Submit your papersSubmit Now
For Enquiries: [email protected]
IIARD LogoIIARD

Quantifying the "Urban Carbon Penalty" in the Nigerian Sudan Savanna: A Multi-Temporal Remote Sensing and Sensitivity Analysis (2005–2025)

Abdulrahman, A., Mansur M.A., Atiku, M., Ambursa, A.S., Muhammad, Z., Salisu, I.A., Wele H. K., Gwimmi D, ., Umar, I, ., Nafiu, A.K., Wele, H.K., F.U., Zogirma

Abstract

Land use and land cover change is a primary driver of terrestrial carbon emissions, yet the differential carbon costs of specific transition pathways in dryland ecosystems remain poorly quantified. This study analyzes the spatiotemporal dynamics of LUCC and associated carbon fluxes in Kebbi State, Nigeria, over twenty years (2005–2025). Using multi-temporal Landsat and Sentinel-2 imagery, we achieved classification accuracies exceeding 87% (Kappa > 0.84) to map six land cover classes. Results indicate a profound landscape transformation: built-up areas tripled (+6.3%), farmland expanded by 8,330 km2, while dense vegetation declined by 9.1%. Integrating these maps with IPCC Tier 2 carbon density parameters validated against local field data, we estimated a net carbon loss of 33.7 MtC (69.25 MtCO2e). Crucially, sensitivity analysis revealed that the conversion of dense vegetation to built-up areas carries a disproportionately high "urban carbon penalty" (Sensitivity Index = 1.76), contributing 17.97% of total emissions from only 10.21% of converted area. In contrast, agricultural extensification onto sparse vegetation exhibited low sensitivity (SI = 0.40). Ordinary Least Squares regression confirmed built-up expansion (β = 0.68, p < 0.001) as the strongest predictor of carbon loss. These findings challenge the assumption that agricultural expansion is the sole dominant driver of dryland emissions, highlighting the critical need for spatially explicit urban containment policies to mitigate high- intensity carbon losses in rapidly urbanizing Sahelian regions.

Keywords

Urban Carbon PenaltyLand Use ChangeRemote SensingSensitivity AnalysisSudan SavannaCarbon Emissions.

References

Agbelade, A. D., & Onyekwelu, J. C. (2020). Carbon sequestration potential of urban trees in southwestern Nigeria. Journal of Forestry Research , 31(4), 1235–1247. Akpa, I. C., et al. (2016). Spatial distribution of soil organic carbon in Nigerian ecosystems. Geoderma Regional , 7(2), 175-184. Angel, S., Parent, J., Civco, D. L., & Blei, A. M. (2011). Making room for a planet of cities . Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Arowolo, A. O., et al. (2018). Land-use/cover change and ecosystem services provision in Nigeria. Land Use Policy , 70, 338-349. Güneralp, B., Seto, K. C., & Fragkias, M. (2017). The urban carbon penalty: Soil sealing and the loss of deep carbon pools in expanding cities. Environmental Research Letters , 12(8), 084011. IJGEM IIARD International Journal of Geography & Environmental Management IPCC. (2019). 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories . IPCC, Geneva. Jobbágy, E. G., & Jackson, R. B. (2000). The vertical distribution of soil organic carbon and its relation to climate and vegetation. Ecological Applications , 10(2), 423-436. Lal, R. (2018). Digging deeper: A holistic perspective of soil carbon. Global Change Biology , 24(8), 3285-3293. Seto, K. C., Güneralp, B., & Hutyra, L. R. (2012). Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 109(40), 16083-16088.