ENGINEERING-BASED ASSESSMENT OF FOREST FRAGMENTATION AND LANDSCAPE CONNECTIVITY FOR SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Dr. Niharika Sen

doi:10.69980/eav9sz31

Authors

Dr. Niharika Sen

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69980/eav9sz31

Keywords:

Forest fragmentation, Landscape connectivity, Environmental engineering

Abstract

Forest fragmentation is a threat to continuity in the ecosystem, causes greater edge effect and decreases forest landscape structure. Engineering analysis of fragmentation indices will help in sustainable environmental planning by recognizing landscape connectivity influences. This study aimed to assess how forest fragmentation indicators influence landscape connectivity and to evaluate regional variation in forest structural continuity. A quantitative secondary-data design was applied using landscape-level forest fragmentation metrics. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize major variables, Pearson correlation analysis examined relationships among fragmentation indicators, and multiple linear regression evaluated the influence of patch density, edge density, aggregation index, and forest cover on landscape connectivity. Country-level comparison was also performed to identify regional differences. Landscape connectivity showed moderate structural continuity across the analyzed forest systems. Aggregation index had the strongest positive association with connectivity, while patch density and edge density negatively influenced connectivity. The regression model explained 57.3% of the variation in landscape connectivity, confirming that spatial configuration is a major determinant of forest structural cohesion. Country-level results showed clear regional variation, with some countries maintaining stronger connectivity and others showing greater fragmentation pressure. Forest connectivity depends more strongly on patch arrangement than forest cover alone. Sustainable environmental management should prioritize aggregated forest structures, ecological corridors, and the reduction of excessive edge formation to improve landscape continuity.

References

1. Ahmadi, M., Farhadinia, M. S., Cushman, S. A., Hemami, M. R., Nezami Balouchi, B., Jowkar, H., & Macdonald, D. W. (2020). Species and space: a combined gap analysis to guide management planning of conservation areas. Landscape Ecology, 35(7), 1505-1517.

2. Andronache, I., Marin, M., Fischer, R., Ahammer, H., Radulovic, M., Ciobotaru, A. M., ... & Peptenatu, D. (2019). Dynamics of forest fragmentation and connectivity using particle and fractal analysis. Scientific reports, 9(1), 12228.

3. Batar, A. K., Shibata, H., & Watanabe, T. (2021). A novel approach for forest fragmentation susceptibility mapping and assessment: a case study from the Indian Himalayan region. Remote Sensing, 13(20), 4090.

4. Bergès, L., Avon, C., Bezombes, L., Clauzel, C., Duflot, R., Foltête, J. C., ... & Spiegelberger, T. (2020). Environmental mitigation hierarchy and biodiversity offsets revisited through habitat connectivity modelling. Journal of Environmental Management, 256, 109950.

5. Brack, D. (2019, March). Forests and climate change. In Proceedings of the background study prepared for the fourteenth session of the United Nations forum on forests. New York, NY, USA: United Nations Forum on Forests.

6. Dar, J. A., Subashree, K., Bhat, N. A., Sundarapandian, S., Xu, M., Saikia, P., ... & Khan, M. L. (2020). Role of major forest biomes in climate change mitigation: An eco-biological perspective. In Socio-economic and Eco-biological Dimensions in Resource use and Conservation: Strategies for Sustainability (pp. 483-526). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

7. De Matos, T. P. V., De Matos, V. P. V., De Mello, K., & Valente, R. A. (2021). Protected areas and forest fragmentation: sustainability index for prioritizing fragments for landscape restoration. Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes, 5(1), 19-31.

8. Fynn, I. E., & Campbell, J. (2019). Forest fragmentation analysis from multiple imaging formats. Journal of Landscape Ecology, 12(1), 1-15.

9. Gonçalves-Souza, T., & Vancine, M. H. (2025). LandFrag: A Dataset to Investigate the Effects of Forest Loss and Fragmentation on Biodiversity [Data set]. In Global Ecology and Biogeography (v1.0.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12206838

10. Hansen, M. C., Wang, L., Song, X. P., Tyukavina, A., Turubanova, S., Potapov, P. V., & Stehman, S. V. (2020). The fate of tropical forest fragments. Science Advances, 6(11), eaax8574.

11. Kozel, P., Sebek, P., Platek, M., Benes, J., Zapletal, M., Dvorsky, M., ... & Cizek, L. (2021). Connectivity and succession of open structures as a key to sustaining light‐demanding biodiversity in deciduous forests. Journal of Applied Ecology, 58(12), 2951-2961.

12. Kumar, A., Ekka, P., Patra, S., Kumar, G., Kishore, B. S., Kumar, R., & Saikia, P. (2022). Geospatial perspectives of sustainable forest management to enhance ecosystem services and livelihood security. Advances in remote sensing for forest monitoring, 10-42.

13. Liu, J., Coomes, D. A., Gibson, L., Hu, G., Liu, J., Luo, Y., ... & Yu, M. (2019). Forest fragmentation in China and its effect on biodiversity. Biological Reviews, 94(5), 1636-1657.

14. Liu, W., Hughes, A. C., Bai, Y., Li, Z., Mei, C., & Ma, Y. (2020). Using landscape connectivity tools to identify conservation priorities in forested areas and potential restoration priorities in rubber plantation in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China. Landscape Ecology, 35(2), 389-402.

15. Ma, J., Li, J., Wu, W., & Liu, J. (2023). Global forest fragmentation change from 2000 to 2020. Nature communications, 14(1), 3752.

16. Mölder, A., Meyer, P., & Nagel, R. V. (2019). Integrative management to sustain biodiversity and ecological continuity in Central European temperate oak (Quercus robur, Q. petraea) forests: An overview. Forest Ecology and Management, 437, 324-339.

17. Putz, F. E., Thompson, I. D., Burton, P. J., Sandom, J., Cerutti, P. O., Nasi, R., ... & Pastur, G. M. (2022). Instant Insights: Sustainable forest management.

18. Rehman, S., Hasan, M. S. U., Rai, A. K., Avtar, R., & Sajjad, H. (2021). Assessing flood-induced ecological vulnerability and risk using GIS-based in situ measurements in Bhagirathi sub-basin, India. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 14(15), 1520.

19. Ribeiro, M. P., de Mello, K., & Valente, R. A. (2022). How can forest fragments support protected areas connectivity in an urban landscape in Brazil?. Urban forestry & urban greening, 74, 127683.

20. Sanderson, J. (Ed.). (2020). Landscape ecology: a top down approach. CRC Press.

21. Tiang, D. C. F., Morris, A., Bell, M., Gibbins, C. N., Azhar, B., & Lechner, A. M. (2021). Ecological connectivity in fragmented agricultural landscapes and the importance of scattered trees and small patches. Ecological Processes, 10(1), 20.

22. Zhang, Z., Meerow, S., Newell, J. P., & Lindquist, M. (2019). Enhancing landscape connectivity through multifunctional green infrastructure corridor modeling and design. Urban forestry & urban greening, 38, 305-317.