SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkiye Uzaktan Algılama Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 8

Assessment of net primary productivity in urban open green spaces using the CASA model under climate change scenarios: The case of Adana, Türkiye

Tuğba Akın Öz(ÇUKUROVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ)0000-0003-2483-3448
Süha Berberoğlu(ÇUKUROVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1547-6680
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-10-05
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results indicate that high-emission climate conditions may substantially reduce ecosystem productivity and potential carbon uptake.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Urban areas are major sources of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other greenhouse gas emissions due to high population density, land-use transformation, and intensive human activities, whereas urban open green spaces support climate change mitigation through vegetation productivity and ecosystem services.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study assesses the spatial distribution of Net Primary Productivity (NPP) in urban open green spaces in the central districts and surrounding areas of Adana Province, Türkiye, and evaluates its potential changes under future climate scenarios projected for 2100.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results indicate that high-emission climate conditions may substantially reduce ecosystem productivity and potential carbon uptake.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:GIS · urban open green spaces · NASA-CASA model

Abstract

Urban areas are major sources of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other greenhouse gas emissions due to high population density, land-use transformation, and intensive human activities, whereas urban open green spaces support climate change mitigation through vegetation productivity and ecosystem services. This study assesses the spatial distribution of Net Primary Productivity (NPP) in urban open green spaces in the central districts and surrounding areas of Adana Province, Türkiye, and evaluates its potential changes under future climate scenarios projected for 2100. NPP was used as an indicator of ecosystem productivity and potential carbon uptake and was calculated using the Carnegie–Ames–Stanford Approach (CASA) model. Sentinel-2-derived Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and land-cover data for 2022 were used together with temperature, precipitation, and solar radiation inputs. For future projections, temperature and precipitation outputs from the HadGEM3-GC31-LL climate model within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) framework were incorporated under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios. The resulting NPP raster datasets were integrated with urban open green space polygons in a GIS environment to calculate mean NPP values for urban green spaces and urban areas. In 2022, NPP ranged from 0 to 332 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹, while mean NPP was 61.18 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹ in urban open green spaces and 29.40 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹ in urban areas. By 2100, mean NPP in urban open green spaces decreased to 56.82 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹ under SSP2-4.5 and to 46.68 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹ under SSP5-8.5. These results indicate that high-emission climate conditions may substantially reduce ecosystem productivity and potential carbon uptake. Protecting high-productivity green spaces, increasing tree canopy cover, and strengthening ecological connectivity are therefore important for climate-resilient urban planning and maintaining ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing areas.

🔖

Cite This Article

Öz, T. A., Berberoğlu, S. (2026). Assessment of net primary productivity in urban open green spaces using the CASA model under climate change scenarios: The case of Adana, Türkiye. Türkiye Uzaktan Algılama Dergisi, Volume: 8. https://doi.org/10.51489/tuzal.1945727

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. Baysal, T., & Kıvrak, M. (2022). Urbanization process in Turkey and examination of the relationship between the GDP data of provinces and the migration rates of provinces by clustering analysis. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 13(35), 829–850. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1025279
  2. Berberoğlu, S., Dönmez, C., & Çilek, A. (2021). Modelling climate change impacts on regional net primary productivity in Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(5), 242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09031-z
  3. Berberoğlu, S., Tanrıöver, A. A., Şatır, O., Dönmez, C., Çilek, A., & Şahingöz, M. (2022). Geospatial technologies for physical planning: Bridging the gap between earth science and planning. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 3(2), 213–223. https://doi.org/10.47818/drarch.2022.v3i2054
  4. Chen, H., Wang, L., Wang, Y., Ni, Z., Xia, B., & Qiu, R. (2024). New perspective to evaluate the carbon offsetting by urban blue-green infrastructure: Direct carbon sequestration and indirect carbon reduction. Environmental Science & Technology, 58(29), 12966–12975. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c07337
  5. Çilek, M. Ü. (2021). A vector-based mapping in GIS environment to classify local climate zone. Çukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(4), 929–940. https://doi.org/10.21605/cukurovaumfd.1040496
  6. Danardono, D., Sunariya, M. I. T., Fikriyah, V. N., & Cholil, M. (2021). Spatiotemporal variation of terrestrial carbon sequestration in tropical urban area: Case study in Surakarta District, Indonesia. Quaestiones Geographicae, 40(3), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2021-0020
  7. Dong, M., Liu, Z., Ni, X., Qi, Z., Wang, J., & Zhang, Q. (2023). Re-evaluating the value of ecosystem based on carbon benefit: A case study in Chengdu, China. Land, 12(8), 1605. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12081605
  8. Fares, S., Conte, A. M., Alivernini, A., Chianucci, F., Grotti, M., Zappitelli, I., Petrella, F., & Corona, P. (2020). Testing removal of carbon dioxide, ozone, and atmospheric particles by urban parks in Italy. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(23), 14910–14922. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c04740
  9. Felzer, B. S., & Andrade, C. (2024). Future (2020–2099) carbon and water dynamics of Lehigh Valley based on land use and land cover change. Environments, 11(7), 133. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11070133
  10. Felzer, B. S., Kicklighter, D. W., Melillo, J. M., Wang, C., Zhuang, Q., & Prinn, R. G. (2004). Effects of ozone on net primary production and carbon sequestration in the conterminous United States using a biogeochemistry model. Tellus B, 56(3), 230–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2004.00097.x
  11. Guan, D., Nie, J., Zhou, L., Chang, Q., & Cao, J. (2023). How to simulate carbon sequestration potential of forest vegetation? A forest carbon sequestration model across a typical mountain city in China. Remote Sensing, 15(21), 5096. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15215096
  12. Güzel, Z. T. (2021). Analysis of settlement patterns in Hatay Province. İdealkent, 12(34), 1390–1412. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.963090
  13. Helder, D., Markham, B. L., Morfitt, R., Storey, J., Barsi, J. A., Gascon, F., Clerc, S., Lafrance, B., Masek, J., Roy, D. P., Lewis, A., & Pahlevan, N. (2018). Observations and recommendations for the calibration of Landsat 8 OLI and Sentinel 2 MSI for improved data interoperability. Remote Sensing, 10(9), 1340. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10091340
  14. Huang, Y., Sun, W., Qin, Z., Zhang, W., Yu, Y., Li, T., Zhang, Q., Wang, G., Yu, L., Wang, Y., Ding, F., & Zhang, P. (2022). The role of China’s terrestrial carbon sequestration 2010–2060 in offsetting energy-related CO₂ emissions. National Science Review, 9(8), nwac057. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwac057
  15. Kabisch, N., & Haase, D. (2014). Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 122, 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.016
  16. Kıslalı, H., & Köse, M. (2021). Yerleşimlerin ve rekreasyon aktivitelerinin Göller Yaylası’na etkileri. Journal of Yaşar University, 16(61), 215–227. https://doi.org/10.19168/jyasar.803894
  17. Kurt, G., Külahlıoğlu, M., & Berberoğlu, S. (2023). Optimized ecological network approach of highly urbanized cities: The case of Adana city. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLVIII-M-1-2023, 553–558. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-M-1-2023-553-2023
  18. Liang, Y., Sun, Y., Zhu, Z., Huang, Y., & Piao, S. (2025). Three decades of land cover changes shifted environment-driven greening towards browning in coastal China. Global Change Biology, 31(3), e70134. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.70134
  19. Liao, Q., Wang, Z., & Huang, C. (2020). Green infrastructure offset the negative ecological effects of urbanization and storing water in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 8077. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218077
  20. McManamay, R. A., Vernon, C. R., Chen, M., Thompson, I., Khan, Z., & Narayan, K. B. (2024). Dynamic urban land extensification is projected to lead to imbalances in the global land-carbon equilibrium. Communications Earth & Environment, 5(1), 70. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01231-y
  21. Nguyen, T. H. D., Phan, K. D., Nguyen, H. T. T., Tran, S. N., Tran, T. G., Tran, B. L., & Doan, T. N. (2020). Total suspended solid distribution in Hau River using Sentinel-2A satellite imagery. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, VI-3/W1-2020, 91–97. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-VI-3-W1-2020-91-2020
  22. Nowak, D. J., Greenfield, E. J., Hoehn, R. E., & Lapoint, E. (2013). Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States. Environmental Pollution, 178, 229–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019
  23. Pan, H., Page, J., Shi, R., Cong, C., Cai, Z., Barthel, S., Thollander, P., Colding, J., & Kalantari, Z. (2023). Contribution of prioritized urban nature-based solutions allocation to carbon neutrality. Nature Climate Change, 13(8), 862–870. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01737-x
  24. Pataki, D. E., Carreiro, M. M., Cherrier, J., Grulke, N. E., Jennings, V., Pincetl, S., Pouyat, R. V., Whitlow, T. H., & Zipperer, W. C. (2011). Coupling biogeochemical cycles in urban environments: Ecosystem services, green solutions, and misconceptions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 9(1), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1890/090220
  25. Potter, C. S., Randerson, J. T., Field, C. B., Matson, P. A., Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., & Klooster, S. A. (1993). Terrestrial ecosystem production: A process model based on global satellite and surface data. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 7(4), 811–841. https://doi.org/10.1029/93GB02725
  26. Sellers, P. J., Los, S. O., Tucker, C. J., Justice, C. O., Dazlich, D. A., Collatz, G. J., & Randall, D. A. (1996). A revised land surface parameterization (SiB2) for atmospheric GCMs. Part II: The generation of global fields of terrestrial biophysical parameters from satellite data. Journal of Climate, 9(4), 706–737. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1996)009 2.0.CO;2
  27. Sezer, Ö. (2022). Forming the modern Turkish village: Nation building and modernization in rural Turkey during the early Republic. transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839461556
  28. Sha, Z., Qiu, D., Fang, H., Xie, Y., Tu, J., Tan, X., Li, X., & Chen, J. (2022). Assessing the potential of vegetation carbon uptake from optimal land management in the Greater Guangzhou Area. Land, 11(11), 1878. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11111878
  29. Sun, Z., Xue, W., Kang, D., & Peng, Z. (2024). Assessment of ecosystem service values of urban wetland: Taking East Lake Scenic Area in Wuhan as an example. Land, 13(7), 1013. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13071013
  30. Townshend, J. R. G., Justice, C. O., Li, W., Gurney, C., & McManus, J. (1991). Global land cover classification by remote sensing: Present capabilities and future possibilities. Remote Sensing of Environment, 35(2–3), 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(91)90016-Y
  31. Traganos, D., & Reinartz, P. (2018). Mapping Mediterranean seagrasses with Sentinel-2 imagery. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 134, 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.06.075
  32. Ün, Ç. (2023). A sustainable approach to the conversion of waste into energy: Landfill gas-to-fuel technology. Sustainability, 15(20), 14782. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014782
  33. Ünal, M., Çilek, A., & Güner, E. D. (2020). Implementation of fuzzy, Simos and strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis for municipal solid waste landfill site selection: Adana City case study. Waste Management & Research, 38(1_suppl), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X19893111
  34. Ustaoğlu, E., & Aydınoğlu, A. Ç. (2019). Regional variations of land-use development and land-use/cover change dynamics: A case study of Turkey. Remote Sensing, 11(7), 885. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11070885
  35. Wang, X., Wang, K., Zhang, Y., Gao, J., & Xiong, Y. (2023). Impact of climate on the carbon sink capacity of ecological spaces: A case study from the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei urban agglomeration. Land, 12(8), 1619. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12081619
  36. Wei, W., Wang, Y., Qi, Y., Liu, G., & Dong, N. (2024). Assessing buffer gradient synergies: Comparing objective and subjective evaluations of urban park ecosystem services in Century Park, Shanghai. Land, 13(11), 1848. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13111848
  37. Wu, C., Chen, K., E, C., You, X., He, D., Hu, L., Liu, B., Wang, R., Shi, Y., Li, C., & Liu, F. (2022). Improved CASA model based on satellite remote sensing data: Simulating net primary productivity of Qinghai Lake basin alpine grassland. Geoscientific Model Development, 15, 6919–6933. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6919-2022
  38. Wu, Y., Luo, M., Ding, S., & Han, Q. (2024). Using a light gradient-boosting machine–Shapley additive explanations model to evaluate the correlation between urban blue–green space landscape spatial patterns and carbon sequestration. Land, 13(11), 1965. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13111965
  39. Xu, M., Liu, H., Beck, R. A., Reif, M. K., Emery, E. B., & Young, J. L. (2019). Regional analysis of lake and reservoir water quality with multispectral satellite remote sensing images (Final report No. ERDC/EL TR-19-19). U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Environmental Laboratory. https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/34933
  40. Xu, X., Yang, G., Tan, Y., Tang, X., Jiang, H., Sun, X., Zhuang, Q., & Li, H. (2017). Impacts of land use changes on net ecosystem production in the Taihu Lake Basin of China from 1985 to 2010. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 122(3), 690–707. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JG003444
  41. Zhang, J., Wang, J., Chen, Y., Huang, S., & Liang, B. (2024). Spatiotemporal variation and prediction of NPP in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region by coupling PLUS and CASA models. Ecological Informatics, 81, 102620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2024.102620
  42. Zhang, S., Zhong, Q., Cheng, D., Xu, C., Chang, Y., Lin, Y., & Li, B. (2022). Coupling coordination analysis and prediction of landscape ecological risks and ecosystem services in the Min River Basin. Land, 11(2), 222. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11020222
  43. Zhang, Y., Su, T., Ma, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, W., Zha, N., & Ming, S. (2022). Forest ecosystem service functions and their associations with landscape patterns in Renqiu City. PLoS ONE, 17(4), e0265015. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265015
  44. Zhou, Y., & Feng, Z. (2023). Estimation of forest stock volume using Sentinel-2 MSI, Landsat 8 OLI imagery and forest inventory data. Forests, 14(7), 1345. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071345