Hey community,
I kind of asked the same question quite a while ago, but now I put some more thought into it and I had to get back to you with the topic.
I’m primarily busy with mapping parts of the Kwilu and Kwango region of the DR Congo, and for some reason I started to map a lot of landscape, too. This landcape is extremely complex if you take a detailed look: In the grasslands, you find thousands of small crops where people work on with no machinery (hence their size).
When I started mapping, I was told to be as detailed as possible - so I used to tag every single crop (and not “areas” of crops, like I did before that). But now I realized that the size of crops is not the only complex thing about them: It is, in fact, shifting cultivation.
What does that mean?
As the name suggests, the crops only rest for one (or 2?) years, after that they are abandoned to let the grounds recover. That means, every time we receive new sattelite imagery (which just happened for the Kwilu/Kwango area), the mapped crops would not resemble the imagery. Radically thought, my edits are useless.
The question is: How do we deal with shifting cultivation? Is it “mappable”? How? Do we just not map it?
…just to add one more thing: The whole shifting cultivation issue is an important part of the Landgrabbing debate. “Land-deals” are also mostly based on sattelite imagery (due to the un-ability and un-willingness of gov. officials to visit the concerned areas) and they do the same “mistake” like I did: Seeing that areas are - apparently - not used, they can be sold (or tagged as natural=grassland).
Why do I bring this up? Because I think that it is very important to somehow point out that those areas ARE used - and are NOT unoccupied!
Thank you very much in advance for any suggestions, help or maybe also more questions!
Kind regards from Brussels,
ian727