References

References:

Alavipanah S, Wegmann M, Qureshi S, et al (2015) The role of vegetation in mitigating urban land surface temperatures: A case study of Munich, Germany during the warm season. Sustainability 7:4689–4706

Allen CD, Breshears DD, McDowell NG (2015) On underestimation of global vulnerability to tree mortality and forest die-off from hotter drought in the Anthropocene. Ecosphere 6:1–55

Axtell R (2000) Why agents?: on the varied motivations for agent computing in the social sciences

Batty M (2005) Agents, cells, and cities: new representational models for simulating multiscale urban dynamics. Environ Plan A 37:1373–1394

Batty M, Xie Y (1994) From cells to cities. Environ Plan B Plan Des 21:S31--S48

Bernard RN (1999) Using adaptive agent-based simulation models to assist planners in policy development: The case of rent control. Rutgers Univ Dep Urban Plan Policy Dev

Bharath S, Rajan KS, Ramachandra TV (2013) Land Surface Temperature Responses to Land Use Land Cover Dynamics. Geoinfor Geostat An Overv 1:. https://doi.org/10.4172/2327-4581.1000112

Bharath S, Rajan KS, Ramachandra TV (2021) Modeling Forest Landscape Dynamics. Nova Science Publishers, New York, NY (United States)

Bharath S, Rajan KS, Ramachandra TV (2014) Status and future transition of rapid urbanizing landscape in central Western Ghats - CA based approach. ISPRS Ann Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci II–8:69–75. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsannals-II-8-69-2014

Breshears DD, Cobb NS, Rich PM, et al (2005) Regional vegetation die-off in response to global-change-type drought. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102:15144–15148

Bunruamkaew K, Murayam Y (2011) Site suitability evaluation for ecotourism using GIS \& AHP: A case study of Surat Thani province, Thailand. Procedia-Social Behav Sci 21:269–278

Buyantuyev A, Wu J (2012) Urbanization diversifies land surface phenology in arid environments: interactions among vegetation, climatic variation, and land use pattern in the Phoenix metropolitan region, USA. Landsc Urban Plan 105:149–159

Chandan MC, Nimish G, Bharath HA (2020) Analysing spatial patterns and trend of future urban expansion using SLEUTH. Spat Inf Res 28:11–23

Clarke KC (2008) A decade of cellular urban modeling with SLEUTH: Unresolved issues and problems. Ch 3:47–60

Crooks AT (2010) Constructing and implementing an agent-based model of residential segregation through vector GIS. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 24:661–675

Crooks AT, Heppenstall AJ (2012) Introduction to agent-based modelling. In: Agent-based models of geographical systems. Springer, pp 85–105

Dadashpoor H, Panahi H (2021) Exploring an integrated spatially model for land-use scenarios simulation in a metropolitan region. Environ Dev Sustain 1–22

Eckhardt R (1987) Stan ulam, john von neumann, and the monte carlo method. Los Alamos Sci 15:131–136

Ermentrout GB, Edelstein-Keshet L (1993) Cellular automata approaches to biological modeling. J Theor Biol 160:97–133

Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T (2013) Examining urban heat island relations to land use and air pollution: Multiple endmember spectral mixture analysis for thermal remote sensing. IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Obs Remote Sens 6:1749–1756

Franklin S, Graesser A (1996) Is it an Agent, or just a Program?: A Taxonomy for Autonomous Agents. In: International workshop on agent theories, architectures, and languages. pp 21–35

Fu X, Wang X, Yang YJ (2018) Deriving suitability factors for CA-Markov land use simulation model based on local historical data. J Environ Manage 206:10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2017.10.012

Fuladlu K, Altan H (2021) Examining Land Surface Temperature Relations with Major Air Pollutant: A Remote Sensing Research in Case of Tehran. Res Sq

Guidolin M, Chen AS, Ghimire B, et al (2016) A weighted cellular automata 2D inundation model for rapid flood analysis. Environ Model \& Softw 84:378–394

Guzman LA, Escobar F, Peña J, Cardona R (2020) A cellular automata-based land-use model as an integrated spatial decision support system for urban planning in developing cities: The case of the Bogotá region. Land use policy 92:104445

Hamad R, Balzter H, Kolo K (2018) Predicting land use/land cover changes using a CA-Markov model under two different scenarios. Sustainability 10:3421

Holland JH, Sigmund K (1995) Hidden order: how adaptation builds complexity. Nature 378:453

Itami RM (1994) Simulating spatial dynamics: cellular automata theory. Landsc Urban Plan 30:27–47

Jackson RB, Baker JS (2010) Opportunities and Constraints for Forest Climate Mitigation. Bioscience 60:698–707. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2010.60.9.7

Kumar N, Liu X, Narayanasamydamodaran S, Pandey KK (2021) A Systematic Review Comparing Urban Flood Management Practices in India to China’s Sponge City Program. Sustainability 13:6346

Li X, Gong P (2016) Urban growth models: progress and perspective. Sci Bull 61:1637–1650

Li X, Liu X (2006) An extended cellular automaton using case‐based reasoning for simulating urban development in a large complex region. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 20:1109–1136

Macal CM, North MJ (2009) Agent-based modeling and simulation. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC). pp 86–98

Mosadeghi R, Warnken J, Tomlinson R, Mirfenderesk H (2015) Comparison of Fuzzy-AHP and AHP in a spatial multi-criteria decision-making model for urban land-use planning. Comput Environ Urban Syst 49:54–65

Pascal JP (1986) Explanatory Booklet on Forest Map of South India. Explan Bookl For Map South India Belgaum-Dharwar-Panaji , Shimoga, Mercara-Mysore 19–30

Polasky S, Nelson E, Pennington D, Johnson KA (2011) The impact of land-use change on ecosystem services, biodiversity and returns to landowners: a case study in the state of Minnesota. Environ Resour Econ 48:219–242

Pontius GR, Malanson J (2005) Comparison of the structure and accuracy of two land change models. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 19:243–265

Ramachandra TV, Bharath S (2021) Carbon Footprint of Karnataka: Accounting of Sources and Sinks. In: Carbon Footprint Case Studies. Springer, pp 53–92

Ramachandra TV, Bharath S (2019a) Carbon Sequestration Potential of the Forest Ecosystems in the Western Ghats, a Global Biodiversity Hotspot. Nat Resour Res 29:2753–2771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11053-019-09588-0

Ramachandra TV, Bharath S, Gupta N (2018) Modelling landscape dynamics with LST in protected areas of Western Ghats, Karnataka. J. Environ. Manage. 1253–1262

Ramachandra TV, Shwetmala (2009) Emissions from India’s transport sector: Statewise synthesis. Atmos Environ 43:5510–5517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.07.015

Ramachandra TV, Vinay S, Bharath S, et al (2020) Insights into riverscape dynamics with the hydrological, ecological and social dimensions for water sustenance. Curr Sci 113891:118

Ramachandra T V., Bharath S, Rajan KS, Subash Chandran MD (2017a) Modelling the forest transition in Central Western Ghats, India. Spat Inf Res 25:117–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41324-017-0084-8

Ramachandra T V., Sellers J, Bharath HA, Setturu B (2019) Micro level analyses of environmentally disastrous urbanization in Bangalore. Environ Monit Assess 191:. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7693-8

Ramachandra T V, Aithal BH (2016) Bengaluru’s reality: towards unlivable status with unplanned urban trajectory. Curr Sci 110:2207–2208

Ramachandra T V, Bajpai V, Kulkarni G, et al (2017b) Economic disparity and CO2 emissions: The domestic energy sector in Greater Bangalore, India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 67:1331–1344

Ramachandra T V, Bharath S (2019b) Sustainable Management of Bannerghatta National Park, India, with the Insights in Land Cover Dynamics. FIIB Bus Rev 8:118–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/2319714519828462

Ramachandra T V, Setturu B, Aithal BH (2012) Peri-urban to urban landscape patterns elucidation through spatial metrics. Int J Eng Res Dev 2:58–81

Ramachandra T V, Uttam K (2009) Land surface temperature with land cover dynamics: multi-resolution, spatio-temporal data analysis of Greater Bangalore. Int J Geoinformatics 5:44

Ramachandra T V, Vinay S, Bharath S (2021) Visualisation of landscape alterations with the proposed linear projects and their impacts on the ecology. Model Earth Syst Environ 1–13

Saaty TL (1980) The analytical hierarchy process, planning, priority. Resour Alloc RWS Publ USA

Samie A, Deng X, Jia S, Chen D (2017) Scenario-based simulation on dynamics of land-use-land-cover change in Punjab Province, Pakistan. Sustainability 9:1285

Santé I, Garcia AM, Miranda D, Crecente R (2010) Cellular automata models for the simulation of real-world urban processes: A review and analysis. Landsc Urban Plan 96:108–122

SEEA (2017) System of Environmental Economic Accounting 2012: Central Framework. International Monetary Fund

Singh AK (2003) Modelling land use land cover changes using cellular automata in a geo-spatial environment

Spencer D (2009) Cities and complexity: understanding cities with cellular automata, agent-based models, and fractals

Torrens PM (2000) How cellular models of urban systems work (1. Theory)

Verburg PH, Soepboer W, Veldkamp A, et al (2002) Modeling the spatial dynamics of regional land use: the CLUE-S model. Environ Manage 30:391–405

Vinay S, Bharath S, Bharath HA, Ramachandra T V (2013) Hydrologic model with landscape dynamics for drought monitoring. In: proceeding of: Joint International Workshop of ISPRS WG VIII/1 and WG IV/4 on Geospatial Data for Disaster and Risk Reduction, Hyderabad, November. pp 21–22

Vose RS, Karl TR, Easterling DR, et al (2004) Impact of land-use change on climate. Nature 427:213–214

Wahyudi A, Liu Y (2013) Cellular automata for urban growth modeling: a chronological review on factors in transition rules. In: 13th International conference on computers in urban planning and urban Management (CUPUM 2013)

Yao R, Wang L, Huang X, et al (2017) Temporal trends of surface urban heat islands and associated determinants in major Chinese cities. Sci Total Environ 609:742–754

Zhou D, Zhao S, Zhang L, Liu S (2016) Remotely sensed assessment of urbanization effects on vegetation phenology in China’s 32 major cities. Remote Sens Environ 176:272–281

Annexure 1

Table a. Weights based on AHP for BAU

Factors

BAU

Eigen Vector of Weight

BS

KP

MA

RA

RO

SI

SL

Bus Stops (BS)

1

0.02

KIDAB Plots (KP)

9

1

0.32

Mining Areas (MA)

3

1/3

1

0.06

Railway (RA)

5

1/3

3

1

0.10

Roads (RO)

9

1/3

3

1

1

0.15

SEIAA Industries (SI)

7

1/3

3

3

3

1

0.23

Slope (SL)

7

1/3

3

3

1/3

1/3

1

0.12

Less Important

Equal

More Important

CR: 0.09

Extremely

Very Strongly

Strongly

Moderate

Moderate

Strongly

Very Strongly

Extremely

Status: Acceptable

(Standard <=0.1)

1/9

1/7

1/5

1/3

1

3

5

7

9

Table b. Weights based on AHP for ALT

Factors

ALT

Eigen Vector of Weight

BS

KP

MA

RA

RO

SI

SL

PP

Bus Stops (BS)

1

0.02

KIDAB Plots (KP)

9

1

0.22

Mining Areas (MA)

3

1/7

1

0.04

Railway (RA)

5

1/5

1

1

0.07

Roads (RO)

7

1/3

3

3

1

0.17

SEIAA Industries (SI)

5

1/3

3

3

1/3

1

0.11

Slope (SL)

3

1/3

3

1/3

1/3

1/3

1

0.06

PP

7

3

5

3

3

3

3

1

0.30

Less Important

Equal

More Important

CR: 0.08

Extremely

Very Strongly

Strongly

Moderate

Moderate

Strongly

Very Strongly

Extremely

Status: Acceptable

(Standard <=0.1)

1/9

1/7

1/5

1/3

1

3

5

7

9

Table c. Weights based on AHP for RFP

Factors

RFP

BS

KP

MA

RA

RO

SI

SL

U19

Eigen Vector of Weight

Bus Stops (BS)

1

0.02

KIDAB Plots (KP)

9

1

0.28

Mining Areas (MA)

3

1/7

1

0.05

Railway (RA)

5

1/5

1

1

0.12

Roads (RO)

7

1/3

3

3

1

0.25

SEIAA Industries (SI)

5

1/3

3

1

1/3

1

0.10

Slope (SL)

3

1/3

3

1/3

1/3

1/3

1

0.06

Urban_2019 (U19)

5

1/3

3

1/3

1/5

3

3

1

0.12

Less Important

Equal

More Important

CR: 0.10

Extremely

Very Strongly

Strongly

Moderate

Moderate

Strongly

Very Strongly

Extremely

Status: Acceptable

(Standard <=0.1)

1/9

1/7

1/5

1/3

1

3

5

7

9

Table d. Weights based on AHP for AF

Factors

AF

BS

KP

MA

RA

RO

SI

SL

PL

Eigen Vector of Weight

Bus Stops (BS)

1

0.02

KIDAB Plots (KP)

7

1

0.27

Mining Areas (MA)

3

1/7

1

0.05

Railway (RA)

5

1/5

1

1

0.06

Roads (RO)

7

1

3

3

1

0.27

SEIAA Industries (SI)

5

1/3

3

3

1/3

1

0.11

Slope (SL)

3

1/3

3

1

1/3

1/3

1

0.07

Plantations (PL)

5

1/3

3

3

1/5

3

3

1

0.15

Less Important

Equal

More Important

Consistency Ratio: 0.07

Extremely

Very Strongly

Strongly

Moderate

Moderate

Strongly

Very Strongly

Extremely

Status: Acceptable

(Standard <=0.1)

1/9

1/7

1/5

1/3

1

3

5

7

9

Table e. Weights based on AHP for SDP

Factors

SDP

BS

KP

MA

RA

RO

SI

PP

PL

Eigen Vector of Weight

Bus Stops (BS)

1

0.02

KIDAB Plots (KP)

7

1

0.22

Mining Areas (MA)

3

1/7

1

0.04

Railway (RA)

5

1/7

1

1

0.05

Roads (RO)

7

1

3

3

1

0.18

SEIAA Industries (SI)

7

1/3

3

3

1/3

1

0.12

Proposed Projects (PP)

3

1/3

3

3

1/3

1/3

1

0.10

Plantations (PL)

7

3

5

5

3

3

1

1

0.28

Less Important

Equal

More Important

Consistency Ratio : 0.09

Extremely

Very Strongly

Strongly

Moderate

Moderate

Strongly

Very Strongly

Extremely

Status: Acceptable

(Satndard <=0.1)

1/9

1/7

1/5

1/3

1

3

5

7

9