construct a thematic land cover map for each selected year with the support of the ground reference data. Firstly, we used Google Earth and ground data (field sample survey) to exactly define the presence of mangroves, mudflats, water surface, aquaculture, other forest, and other land use on Landsat Level—2 images (NDVI images). Then, we defined NDVI maximum and minimum values for each land cover type. Lastly, we used ArcGIS 10.3 software to classify the six land cover types. NDVI index values are usually divided into levels: a negative value to 0 refers to water; values of less than 0.1 usually represent soil, rock, sand, or snow; values from 0.2 to 0.5 are bushes, grass, or dry fields; and values of 0.6 to 0.9 or close to 1.0 are trees [72,73]. The NDVI output is a greyscale raster map with index values ranging from 1 to −1. These threshold values were then used to construct a thematic land cover map for each year. These thresholds were confirmed in previous studies [74,75,76,77].
In addition, the visual interpretation approach used expert knowledge and experience to separate the areas of mangrove forests and other classes from remote sensing imagery. This approach was used to support NDVI, and to identify NDVI thresholds and classify reference data by using higher spatial resolution Google Earth [78,79] (on Google Earth software, older images were given by using the ‘show historical imagery’ function) along with a data survey, forest cover map, and land cover maps The various steps taken in this study are summarized in the flow chart in Figure 2. The final classification result was the combined NDVI method and visual interpretation.

2.5. Accuracy Assessment

In this study, a thematic land cover map derived with classification mainly according to NDVI values each selected year was considered to be accurate if it gave an unbiased representation of the land cover categories [80]. Accuracy assessments were conducted on the 2020 Landsat images by comparing the classification results with reference data that accurately reflected true land covers [80]. This study’s 360 field sample points were acquired from a field investigation in August 2020 and recorded using the global positioning system (GPS). The field survey was conducted to collect ground information on LULC, including forest type, water bodies, aquaculture, bare land, and others.
We also collected 435 sample points from high-resolution images (Google Earth) for the classified images. The sample points were randomly distributed across the six land cover classes (Table 2). The 795 validation points were stratified randomly by a sampling approach by area and were then used to compare with the 2020 land cover map classifications based on NDVI thresholds. Moreover, reference data and maps (land cover maps in 2005, 2010, and 2015 with a scale of 1:50,000; forest cover maps in 1983, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015) were used.
Validation points collected from the field data survey and Google Earth were used to assess only the accuracy of the 2020 classified map. The accuracy for earlier classifications were also assessed by using land cover maps, forest cover maps, Google Earth, and a data survey. The ground data for earlier years were not of high reliability, and this would have affected the accuracy of classification for that period. The field sample points were defined by using forest cover and land cover maps before conducting the field data survey. Of the 795 validation points collected from the ground reference data and Google Earth for six land-use classes (Table 2), 202 were in aquaculture, 166 were in mangrove forests, 68 were in mudflats, 73 were in other forests, 154 were in other land use, and 132 were in water. To evaluate the accuracy of land cover maps and assess the accuracy of the NDVI approach each selected year, users, producers, and overall accuracy with kappa statistics were derived from the error matrix. According to Anand [81], once a classification exercise has been carried out, there is a need to determine the degree of error in the end product, including identified categories on the map. Errors are the result of incorrect labelling of the pixels for a category. The most used method of representing the degree of accuracy of classification is to build a k × k array, where k represents the number of categories. The resulting error matrix is useful for determining overall errors for each category and misclassifications by category; as a result, it is also known as the confusion matrix. The strength of a confusion matrix is that it identifies the nature of the classification errors, and their quantities [81]. The kappa coefficient is a measure of the agreement between two maps considering all elements of the error matrix, and it is defined in terms of error matrix according to Anand [81]. Kappa values were categorized into groups by value where: kappa values that were zero indicated no agreement; from 0.41–0.6 were considered as moderate agreement; 0.61–0.8 were regarded as substantial agreement; and 0.81–1 referred to an almost perfect agreement [80,82,83,84].

3. Results

3.1. Classification and Accuracy Assessment

All the Landsat images in Table 1 were used to produce the NDVI LULC classification maps for the study area. NDVI thresholds for each land cover type were defined from the calculated ratio difference between the measured canopy reflectance in the red and near-infrared bands, as follows: mangrove forest (0.57–1.0); other forest (0.49–0.56); other land use (0.26–0.48); aquaculture (0.17–0.25); mudflat (0.01–0.16); and water (0.0–1.0). These threshold values were then used to construct a thematic land cover map for each assessed year.
The error matrix produced (Table 3) showed that results of the accuracy assessment for the 2020 classification indicate a high rate of classification accuracy with a user accuracy as follows: 100% for mapping mangrove forest; 98.6% for other forests; 94.7% for aquaculture; 100% for mudflat; 99.2% for water; and 94.2% for other land use, giving an overall accuracy of 97.2%. Also, the kappa coefficient of 0.97 revealed a substantial agreement between the classification results and reference data. The classification accuracy was averaged for twelve study areas. There were small differences in classification accuracy between the areas and the magnitude of the errors was ±2.7%. Thus, the results confirmed the potential effectiveness of using recent Landsat data for monitoring the spatiotemporal distribution of mangrove forests in the study areas.

3.2. LULC Changes in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An Provinces from 1973 to 2020

Multi-temporal changes in the extent of mangrove forests in the study regions are detailed in Table 4. From 1973 to 2020, the overall mangrove forest area increased in Nghe An and Thanh Hoa by 256.5 and 431 ha (equivalent to 8.2% per year and 2.5% per year respectively. Over the same period, the aquaculture area increased by 1328 ha in Nghe An and 3333 ha in Thanh Hoa provinces. In contrast, the mudflat areas declined by 880 ha in Nghe An and 4572 ha in Thanh Hoa provinces.
In September 2020, there were 215.6 ha of mudflat cover in Nghe An province and 457.9 ha in Thanh Hoa province. The inter-tidal parts of the latter areas provide potential targets for future mangrove restoration projects. The areas of other forest, other land use, and water fluctuated slightly in Nghe An province, but they changed markedly for Thanh Hoa province. In particular, the area of other forest in Thanh Hoa province dropped from 3731.8 ha in 1973 to 660.8 ha in 2020, and the other land use category increased from 5992 ha to 8910 ha over the same period.
From 1973–1988, mangrove cover nearly doubled from 66.5 to 124.5 ha in Nghe An province, but it declined from about 366 ha to 120 ha in Thanh Hoa province. From 1988 to 1995, the mangrove area declined in both provinces, especially in Thanh Hoa, where it decreased to 62 ha in 1995. From 1995 to 2005, there was a marked increase in the area of mangroves to nearly 340 ha in Thanh Hoa and 282 ha in Nghe An by 2005. In the next five years, the mangrove cover in Thanh Hoa fell slightly, but it increased slightly in Nghe An. Between 2010 and 2015, about 40 ha in Nghe An province and 170 ha in Thanh Hoa province were planted to mangroves. By August 2020, mangrove cover in Thanh Hoa province was about 797 ha (increase of 431 ha over 1973), while the figure for Nghe An province was about 323 ha (increase of 257 ha over 1973).

3.3. Change in Mangrove Cover at the District Level from 1973 to 2020

Mangrove cover and change in mangrove cover differed between districts within the two provinces (Table 5). Mangroves were evident in Vinh city, Nghi Loc, Hau Loc, and Nga Son districts in 1973. In 1995, mangroves were present in Dien Chau and Tinh Gia districts, but had disappeared in Hoang Hoa district. The period from 1973–2020 witnessed fluctuations in mangrove cover in Hau Loc and Nga Son districts. By 2020, the mangrove cover in Nga Son district was similar to what it was in 1973. By contrast, there was almost constant mangrove cover (about 50 ha) in Vinh city from 1973 to 2020. By 2020, mangrove cover was greatest in Hau Loc (256.8 ha) and Nga Son (315.5 ha) and least in Nghi Loc district (47.1 ha) and Vinh city (55.2 ha) (Table 5).

3.4. Drivers of Change in Mangrove Cover

Changes in mangrove forest extent were observed across most districts (Table 5) because of both natural and anthropogenic drivers of change. The main drivers of change in mangrove forest in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces were aquaculture, other land use, and afforestation projects. Whilst we did observe some natural seedling recruitment of mangroves along river edges and mudflats in our field surveys, most seedlings did not survive longer than a few months.
  • Aquaculture
Mangrove cover in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces was appreciably affected by aquaculture, which depended on the period and location. From 1973 to 1988, aquaculture had a small regional impact on mangrove extent in both provinces. The loss from aquaculture was only 8.2% (28.3 ha) in Thanh Hoa province, while the area of mangroves in Nghe An province was not affected by aquaculture. The percentage of conversion to aquaculture ponds increased steadily over the next five years. Aquaculture accounted for 31.3 ha (28.2%) loss of mangroves in Thanh Hoa, and 5 ha (21.9%) in Nghe An. It can be seen in Hau Loc district (Figure 3) that aquaculture was present in the northeast in 1988. This change resulted from the Doi Moi (Renovation) policy which was implemented in 1986. From 1995–2005, there were notable increases in the area of aquaculture in both Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces. This is illustrated (Figure S1) using Nga Son district, where aquaculture expanded in the north. On average, aquaculture accounted for 49.6% (28.8 ha) and 95.7% (16.2 ha) of the mangrove loss in Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces, respectively. Aquaculture remained the main reason for mangrove loss (89.2%) in Thanh Hoa province from 2005 to 2010 but was a smaller contributor (27.5%) in Nghe An province. Between 2010 and 2015, the rate of mangrove loss from the expansion of aquaculture was more than 70% in both provinces. Since 2015, conversion to aquaculture has continued at a constant rate in Thanh Hoa province but declined to about 50% in Nghe An province.
  • Other land use
Other land use was also an important driver of mangrove deforestation. In particular, the study shows that the expansion of rice production was responsible for driving mangrove deforestation. On average, agriculture expansion for rice production accounted for 7.3% and 57.4% mangrove loss, respectively, in Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces from 1973 to 2020. The conversion rate to other land use was particularly dominant in Thanh Hoa province, especially from 1973 to 1995. The percentage of conversion to other land use was highest at about 300 ha (86.7%) in Thanh Hoa province in 1973 to 1988, then declined to 30.2% in 1995. The river mouth in Nga Son district (Thanh Hoa province) illustrates how rice production resulted in the area of mangroves dropping from 318.7 ha in 1973 to 63.8 ha in 1988 (Table 5).
  • Afforestation
Afforestation projects contributed considerably to the change in mangrove area during the research period. In the river mouth in Nga Son district, in the five years from 2015–2020, more than 211 ha of mangroves were established on the mudflat area (Table 5, Figure 4). The change is apparent on Landsat images year by year (Figure 4). The satellite imagery revealed young mangroves, and hence mangroves planted in recent years were able to be included in the 2020 land use maps. We were able to detect 6 month old mangroves on Landsat and Google Earth images.
It is evident from the satellite imagery that not all afforestation projects were successful (example of Nga Son is illustrated in Figure 4). For example, from 1988 to 1995, parts of the afforestation estate disappeared to mudflat, totaling 45.3 ha (40.8%) and 15.5 ha (67.5%) in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces, respectively. This means that restoration efforts during this period in Thanh Hoa were not successful. According to local people in Minh Loc commune (Hau Loc district, Thanh Hoa province), some mangrove restoration programs failed in Minh Loc commune in 2015, 2017, and 2019. Likewise, survival rates of mangroves in other projects in Nga Son district were not high; thus, some projects had to be replanted (Figure 4). Reasons given for these failures include natural disasters and change in land use, and these are discussed in the following sections.

4. Discussion

4.1. Mangrove Extent

Mangrove cover fluctuated greatly in the two provinces over time. However, overall, the increase in the mangrove area of 584.2 ha in Thanh Hoa province and 124.2 ha in Nghe An province since 1973 is a successful outcome for protecting this vulnerable coastal region of Vietnam. In a previous study that covered a small part of the study region, Hoa et al. [57] concluded that mangrove forests in Hau Loc and Nga Son districts had increased by 278 ha between 2005 and 2018. Our assessment of these districts is marginally higher. As [58] used supervised classification techniques, this may have resulted in an underestimation of the mangrove area due to a higher occurrence of misclassification. Our study provides a detailed analysis of the areal extent and distribution of Thanh Hoa and Nghe An’s mangrove forests. However, more qualitative and quantitative information concerning the composition and condition of mangrove forests is needed for planning future afforestation and conservation efforts. Remote sensing technology allows monitoring of mangrove forests to be faster, more efficient, and with a broader scope than with conventional methods [86]. Remote sensing has been used to identify attributes such as biomass [87,88,89], carbon stocks [90,91], species [92,93,94,95], and mangrove health [96,97,98].

4.2. Drivers of Change Over Time

The drivers of change on a hectare basis over the period of 1973 to 2020 were in the order of aquaculture > other land use > natural factors > afforestation.
  • Aquaculture
Globally, mangrove forests have experienced extensive deforestation owing to the global demand for commodities such as farmed shrimp and fish [99,100]. In this study, aquaculture accounted for 42.5% and 29.8% of the mangroves lost in Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces, respectively, from 1973 to 2020. From 2005 to 2010, conversion to aquaculture caused significant mangrove loss in Than Hoa province. The aquaculture industry is primarily responsible for mangrove deforestation in Southeast Asia over the past 30 years [9,101]. Hence, this region is well known as a global hotspot of mangrove loss and fragmentation [102]. For example, aquaculture contributed to 33% loss of mangroves in Thailand and 63% in Indonesia [99]. In Vietnam, the Doi Moi Policy launched in 1986 encouraged trade liberalization and export growth, including planned and unplanned responses of the domestic agricultural sector to global markets. This led to the large-scale conversion of mangrove forests to shrimp farms [13,103]. An example of conversion to aquaculture and other land in Tinh Gia district in 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 is evident on satellite images (Figure S2).
  • Other land use
The contribution of other land use to mangrove loss was about 7.3% and 57.8% in Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces, respectively, over the research period of 47 years. Rice production has been a major driver of mangrove loss in many countries. It is estimated that agriculture expansion for rice production, primarily in Southern Asia, accounted for more than 20% of the total mangrove change in the region from 2000 to 2012 [102]. The expansion of rice agriculture across Myanmar is responsible for driving the fastest rate of mangrove deforestation of any country in Southeast Asia, with 87.6% loss occurring in the 2000s [102,104]. In Vietnam, rice production is estimated to have contributed about 10% of the total loss of mangroves [102] including parts of northern Vietnam [80].
  • Natural factors
In 2005, a peak tide and a river storm surge co-occurred as typhoons hit Thanh Hoa province. All shrimp farms were seriously damaged, and many shrimp farmers fell deeply into debt [105]. The surge destroyed 3.7 km of the coastal dike system protecting Da Loc (Hau Loc, Thanh Hoa). Floodwaters inundated seven out of ten villages, lasting for several hours. More than 100 houses were heavily damaged or destroyed, with all shrimp farms and 500 hectares of crops lost. The loss of mangroves was not recorded, but community members later discovered that the only section of dike spared by the storm was the 4.7 km section protected by mangroves [105]. Therefore, since 2005, local people have realized the essential roles of mangrove forests in protecting the dike system and their livelihoods against typhoons. Engineering actions such as concrete barriers have been implemented to reduce storm damage. The planting of mangrove forests in vulnerable areas and the protection of older mangroves subsequently received more active local participation. Consequently, mangrove forests have expanded due to active local participation in mangrove forest management in close cooperation with the local authorities.
Significant areas of mangroves (36%) were transformed to mudflats in Nghe An province, and nearly 14% changed to water. Factors that contributed to this include failed mangrove restoration projects, coastal erosion, storms, and typhoons. Sea level rise may also be a contributing factor [106] but there is no reliable information for this part of Vietnam. Due to coastal erosion, mangroves tend to move landward or die due to bank slumping, especially in deltaic regions [107,108]. The loss of mudflat areas through erosion decreased the number of potential areas for planting mangroves in both Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces. For example, in the river mouth in Nga Son and Hau Loc districts (Figure 3 and Figure 4), the total mudflat area decreased by over 4000 ha from 2005 to 2010. Loss of mangroves in Nghe An in 2015 to 2020 has been attributed to the frequency of storms in the area [109]. However, policies on coastal forest management, protection, rehabilitation, and development in response to climate change were also launched in this period [63,64].
Damage sustained by mangrove forests from storms and tsunamis has been documented in other studies. For instance, after examining the extent of mangrove destruction and subsequent recovery in Thai Lan after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Kamthonkiat, Rodfai [110] found that the tsunami reduced the mangrove area by 5% (1054 ha). Smith, Anderson [111] estimated that 1250 ha of mangroves were initially lost from the impacts of Hurricane Wilma in 2005 on Florida mangroves. They also reported that frequent hurricanes hitting the area have drastically altered the mangrove ecosystems by changing some of them to mudflats.
  • Afforestation
Development projects, as well as increasing local participation [67] in mangrove management, have helped to increase mangrove cover. For example, community members planted 277 ha of mangrove in Hau Loc and 181 ha in Nga Son in 2007, with a survival rate of 70 to 90% [105]. The participation of local people in planting, maintaining, and protecting the young forests has also led to cost savings, efficiency gains, and strong community buy-in for forest protection. In the 1990s, the coastal zone in Hoang Hoa, Hau Loc, Tinh Gia, and Nga Son districts (Thanh Hoa province), and Nghi Loc, Vinh city, Dien Chau, and Quynh Luu districts (Nghe An province) was the focus of a project entitled Environmental Preservation Project, implemented by NGOs. Furthermore, to increase the resilience of communities to natural disasters and with support from IFRC/JRC, 1245 ha in Thanh Hoa province and 1096 ha in Nghe An province were planted from 1997 to 2010. These projects had individual agreements with households who participated in the planting and protection of mangrove forests. Also, the provincial Red Cross chapter made direct payments to local households.
Mangrove forests in Nghe An increased from 1973 to 1995 due to mangrove afforestation programs funded by NGOs. International involvement in mangrove planting projects became more evident from 1990 to 2005, and thousands of hectares of mangroves were planted in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces (Table S1). However, over the decade from 2010 to 2020, there was only a moderate increase in the mangrove area of 170 ha and 40 ha in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces, respectively, despite new mangrove planting projects (funded by the IFRC/JRC and CARE, Table S1) and implementation of the national plan for forest protection and development for 2010 to 2020 (Table S2) [63]. Over the last decades, the area of aquaculture increased greatly, including 286 ha in the river mouth in Nga Son and 359 ha in Hau Loc, which impacted some mangrove plantings.
From project documents, it is estimated that about 6318 ha of mangrove will be planted by funds from NGOs and the state from the early 1990s to 2023 in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces. This estimate is subject to change as it depends on many factors. For example, according to the National Target Program to Respond to Climate Change (Table S2), 300 ha of mangroves were to be planted in Thanh Hoa province from 2014 to 2015 [64]. However, only 194.4 ha of mangroves were planted as the approved budget was not fully allocated [112]. By contrast, programs for sea dyke maintenance in Thanh Hoa (Table S2) were fully implemented as in the approved plans [109,113].
By comparing the data in project documents and government audits, we estimate that the average rate of success of mangrove restoration programs in the two provinces is about 30%. Furthermore, nearly 5000 ha of mangroves scheduled to be planted in the next three years will help to redress the historic loss of mangroves. The survival rate of mangrove restoration projects in this area has been a challenge. Therefore, engineering solutions to improve the survival rate of mangrove restoration programs should be considered as priority studies.
  • Classification and accuracy assessment
Regarding LULC classification, differences in the area of water in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An overtime could be due to water level variations from the low and high tide regimes in two images collected for comparison [33,61,114], and temporal differences between the two images [61]. In fact, there was a tidally temporal difference between images captured over the years in this study. As the tide came in or out of the study areas, some areas that belonged to mudflats or water, were covered by water or mudflats, thus narrowing or expanding its areas. However, this did not affect the mapping of mangroves.
In this study, accuracy assessment showed that it was possible to estimate mangrove cover and other LULC classes in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces using Landsat data. The accuracy of the individual classes showed that NDVI was effective in separating mangroves and LULC classes. Mangroves produced higher user and producer accuracies than other LULC classes, indicating that mangroves were well classified. The producer and user’s accuracies of other land use were lower than the other classes, which could be due to spectral similarity between other land uses (such as rice fields) and other forests. However, the kappa coefficient was 0.97 (Table 4), showing that there was a substantial agreement between the classification results and reference data [83,84,115].

5. Conclusions

The present study used multi-date Landsat imagery, processed using the NDVI method, to quantify changes in the distribution of mangroves in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces. The main drivers of mangrove change were: aquaculture > other land use > natural factors > afforestation. The study estimated that over the last 47 years (from 1973 to 2020), mangrove forests increased by approximately 2.5% to 797.1 ha in Thanh Hoa province and 8.2% to 323 ha in Nghe An province due to the deposition of sediment and mangrove plantation programs. The success of mangrove restoration efforts relies heavily on the involvement of local communities. We suggest that agencies engaged in managing coastal infrastructure and mangroves should employ remote sensing approaches for sustainable planning and management of mangrove forests in tandem with the local communes.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/f12050637/s1, Figure S1: NDVI LULC classification map of the river mouth in Nga Son district, Thanh Hoa province obtained from Landsat 1 for 1973 (a); Landsat 5 for 1988 (b); 1995 (c); 2005 (d); 2010 (e); and Landsat 8 for 2015 (f) and 2020 (g). Figure S2: Loss of planted mangroves by aquaculture in Tinh Gia district, Thanh Hoa province from 2014 to 2020; loss of mangrove by aquaculture—a; and loss of mangroves by other land uses—b and c. Table S1: Mangrove restoration areas are funded by NGOs in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces from the 1990s to 2020. Table S2: Mangrove restoration areas are funded by the Vietnam government in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An provinces from the 1990s to 2020.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.T.T.N. and B.D.; Data curation, H.T.T.N. and T.V.L.; Formal analysis, H.H.N.; Investigation, T.V.L., H.Q.N., and T.V.N.; Methodology, H.H.N.; Resources, T.V.L., H.Q.N. and T.V.N.; Software, H.H.N.; Supervision, B.D.; Validation, B.D.; Visualization, G.E.S.H. and B.D.; Writing—original draft, H.T.T.N.; Writing—review & editing, B.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Murdoch University, Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training, and the Institute of Ecology and Works Protection (Project “Integrated solutions to restore and sustainably develop coastal protection forest in Thanh Hoa province, code: DTĐL.CN-34/17”).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We thank Nguyen Huy Hoang (GIS expert, Silviculture Research Institute, Vietnamese Academy of Forest Sciences, Duc Thang, Bac Tu Liem, Ha Noi, Vietnam) for drawing the maps, Ta Van Van (Engineering expert, Institute of Ecology and Works Protection, Vietnam Academy for Water Resources, 267 Chua Boc, Dong Da, Ha Noi, Vietnam) for providing data on Vietnamese mangroves, and the Center for Ecology and Reservoir Protection (Institute of Ecology and Works Protection, Vietnam Academy for Water Resources, 267 Chua Boc, Dong Da, Ha Noi, Vietnam) for providing data on mangrove forests in Thanh Hoa province.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Koch, E.W.; Barbier, E.B.; Silliman, B.R.; Reed, D.J.; Perillo, G.M.; Hacker, S.D.; Granek, E.F.; Primavera, J.H.; Muthiga, N.; Polasky, S.; et al. Non-linearity in ecosystem services: Temporal and spatial variability in coastal protection. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nagelkerken, I.; Blaber, S.; Bouillon, S.; Green, P.; Haywood, M.; Kirton, L.; Meynecke, J.-O.; Pawlik, J.; Penrose, H.M.; Sasekumar, A.; et al. The habitat function of mangroves for terrestrial and marine fauna: A review. Aquat. Bot. 2008, 89, 155–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Ouyang, X.; Lee, S.Y.; Connolly, R.M.; Kainz, M.J. Spatially-explicit valuation of coastal wetlands for cyclone mitigation in Australia and China. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 3035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hochard, J.P.; Hamilton, S.; Barbier, E.B. Mangroves shelter coastal economic activity from cyclones. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 12232–12237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Atwood, T.B.; Connolly, R.M.; Almahasheer, H.; Carnell, P.E.; Duarte, C.M.; Lewis, C.J.E.; Irigoien, X.; Kelleway, J.J.; Lavery, P.S.; Macreadie, P.I.; et al. Global patterns in mangrove soil carbon stocks and losses. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2017, 7, 523–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Adame, M.F.; Brown, C.J.; Bejarano, M.; Herrera-Silveira, J.A.; Ezcurra, P.; Kauffman, J.B.; Birdsey, R.A. The undervalued contribution of mangrove protection in Mexico to carbon emission targets. Conserv. Lett. A J. Soc. Conversat. Biol. 2018, 11, e12445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Lovelock, C.E.; Cahoon, D.R.; Friess, D.A.; Guntenspergen, G.R.; Krauss, K.W.; Reef, R.; Rogers, K.; Saunders, M.L.; Sidik, F.; Swales, A.; et al. The vulnerability of Indo-Pacific mangrove forests to sea-level rise. Nature 2015, 526, 559–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Schuerch, M.; Spencer, T.; Temmerman, S.; Kirwan, M.L.; Wolff, C.; Lincke, D.; McOwen, C.J.; Pickering, M.D.; Reef, R.; Vafeidis, A.T.; et al. Future response of global coastal wetlands to sea-level rise. Nature 2018, 561, 231–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Valiela, I.; Bowen, J.L.; York, J.K. Mangrove Forests: One of the World’s Threatened Major Tropical Environments: At least 35% of the area of mangrove forests has been lost in the past two decades, losses that exceed those for tropical rain forests and coral reefs, two other well-known threatened environments. Bioscience 2001, 51, 807–815. [Google Scholar]
  10. Hamilton, S.; Casey, D. Creation of a high spatio-temporal resolution global database of continuous mangrove forest cover for the 21st century (CGMFC-21). Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2016, 25, 729–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Friess, D.A.; Rogers, K.; Lovelock, C.E.; Krauss, K.W.; Hamilton, S.E.; Lee, S.Y.; Lucas, R.; Primavera, J.; Rajkaran, A.; Shi, S. The state of the world’s mangrove forests: Past, present, and future. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2019, 44, 89–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Mejía-Rentería, J.C.; Castellanos-Galindo, G.A.; Cantera-Kintz, J.R.; Hamilton, S.E. A comparison of Colombian Pacific mangrove extent estimations: Implications for the conservation of a unique Neotropical tidal forest. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2018, 212, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hong, P.N.; San, H.T. Mangroves of Vietnam; IUCN: Bangkok, Thailand, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ratner, B.D. Wetlands Management in Vietnam: Issues and Perspectives; WorldFish: Penang, Malaysia, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  15. Tuan, L.; Yukihiro, M.; Dao, P.; Tho, N.H.; Dao, Q. Environmental management in mangrove areas. Environ. Inform. Arch. 2003, 1, 38–52. [Google Scholar]
  16. FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015 Desk Reference; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  17. Tuan, L.; Hong, P.N. Problems of coastal environment and restoration in Vietnam. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop Yearbook of Vietnam, Hanoi, Vietnam, 5–7 December 2008. (In Vietnamese). [Google Scholar]
  18. Forest Inventory and Planning Institute. Results of National Forest Survey Following Decision No 405/TTg-KTN of the Prime Minister, Dated 16 March 2007; Forest Inventory and Planning Institute (FIPI): Hanoi, Vietnam, 2007. (In Vietnamese) [Google Scholar]
  19. MARD. Decision No. 3158/QD-BNN-TCLN “Announcing Forest Status in 2015–2016”; MARD: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  20. MARD. Announcement of National Forest Status in 2019; MARD: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2020. (In Vietnamese) [Google Scholar]
  21. Wang, X.; Mahul, O.; Stutley, C. Weathering the Storm: Options for Disaster Risk Financing in Vietnam; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  22. Takagi, H. Statistics on typhoon landfalls in Vietnam: Can recent increases in economic damage be attributed to storm trends? Urban. Clim. 2019, 30, 100506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tinh, D.Q. Vietnam Country Report 1999; Asian Disaster Reducton Center (ADRC): Kobe, Japan, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  24. Takagi, H.; Esteban, M.; Thao, N.D. Introduction: Coastal Disasters and Climate Change in Vietnam; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  25. Hardisky, M.; Gross, M.; Klemas, V. Remote sensing of coastal wetlands. BioScience 1986, 36, 453–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Green, E.; Clark, C.D.; Mumby, P.J.; Edwards, A.J.; Ellis, A.C. Remote sensing techniques for mangrove mapping. Int. J. Remote Sens. 1998, 19, 935–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Blasco, F.; Gauquelin, T.; Rasolofoharinoro, M.; Denis, J.; Aizpuru, M.; Caldairou, V. Recent advances in mangrove studies using remote sensing data. Mar. Freshw. Res. 1998, 49, 287–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Heumann, B.W. Satellite remote sensing of mangrove forests: Recent advances and future opportunities. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 2011, 35, 87–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Held, A.; Ticehurst, C.; Lymburner, L.; Williams, N. High resolution mapping of tropical mangrove ecosystems using hyperspectral and radar remote sensing. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2003, 24, 2739–2759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tuan, V.; Oppelt, N.; Leinenkugel, P.; Kuenzer, C. Remote sensing in mapping mangrove ecosystems—An object-based approach. Remote Sens. 2013, 5, 183–201. [Google Scholar]
  31. Lucas, R.; Van De Kerchove, R.; Otero, V.; Lagomasino, D.; Fatoyinbo, L.; Omar, H.; Satyanarayana, B.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F. Structural characterisation of mangrove forests achieved through combining multiple sources of remote sensing data. Remote Sens. Environ. 2020, 237, 111543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bindu, G.; Rajan, P.; Jishnu, E.; Joseph, K.A. Carbon stock assessment of mangroves using remote sensing and geographic information system. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 2020, 23, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Thi, V.T.; Xuan, A.T.T.; Nguyen, H.P.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F.; Koedam, N. Application of remote sensing and GIS for detection of long-term mangrove shoreline changes in Mui Ca Mau, Vietnam. Biogeosciences 2014, 11, 3781. [Google Scholar]
  34. Thu, P.M.; Populus, J. Status and changes of mangrove forest in Mekong Delta: Case study in Tra Vinh, Vietnam. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2007, 71, 98–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Luong, N.V.; Tateishi, R.; Hoan, N.T. Analysis of an impact of succession in mangrove forest association using remote sensing and GIS technology. J. Geogr. Geol. 2015, 7, 106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Lien, P.T.; Brabyn, L. Monitoring mangrove biomass change in Vietnam using SPOT images and an object-based approach combined with machine learning algorithms. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2017, 128, 86–97. [Google Scholar]
  37. Tuan, V.; Kuenzer, C.; Oppelt, N. How remote sensing supports mangrove ecosystem service valuation: A case study in Ca Mau province, Vietnam. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 14, 67–75. [Google Scholar]
  38. Son, N.T.; Chen, C.-F.; Chang, N.-B.; Chen, C.-R.; Chang, L.-Y.; Thanh, B.-X. Mangrove mapping and change detection in Ca Mau Peninsula, Vietnam, using Landsat data and object-based image analysis. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2014, 8, 503–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tong, P.; Auda, Y.; Populus, J.; Aizpuru, M.; Habshi, A.A.; Blasco, F. Assessment from space of mangroves evolution in the Mekong Delta, in relation to extensive shrimp farming. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2004, 25, 4795–4812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Binh, T.; Vromant, N.; Hung, N.T.; Hens, L.; Boon, E. Land cover changes between 1968 and 2003 in Cai Nuoc, Ca Mau peninsula, Vietnam. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2005, 7, 519–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Van, T.; Wilson, N.; Thanh Tung, H.; Quisthoudt, K.; Quang Minh, V.; Tuan, L.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F.; Koedam, N. Changes in mangrove vegetation area and character in a war and land use change affected region of Vietnam (Mui Ca Mau) over six decades. Acta Oecologica 2015, 63, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Hauser, L.T.; Vu, G.N.; Nguyen, B.A.; Dade, E.; Nguyen, H.M.; Nguyen, T.T.Q.; Le, T.Q.; Vu, L.H.; Tong, A.T.H.; Pham, H.V. Uncovering the spatio-temporal dynamics of land cover change and fragmentation of mangroves in the Ca Mau peninsula, Vietnam using multi-temporal SPOT satellite imagery (2004–2013). Appl. Geogr. 2017, 86, 197–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Tuan, V.; Kuenzer, C. Can Gio Mangrove Biosphere Reserve Evaluation 2012: Current status, Dynamics, and Ecosystem Services; International Union for the Conservation of Nature, IUCN: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  44. Dat, P.T.; Le, N.N.; Ha, N.T.; Nguyen, L.V.; Xia, J.; Yokoya, N.; To, T.T.; Trinh, H.X.; Kieu, L.Q.; Takeuchi, W. Estimating Mangrove Above-Ground Biomass Using Extreme Gradient Boosting Decision Trees Algorithm with Fused Sentinel-2 and ALOS-2 PALSAR-2 Data in Can Gio Biosphere Reserve, Vietnam. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 777. [Google Scholar]
  45. Pham, M.H.; Do, T.H.; Pham, V.-M.; Bui, Q.-T. Mangrove forest classification and aboveground biomass estimation using an atom search algorithm and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0233110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hong, P.N. Ecology of Mangrove Vegetation in Vietnam; Hanoi Pedagogic University: Hanoi, Vietnam, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  47. Van Thao, N.; Thanh, T.D.; Saito, Y.; Gouramanis, C. Monitoring coastline change in the Red River Delta using remotely sensed data. Vietnam J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 2013, 13, 151–160. [Google Scholar]
  48. Dat, P.T.; Yokoya, N.; Xia, J.; Ha, N.T.; Le, N.N.; Nguyen, T.T.T.; Dao, T.H.; Vu, T.T.P.; Pham, T.D.; Takeuchi, W. Comparison of Machine Learning Methods for Estimating Mangrove Above-Ground Biomass Using Multiple Source Remote Sensing Data in the Red River Delta Biosphere Reserve, Vietnam. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1334. [Google Scholar]
  49. Seto, K.C.; Fragkias, M. Mangrove conversion and aquaculture development in Vietnam: A remote sensing-based approach for evaluating the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2007, 17, 486–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ngoc, T.; Demaine, H. Potentials for different models for freshwater aquaculture development in the Red River Delta (Vietnam) using GIS analysis. Nagathe Iclarm Q. 1996, 19, 29–32. [Google Scholar]
  51. Lan, P.T.; Son, T.S.; Gunasekara, K.; Nhan, N.T. Application of Remote Sensing and GIS technology for monitoring coastal changes in estuary area of the Red river system, Vietnam. J. Korean Soc. Surv. Geod. Photogramm. Cartogr. 2013, 31, 529–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Hoa, N.H.; Ngoc, T.L.T.; Le An, T.; Nghia, N.H.; Khanh, D.L.V.; Thu, N.H.T.; Bohm, S.; Premnath, C.F.S. Monitoring changes in coastal mangrove extents using multi-temporal satellite data in selected communes, Hai Phong city, Vietnam. For. Soc. 2020, 4, 256–270. [Google Scholar]
  53. Dat, P.T.; Yoshino, K.; Le, N.N.; Bui, D.T. Estimating aboveground biomass of a mangrove plantation on the Northern coast of Vietnam using machine learning techniques with an integration of ALOS-2 PALSAR-2 and Sentinel-2A data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2018, 39, 7761–7788. [Google Scholar]
  54. Dat, P.T.; Bui, D.T.; Yoshino, K.; Le, N.N. Optimized rule-based logistic model tree algorithm for mapping mangrove species using ALOS PALSAR imagery and GIS in the tropical region. Environ. Earth Sci. 2018, 77, 159. [Google Scholar]
  55. Dat, P.T.; Yoshino, K. Aboveground biomass estimation of mangrove species using ALOS-2 PALSAR imagery in Hai Phong City, Vietnam. J. Appl. Remote Sens. 2017, 11, 026010. [Google Scholar]
  56. Dat, P.T.; Yoshino, K.; Bui, D.T. Biomass estimation of Sonneratia caseolaris (l.) Engler at a coastal area of Hai Phong city (Vietnam) using ALOS-2 PALSAR imagery and GIS-based multi-layer perceptron neural networks. Giscience Remote Sens. 2017, 54, 329–353. [Google Scholar]
  57. Hoa, N.H.; Nghia, N.H.; Nguyen, H.T.T.; Le, A.T.; Tran, L.T.N.; Duong, L.V.K.; Bohm, S.; Furniss, M.J. Classification methods for mapping mangrove extents and drivers of change in Thanh Hoa Province, Vietnam during 2005-2018. For. Soc. 2020, 4, 225–242. [Google Scholar]
  58. Dat, P.T.; Yoshino, K. Monitoring mangrove forest using multi-temporal satellite data in the Northern Coast of Vietnam. In Proceedings of the 32nd Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, Taipei, Taiwan, 3–7 October 2011. [Google Scholar]
  59. Dat, P.T.; Yoshino, K. Mangrove mapping and change detection using multi-temporal Landsat imagery in Hai Phong city, Vietnam. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Cartography in Internet and Ubiquitous Environments, Tokyo, Japan, 17–19 March 2015. [Google Scholar]
  60. Zhang, K.; Dong, X.; Liu, Z.; Gao, W.; Hu, Z.; Wu, G. Mapping tidal flats with Landsat 8 images and google earth engine: A case study of the China’s eastern coastal zone circa 2015. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Zhang, X.; Treitz, P.M.; Chen, D.; Quan, C.; Shi, L.; Li, X. Mapping mangrove forests using multi-tidal remotely-sensed data and a decision-tree-based procedure. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2017, 62, 201–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Chen, B.; Xiao, X.; Li, X.; Pan, L.; Doughty, R.; Ma, J.; Dong, J.; Chen, G.; Yin, Z.; Pan, T.; et al. A mangrove forest map of China in 2015: Analysis of time series Landsat 7/8 and Sentinel-1A imagery in Google Earth Engine cloud computing platform. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2017, 131, 104–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. The Prime Minister of Vietnam. Decision No. 57/QĐ-TTg Dated 9th January 2012 “Aproving the Forest Protection and Development Plan for the 2011–2020 Period”; The Prime Ministrer of Vietnam: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2012. (In Vietnamese)
  64. The Prime Minister of Vietnam. Decision No. 120/GĐ-TTg Dated 22nd January 2015 “Approving the Scheme on Protection and Development of Coastal Forest Respond to Climate Change, the Period 2015–2020”; Prime Minister of Vietnam: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2015. (In Vietnamese)
  65. The Prime Minister of Vietnam. Decision No. 125/QD-TTg Dated 16th January 2020 “Aproving of the Investment Policy of the Project ‘Conservation and Management of Coastal Mangrove Ecosystems in the Red River Dealta Region–KfW11.’ Promotion loans of the German Contruction Bank (KfW) and EU Non-Refundable ODA”; The Prime Minister of Vietnam: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2020; p. 3. (In Vietnamese)
  66. Chairwoman of the National Assembly. Vietnam Law on Forestry; Vietnam National Assembly: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  67. MARD. Results of Forest Investigation in 25 Provinces in the Period 2014–2015 under the Project “Total National Forest Investigation in 2013–2016”; MARD: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  68. MARD. Final Report of the Project “Total National Forest Investigation in the Period 2013–2016”; MARD: Hanoi, Vietnam, 2017. (In Vietnamese) [Google Scholar]
  69. Joseph, G. Fundamentals of Remote Sensing; Universities Press: Hyderabad, India, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  70. Bakr, N.; Weindorf, D.; Bahnassy, M.; Marei, S.; El-Badawi, M. Monitoring land cover changes in a newly reclaimed area of Egypt using multi-temporal Landsat data. Appl. Geogr. 2010, 30, 592–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Pirotti, F.; Parraga, M.A.; Stuaro, E.; Dubbini, M.; Masiero, A.; Ramanzin, M. NDVI from Landsat 8 vegetation indices to study movement dynamics of Capra ibex in mountain areas. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2014, XL-7, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Singh, A. Digital change detection techniques using remotely-sensed data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 1989, 10, 989–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Tucker, C.J.; Pinzon, J.E.; Brown, M.E.; Slayback, D.A.; Pak, E.W.; Mahoney, R.; Vermote, E.F.; El Saleous, E. An extended AVHRR 8-km NDVI dataset compatible with MODIS and SPOT vegetation NDVI data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2005, 26, 4485–4498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bhandari, A.; Kumar, A.; Singh, G. Feature extraction using Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI): A case study of Jabalpur city. Procedia Technol. 2012, 6, 612–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Ibrahim, N.; Mustapha, M.; Lihan, T.; Ghaffar, M. Determination of mangrove change in Matang Mangrove Forest using multi temporal satellite imageries. In Proceedings of the AIP Conference Proceedings, Rhodes, Greece, 21–27 September 2013; American Institute of Physics: College Park, MD, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  76. Taufik, A.; Ahmad, S.S.S.; Ahmad, A. Classification of landsat 8 satellite data using NDVI thresholds. J. Telecommun. Electron. Comput. Eng. 2016, 8, 37–40. [Google Scholar]
  77. Hashim, H.; Abd Latif, Z.; Adnan, N.A. Urban vegetation classification with NDVI threshold value method with very high resolution (VHR) PLEIADES Imagery. In Proceedings of the International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1–3 October 2019; pp. 237–240. [Google Scholar]
  78. Hu, Q.; Wu, W.; Xia, T.; Yu, Q.; Yang, P.; Li, Z.; Song, Q. Exploring the use of Google Earth imagery and object-based methods in land use/cover mapping. Remote Sens. 2013, 5, 6026–6042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Malarvizhi, K.; Kumar, S.V.; Porchelvan, P. Use of high resolution Google Earth satellite imagery in landuse map preparation for urban related applications. Procedia Technol. 2016, 24, 1835–1842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Dat, P.T.; Yoshino, K. Impacts of mangrove management systems on mangrove changes in the Northern Coast of Vietnam. Tropics 2016, 24, 141–151. [Google Scholar]
  81. Anand, A. Unit-14 Accuracy Assessment. Processing and Classification of Remotely Sensed Images. Remote Sensing and Image Interpretaion; Indiara Gandhi National Open University: Delhi, India, 2017; pp. 59–78. [Google Scholar]
  82. Conchedda, G.; Durieux, L.; Mayaux, P. An object-based method for mapping and change analysis in mangrove ecosystems. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2008, 63, 578–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Maryantika, N.; Lin, C. Exploring changes of land use and mangrove distribution in the economic area of Sidoarjo District, East Java using multi-temporal Landsat images. Inf. Process. Agric. 2017, 4, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Thomas, N.; Bunting, P.; Lucas, R.; Hardy, A.; Rosenqvist, A.; Fatoyinbo, T. Mapping mangrove extent and change: A globally applicable approach. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 1466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Institute of Ecology and Works Protection. Profile of the Mangrove Planting Project in Nga Son District, Thanh Hoa Province. Unpublished. 2020. (In Vietnamese) [Google Scholar]
  86. Tuominen, S.; Fish, S.; Poso, S. Combining remote sensing, data from earlier inventories, and geostatistical interpolation in multisource forest inventory. Can. J. For. Res. 2003, 33, 624–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Ghosh, S.; Behera, M. Aboveground biomass estimates of tropical mangrove forest using Sentinel-1 SAR coherence data-The superiority of deep learning over semi-empirical model. Comput. Geosci. 2021, 150, 104737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Giri, C. Recent advancement in mangrove forests mapping and monitoring of the world using earth observation satellite data. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Hu, T.; Zhang, Y.; Su, Y.; Zheng, Y.; Lin, G.; Guo, Q. Mapping the global mangrove forest aboveground biomass using multisource remote sensing data. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Wicaksono, P.; Danoedoro, P.; Hartono; Nehren, U. Mangrove biomass carbon stock mapping of the Karimunjawa Islands using multispectral remote sensing. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2016, 37, 26–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Hamdan, O.; Khairunnisa, M.; Ammar, A.; Hasmadi, I.M.; Aziz, H.K. Mangrove carbon stock assessment by optical satellite imagery. J. Trop. For. Sci. 2013, 554–565. [Google Scholar]
  92. Giri, S.; Mukhopadhyay, A.; Hazra, S.; Mukherjee, S.; Roy, D.; Ghosh, S.; Ghosh, T.; Mitra, D. A study on abundance and distribution of mangrove species in Indian Sundarban using remote sensing technique. J. Coast. Conserv. 2014, 18, 359–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Wan, L.; Zhang, H.; Lin, G.; Lin, H. A small-patched convolutional neural network for mangrove mapping at species level using high-resolution remote-sensing image. Ann. GIS 2019, 25, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Valderrama-Landeros, L.; Flores-de-Santiago, F.; Kovacs, J.; Flores-Verdugo, F. An assessment of commonly employed satellite-based remote sensors for mapping mangrove species in Mexico using an NDVI-based classification scheme. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2018, 190, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Heenkenda, M.K.; Joyce, K.E.; Maier, S.W.; Bartolo, R. Mangrove species identification: Comparing WorldView-2 with aerial photographs. Remote Sens. 2014, 6, 6064–6088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Chellamani, P.; Singh, C.P.; Panigrahy, S. Assessment of the health status of Indian mangrove ecosystems using multi temporal remote sensing data. Trop. Ecol. 2014, 55, 245–253. [Google Scholar]
  97. Nurhaliza, A.; Damayanti, A.; Dimyati, M. Monitoring Area and Health Changes of Mangrove Forest Using Multitemporal Landsat Imagery in Taman Hutan Raya Ngurah Rai, Bali Province. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 673, 012050. [Google Scholar]
  98. Vidhya, R.; Vijayasekaran, D.; Farook, M.A.; Jai, S.; Rohini, M.; Sinduja, A. Improved classification of mangroves health status using hyperspectral remote sensing data. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2014, 40, 667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Hamilton, S. Assessing the role of commercial aquaculture in displacing mangrove forest. Bull. Mar. Sci. 2013, 89, 585–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Bryan-Brown, D.N.; Connolly, R.M.; Richards, D.R.; Adame, F.; Friess, D.A.; Brown, C.J. Global trends in mangrove forest fragmentation. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 7117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Primavera, J.H. Development and conservation of Philippine mangroves: Institutional issues. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 35, 91–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Richards, D.R.; Friess, D.A. Rates and drivers of mangrove deforestation in Southeast Asia, 2000–2012. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 344–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  103. McNally, R.; McEwin, A.; Holland, T. The Potential for Mangrove Carbon Projects in Vietnam; SNV–Netherlands Development Organization REDD; Netherlands Development Organization: Hague, The Netherlands, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  104. Webb, E.L.; Jachowski, N.R.; Phelps, J.; Friess, D.A.; Than, M.M.; Ziegler, A.D. Deforestation in the Ayeyarwady Delta and the conservation implications of an internationally-engaged Myanmar. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2014, 24, 321–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Reed, S.; Nghi, N.; Minh, N.; Lien, H.; Hung, T.; Thien, N.; Anh, N.K. Building Coastal Resilience in Vietnam: An Integrated, Community-Based Approach to Mangrove Management, Disaster Risk Reduction, and Climate Change Adaptation; CARE international in Vietnam: Hà Nội, Vietnam, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  106. Ward, R.D.; Friess, D.A.; Day, R.H.; MacKenzie, R.A. Impacts of climate change on mangrove ecosystems: A region by region overview. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 2016, 2, e01211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Chaudhuri, P.; Chaudhuri, S.; Ghosh, R. The Role of Mangroves in Coastal and Estuarine Sedimentary Accretion in Southeast. Asia; Sedimentary Processes-Examples from Asia, Turkey and Nigeria: London, UK, 2019; pp. 89–112. [Google Scholar]
  108. Thakur, S.; Mondal, I.; Bar, S.; Nandi, S.; Ghosh, P.; Das, P.; De, T.K. Shoreline changes and its impact on the mangrove ecosystems of some islands of Indian Sundarbans, North-East coast of India. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 124764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Thanh Hoa Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. Biên Bản Nghiệm Thu Chất Lượng Công Trình; Thanh Hoa Department of Agriculture and Rural Development: Thanh Hoa, Vietnam, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  110. Kamthonkiat, D.; Rodfai, C.; Saiwanrungkul, A.; Koshimura, S.; Matsuoka, M.; Lasaponara, R. Geoinformatics in mangrove monitoring: Damage and recovery after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami in Phang Nga, Thailand. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 11, 1851–1862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Smith, T.J.; Anderson, G.H.; Balentine, K.; Tiling, G.; Ward, G.A.; Whelan, K.R. Cumulative impacts of hurricanes on Florida mangrove ecosystems: Sediment deposition, storm surges and vegetation. Wetlands 2009, 29, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. People’s Committee of Thanh Hoa Province. Final Report of National Target Program Response to Climate Change, Period 2010–2015, Thanh Hoa Province; People’s Committee of Thanh Hoa province: Thanh Hoa, Vietnam, 2015. (In Vietnamese) [Google Scholar]
  113. Thanh Hoa Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. Acceptance of the Construction Quality; Thanh Hoa Department of Agriculture and Rural Development: Thanh Hoa, Vietnam, 2015. (In Vietnamese) [Google Scholar]
  114. Laengner, M.L.; Siteur, K.; van der Wal, D. Trends in the seaward extent of saltmarshes across Europe from long-term satellite data. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 1653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Dan, T.; Chen, C.; Chiang, S.; Ogawa, S. Mapping and change analysis in mangrove forest by using Landsat imagery. ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2016, 3, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Forests 12 00637 g001 550
Figure 1. Location map of the study areas showing the distribution of the mangroves in green in 2020 (1—Hau Loc district; 2—Nga Son district; 3, 4—Hoang Hoa district; 5, 6—Tinh Gia district; 7, 8—Quynh Luu district; 9—Vinh city; 10, 11—Nghi Loc district; and 12—Dien Chau district); the coast is highlighted in grey.
Figure 1. Location map of the study areas showing the distribution of the mangroves in green in 2020 (1—Hau Loc district; 2—Nga Son district; 3, 4—Hoang Hoa district; 5, 6—Tinh Gia district; 7, 8—Quynh Luu district; 9—Vinh city; 10, 11—Nghi Loc district; and 12—Dien Chau district); the coast is highlighted in grey.
Forests 12 00637 g001
Forests 12 00637 g002 550
Figure 2. Chart of the methodology used for mapping mangrove extent and land cover.
Figure 2. Chart of the methodology used for mapping mangrove extent and land cover.
Forests 12 00637 g002
Forests 12 00637 g003 550
Figure 3. Land use and land cover classification map of the river mouth in Hau Loc district in Thanh Hoa province obtained from Landsat 1 for 1973 (a), Landsat 5 for 1988 (b), 1995 (c), 2005 (d), 2010 (e), and Landsat 8 for 2015 (f) and 2020 (g). Panel (h) provides the LULC (ha) for panels (a–g).
Figure 3. Land use and land cover classification map of the river mouth in Hau Loc district in Thanh Hoa province obtained from Landsat 1 for 1973 (a), Landsat 5 for 1988 (b), 1995 (c), 2005 (d), 2010 (e), and Landsat 8 for 2015 (f) and 2020 (g). Panel (h) provides the LULC (ha) for panels (a–g).
Forests 12 00637 g003
Forests 12 00637 g004 550
Figure 4. Mangrove restoration programs in Nga Son district. (a) Google Earth image of 2014 overlaid with mangrove extent obtained from Landsat images from 1973 to 2020; (b) Landsat image from 24/8/2020 showing boundaries for mangrove distribution in 2016 (light blue) and 2020 (yellow) obtained by NDVI; (c) Google Earth image of 26/7/2020 showing the extent of mangrove restoration projects planted in 2015 and 2017, and the planned area for mangrove planting from 2019 to 2021 sourced from [85]. Imagery in (a,c) copyright of Google Earth.
Figure 4. Mangrove restoration programs in Nga Son district. (a) Google Earth image of 2014 overlaid with mangrove extent obtained from Landsat images from 1973 to 2020; (b) Landsat image from 24/8/2020 showing boundaries for mangrove distribution in 2016 (light blue) and 2020 (yellow) obtained by NDVI; (c) Google Earth image of 26/7/2020 showing the extent of mangrove restoration projects planted in 2015 and 2017, and the planned area for mangrove planting from 2019 to 2021 sourced from [85]. Imagery in (a,c) copyright of Google Earth.
Forests 12 00637 g004
Table
Table 1. Landsat images used for the LULC change analysis.
Table 1. Landsat images used for the LULC change analysis.
Image DateImage NumberSatellite
(Resolution m)		Path/Row
21 July 1973LM11360461973202AAA05Landsat 1(60)136/46
27 February 1973LM11360471973058AAA05Landsat 1(60)136/47
4 November 1988LT51260461988309BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/46
20 November 1988LT51260461988325BKT01Landsat 5(30)126/46
28 May 1988LT51260471988149BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
13 June 1988LT51260471988165BKT01Landsat 5(30)126/47
1 September 1988LT51260471988245BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
4 November 1988LT51260471988309BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
6 December 1988LT51260471988341BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
24 November 1995LT51260461995328CLT00Landsat 5(30)126/46
8 January 1995LT51260471995008BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
14 April 1995LT51260471995104BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
24 June 1995LT51270461995175BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/46
10 July 1995LT51270471995191BKT00Landsat 5(30)127/47
3 January 2005LT51260462005003BJC01Landsat 5(30)126/46
11 May 2005LT51260462005131BJC00Landsat 5(30)126/46
14 July 2005LT51260462005195BJC00Landsat 5(30)126/46
3 January 2005LT51260472005003BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
11 May 2005LT51260472005131BKT01Landsat 5(30)126/47
14 July 2005LT51260472005195BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
1 November 2010LT51260462010305BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/46
3 December 2010LT51260462010337BJC00Landsat 5(30)126/46
12 July 2010LT51260472010193BKT00Landsat 5(30)126/47
10 Jyly 2015LC81260462015191LGN01Landsat 8(15)126/46
11 August 2015LC81260462015223LGN01Landsat 8(15)126/46
7 May 2015LC81260472015127LGN02Landsat 8(15)126/47
11 August 2015LC81260472015223LGN01Landsat 8(15)126/47
30 May 2015LC81270462015150LGN01Landsat 8(15)127/46
21 June 2020LC81260462020173LGN00Landsat 8(15)126/46
20 May 2020LC81260472020141LGN00Landsat 8(15)126/47
21 June 2020LC81260472020173LGN00Landsat 8(15)126/47
27 December 2013LC81260462013361LGN01Landsat 8(15)126/46
30 December 2014LC81260462014364LGN01Landsat 8(15)126/46
1 July 2015LC81270462015182LGN01Landsat 8(15)127/46
7 October 2016LC81270462016281LGN02Landsat 8(15)127/46
31 July 2017LC81260462017212LGN00Landsat 8(15)126/46
23 November 2018LC81260462018327LGN00Landsat 8(15)126/46
10 November 2019LC81260462019314LGN00Landsat 8(15)126/46
24 August 2020LC81260462020237LGN00Landsat 8(15)126/46
Table
Table 2. Description of the land cover categories.
Table 2. Description of the land cover categories.
Land Cover TypeDescription
Mangrove forestInter-tidal, halophytic forests both natural and planted
Other forestNon-mangrove forest
Aquaculture Aquaculture ponds and salt pans
Other land useRice fields, urban areas, roads, and industrial zones
Mudflat Tidal mudflats, sandy beaches, and other low-lying flooded areas
WaterRivers/estuaries, lakes, canals, small water bodies, and sea
Table
Table 3. Error matrix based on a random sample of 795 points, which were cross-classified using the LULC map classified in 2020 and ground-truthing, in which each row and column represents one category in the interpreted map. The left-hand side of the table has the categories on the standard map/data. The top of the table comprises the k categories representing the product of the created map to be evaluated. The values in the matrix indicate the numbers of pixels.
Table 3. Error matrix based on a random sample of 795 points, which were cross-classified using the LULC map classified in 2020 and ground-truthing, in which each row and column represents one category in the interpreted map. The left-hand side of the table has the categories on the standard map/data. The top of the table comprises the k categories representing the product of the created map to be evaluated. The values in the matrix indicate the numbers of pixels.
Ground Truth (References from GPS)
Classified DataMFOFAqOLUMFWTotalUser’s Accuracy 1
Classification result(MF)166 166100.0
OF 71 1 7298.6
Aq 19762320894.7
OLU 25147 215694.2
MF 65 65100.0
W 112712899.2
Total1667320215468132795
Producer’s accuracy 210097.397.595.595.696.2
Overall accuracy 397.2
Kappa 40.97
1 User’s accuracy (commission error), computed by dividing the number of correctly classified pixels in each category by the total number of pixels classified in that category (the row total). The user’s accuracy represents the probability that a pixel classified into a given category represents that category on the ground. 2 Producer’s accuracy (omission errors) results were calculated from dividing the number of correctly classified pixels in each category (on the major diagonal) by the number of reference pixels “known” to be of that category (the column total). This value represents how well reference pixels of the ground cover type are classified. 3 Total accuracy computed by dividing the total number of correctly classified pixels (the sum of the elements along the major diagonal) by the total number of reference pixels. The overall accuracy is calculated as given from dividing the sum of the diagonal elements by the total number of accuracy sites. 4 Kappa coefficient is a measure of the agreement between two maps taking into account all elements of the error matrix and it is defined in terms of the error matrix according to Anand [81]. Mangrove forest—MF, Other forest—OF, Aquaculture—A, Other land use—OLU, Mudflat—MF, and Water—W.
Table
Table 4. The estimated area of LULC (ha) and the land cover percentages in Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces for the years 1973, 1988, 1995, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020 obtained from Landsat images.
Table 4. The estimated area of LULC (ha) and the land cover percentages in Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces for the years 1973, 1988, 1995, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020 obtained from Landsat images.
Province/
Classification		1973198819952005201020152020
(ha)(%)(ha)(%)(ha)(%)(ha)(%)(ha)(%)(ha)(%)(ha)(%)
Nghe An 1
Mangrove forest66.50.5124.40.9155.61.1282.11.9300.22.1340.72.33232.2
Other forest647.34.5814.95.6629.14.35944.16004.1612.54.2603.94.2
Aquaculture1487.910.21503.110.42159.914.92548.617.62702.118.62812.819.42816.119.4
Other land use9046.862.3801455.28851.4618644.159.58501.458.58375.357.78329.557.4
Mudflat1095.87.51885.113591.14.1354.72.4265.31.8239.71.7215.61.5
Water2176.8152179.6152134.114.72097.614.42152.114.8214014.7223315.4
Thanh Hoa 2
Mangrove forest366.12.1119.40.761.70.43402.1323.81.8492.73.4797.14.5
Other forest3731.821.32079.111.8686.23.9629.93.6637.83.6660.84.6660.83.8
Aquaculture566.23.27384.21152.36.63017.417.23485.619.93846.321.93898.922.2
Other land use5992.334.18734.749.89992.556.99744.855.59355.253.38955.561.78910.650.8
Mudflat5030.228.72467.614.13563.420.31516.28.5849.84.8801.75.5457.92.6
Water1864.410.63412.319.4209511.92302.713.12898.816.52794.119.22825.816.1
1 The total ha of the study area in Nghe An was 14,521.1 ha; 2 The total ha of the study area in Thanh Hoa was 17,551 ha.
Table
Table 5. The estimated area of mangrove cover (ha) in coastal districts of Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces for years 1973, 1988, 1995, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020 * obtained from Landsat images.
Table 5. The estimated area of mangrove cover (ha) in coastal districts of Nghe An and Thanh Hoa provinces for years 1973, 1988, 1995, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020 * obtained from Landsat images.
ProvinceDistrict1973198819952005201020152020
Nghe An 66.5124.5155.6282.1300.2340.7323.0
Dien Chau 6.499.8101.8110.7105.0
Nghi Loc21.326.714.844.232.046.547.1
Quynh Luu 47.768.380.9111.3128.4115.7
Vinh city45.250.166.157.355.255.255.2
Thanh Hoa 366.1119.461.7340.0323.8492.7797.1
Hau Loc47.412.720.295.580.2181.6256.8
Hoang Hoa 42.9 84.52335.269.2
Nga Son318.763.810.4101.7121.8129.8315.5
Tinh Gia 31.158.398.8146.1155.6
Total 437.9243.0219.3643.8626.8829.61120.1
* For Nghi Loc, Hoang Hoa, Quynh Luu, and Tinh Gia districts, the data were combined from the two sites.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nguyen, H.T.T.; Hardy, G.E.S.; Le, T.V.; Nguyen, H.Q.; Nguyen, H.H.; Nguyen, T.V.; Dell, B. Mangrove Forest Landcover Changes in Coastal Vietnam: A Case Study from 1973 to 2020 in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An Provinces. Forests 2021, 12, 637. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12050637

AMA Style

Nguyen HTT, Hardy GES, Le TV, Nguyen HQ, Nguyen HH, Nguyen TV, Dell B. Mangrove Forest Landcover Changes in Coastal Vietnam: A Case Study from 1973 to 2020 in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An Provinces. Forests. 2021; 12(5):637. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12050637

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nguyen, Huong Thi Thuy, Giles E. S. Hardy, Tuat Van Le, Huy Quoc Nguyen, Hoang Huy Nguyen, Thinh Van Nguyen, and Bernard Dell. 2021. "Mangrove Forest Landcover Changes in Coastal Vietnam: A Case Study from 1973 to 2020 in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An Provinces" Forests 12, no. 5: 637. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12050637

APA Style

Nguyen, H. T. T., Hardy, G. E. S., Le, T. V., Nguyen, H. Q., Nguyen, H. H., Nguyen, T. V., & Dell, B. (2021). Mangrove Forest Landcover Changes in Coastal Vietnam: A Case Study from 1973 to 2020 in Thanh Hoa and Nghe An Provinces. Forests, 12(5), 637. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12050637

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop