Comparison and Assessment of Different Land Cover Datasets on the Cropland in Northeast China

Abstract

The provision of precise and dependable information regarding the extent and distribution of cropland is imperative for the evaluation of food security, agricultural planning, and resource management. Cropland is an important component of land cover type and is offered in multiple existing global/regional land cover products. However, global-scale accuracy evaluation may not be representative of class-specific or local-area accuracy, such as in Northeast China, which is an important grain-producing region of China and has various types of cultivated land (e.g., wheat, rice) and diverse terrains. It poses a great challenge in generating precise cropland classification by automated mapping. Thus, it is indispensable to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of these various land cover datasets before using them. In this study, we collected thirteen sets of global or national-scale land cover datasets. Through the visual interpretation of high-resolution images, ground “truth” samples were collected to evaluate the data accuracy across Northeast China. The overall accuracy (OA) evaluation results in Phase-2020 show that CLCD has the highest value with 0.914, followed by GlobeLand30 (0.906), GLC_FCS30 (0.902), and Esri (0.896) for cropland classification in Northeast China. CGLS-LC100 has the lowest OA (0.710). For the commission and omission errors of six datasets in Phase-2020, CGLS-LC100 has an obvious overestimation (larger commission error), while the two national-scale datasets (CLCD and CLUDs) perform relatively better. In terms of spatial consistency, high spatial agreement among the nine Phase-2015 datasets or in the six Phase-2020 datasets could be discovered in traditional agricultural regions like the Sanjiang–Songnen–Liaohe Plain, and low agreement is found in the transition areas of mountains (hills) and plains with the mixed landscape of forest (grassland) and farmland. In the aspect of comparison pairwise data, CLCD is in good agreement with GLC_FCS30, GlobeLand30, and Esri, while CGLS-LC100 is in the poorest agreement with any other dataset. The comparison and evaluation results are expected to provide a reference on which aspects and to what extent these land cover products may be consistent and guide the cropland data product selection for Northeast China.