Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 This study provided useful information that can be applied to quantify the implication of management policies in Kurdistan province and other similar regions. + 875 word(s) 875 2020-05-06 11:20:19 |
2 format correct -1 word(s) 874 2020-10-30 07:37:56 | |
3 format correct -1 word(s) 874 2020-10-30 07:44:21 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, R.; Nabiollahi, K.; Rasoli, L.; Kerry, R.; Scholten, T. Land Suitability Assessment. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 21 June 2024).
Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi R, Nabiollahi K, Rasoli L, Kerry R, Scholten T. Land Suitability Assessment. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed June 21, 2024.
Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, Ruhollah, Kamal Nabiollahi, Leila Rasoli, Ruth Kerry, Thomas Scholten. "Land Suitability Assessment" Encyclopedia, (accessed June 21, 2024).
Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, R., Nabiollahi, K., Rasoli, L., Kerry, R., & Scholten, T. (2020, May 11). Land Suitability Assessment. In Encyclopedia.
Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, Ruhollah, et al. "Land Suitability Assessment." Encyclopedia. Web. 11 May, 2020.
Land Suitability Assessment

Land suitability assessment is a method of land evaluation, which identifies the major limiting factors for planting a particular crop. Land suitability assessment includes qualitative and quantitative evaluation. In the qualitative land suitability evaluations, information about climate, hydrology, topography, vegetation, and soil properties is considered and in quantitative assessment, the results are more detailed and yield is estimated. At present study we prepared land suitability assessment map for rain-fed wheat and barley crops based on FAO "land suitability assessment framework" using parametric method and machine learning algorithms in Kurdistan Province, located in west of Iran. This is a unique study that compared two machine learning-based and traditional-based approaches for mapping current and potential future land suitability classes. Moreover, potential yield of rain-fed wheat and barley crop were computed by FAO model.

Land suitability assessment Machine learning Crops

1. Introduction

Rapid population growth in developing countries means that more food will be required to meet the demands of growing populations. Rain-fed wheat and barley, as major grain crops worldwide, are planted under a wide range of environments and are a major staple source of food for humans and livestock [1][2][3][4]. The production of such staple crops influences local food security [5]. Rain-fed wheat and barley are cultivated on approximately 6 and 0.64 million ha in Iran, respectively [6]. They are well adapted to the rain conditions of western Iran, where mean precipitation is 350–500 mm. The production of rain-fed wheat and barley per unit area in Iran is low compared to developed countries worldwide [2]. One of the main causes for this low yield is that the suitability of land for their cultivation has not been determined. To overcome this problem, land suitability assessment is needed, which can help to increase crop yield by growing these crops in the locations that are most suited to their growth [7].

The first step in agricultural land use planning is land suitability assessment which is often conducted to determine which type of land use is suitable for a particular location [8]. Land suitability assessment is a method of land evaluation, which identifies the major limiting factors for planting a particular crop [9][10]. Land suitability assessment includes qualitative and quantitative evaluation. In the qualitative land suitability evaluations, information about climate, hydrology, topography, vegetation, and soil properties is considered [11] and in quantitative assessment, the results are more detailed and yield is estimated [12]. The FAO land evaluation framework [13][14] and physical land evaluation methods [15] have been widely used for land suitability assessment.

Land suitability maps provide the necessary information for agricultural planners and are vital for decreasing land degradation and for assessing sustainable land use. There is a lack of land suitability mapping and associated information in Iran because land suitability surveying and mapping in Iran have followed the traditional approach [16][17][18][19][20]. In the traditional approach, abbreviation of the soil variability through a soil map unit to a representative soil profile may cause the precision of the land suitability maps to be lacking and ignores the continuous nature of soil and landscape variation, resulting in the misclassification of sites and discrete and sharply defined boundaries [21][22]. Moreover, the traditional approach is time-consuming and costly [23].

Machine learning (ML) models are capable of learning from large datasets and integrate different types of data easily [24][25]. In digital soil mapping framework, these ML models have been applied to make links between soil observations and auxiliary variables to understand spatial and temporal variation in soil classes and other soil properties [24][26][27][28]. These ML models include artificial neural networks, partial least squares regressions, support vector machines, generalized additive models, genetic programming, regression tree models, k nearest neighbor regression, adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system, and random forests [26][27][28]. It should be noted that random forests and support vector machines have been the most commonly used techniques in the digital soil mapping community in the last decade due to their relatively good accuracy, robustness, and ease of use. The auxiliary variables can be obtained from digital elevation models (DEM), remotely sensed data (RS), and other geo-spatial data sources [24][29][30][31][32][33][34][35].

2. Discussion

Although in recent years, ML models have been widely used to create digital soil maps [24], little attempt has been made for using ML models to digitally map land suitability classes [36][37]. For instance, Dang et al. [38] applied a hybrid neural-fuzzy model to map land suitability classes and predict rice yields in the Sapa district in northern Vietnam. Auxiliary variables included eight environmental variables (including elevation, slope, soil erosion, sediment retention, length of flow, ratio of evapotranspiration to precipitation, water yield, and wetness index), three socioeconomic variables, and land cover. Harms et al. [39] assessed land suitability for irrigated crops for 155,000 km2 of northern Australia using digital mapping approaches and machine learning models. They concluded that the coupling of digitally derived soil and land attributes with a conventional land suitability framework facilitates the rapid evaluation of regional-scale agricultural potential in a remote area.

Although Kurdistan province is one of the main agriculturally productive regions of Iran and holds an important role in the country’s crop production rank, the mean yield of rain-fed wheat and barley in these regions is lower than 800 kg ha−1 [40]. Land suitability maps can classify the areas that are highly suitable for the cultivation of the two main crops and can help to increase their production. However, such information is commonly scarce in these semi-arid regions.


  1. Dawson, I.K.; Russell, J.; Powell, W.; Steffenson, B.; Thomas, W.T.; Waugh, R. A translational model for adaptation to climate change. New Phytol. 2015, 206, 913–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. FAO. FAO Year Book; FAO Publication: Rome, Italy, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  3. Houshyar, E.; Esmailpour, M. The impacts of tillage, fertilizer and residue managements on the soil properties and wheat production in a semi-arid region of Iran. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. 2018, 93, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Jamshidi, A.; Javanmard, H.R. Evaluation of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) genotypes for salinity tolerance under field conditions using the stress indices. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2018, 9, 2093–2099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Qader, S.H.; Dash, J.; Atkinson, P.M. Forecasting wheat and barley crop production in arid and semi-arid regions using remotely sensed primary productivity and crop phenology: A case study in Iraq. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. 2018, 613–614, 250–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. FAO. Fertilizer Use by Crop in the Islamic Republic of Iran; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  7. FAO. Land Evaluation: Towards a Revised Framework; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bodaghabadi, M.B.; Faskhodi, A.A.; Saleh, M.H.; Hosseinifard, S.J.; Heydari, M. Soil suitability analysis and evaluation of pistachio orchard farming, using canonical multivariate analysis. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 246, 528–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. De la Rosa, D.; Mayol, F.; Diaz-Pereira, E.; Fernandez, M. A land evaluation decision support system (MicroLEIS DSS) for agricultural soil protection. Environ. Model. Softw. 2004, 19, 929–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Halder, J.C. Land suitability assessment for crop cultivation by using remote sensing and GIS. J. Geogr. Geol. 2013, 5, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mosleh, Z.; Salehi, M.H.; Fasakhodi, A.A.; Jafari, A.; Mehnatkesh, A.; Borujeni, I.E. Sustainable allocation of agricultural lands and water resources using suitability analysis and mathematical multi-objective programming. Geoderma 2017, 303, 52–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. El Baroudy, A.A. Mapping and evaluating land suitability using a GIS-based model. Catena 2016, 140, 96–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. FAO. A Framework for Land Evaluation; Soils Bulletin No.32. FAO; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 1976. [Google Scholar]
  14. FAO. Guidelines: Land Evaluation for Irrigated Agriculture; Soil Bulletin No.55. FAO; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  15. Sys, C.; Van Ranst, E.; Debaveye, J. Land Evaluation, Part I. Principles in Land Evaluation and Crop Production Calculations. In General administration for development cooperation; General Administration for Development Cooperation: Brussels, Belgium, 1991; pp. 40–80. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bagherzadeh, A.; Mansouri Daneshvar, M.R. Qualitative land suitability evaluation for wheat and barley crops in Khorasan-Razavi province, northeast of Iran. J. Agric. Res. 2014, 3, 155–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Feizizadeh, B.; Blaschke, T. Land suitability analysis for Tabriz County, Iran: A multi-criteria evaluation approach using GIS. J. Environ. Plann. Man. 2012, 56, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Keshavarzi, A.; Sarmadian, F.; Heidari, A.; Omid, M. Land suitability evaluation using fuzzy continuous classification (a case study: Ziaran region). Mod. Appl. Sci. 2010, 4, 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Safari, Y.; Esfandiarpour-Boroujeni, I.; Kamali, A.; Salehi, M.H.; Bagheri-Bodaghabadi, M. Qualitative Land Suitability Evaluation for Main Irrigated Crops in the Shahrekord Plain, Iran: A Geostatistical Approach Compared with Conventional Method. Pedosphere 2013, 23, 767–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ziadat, F.M. Land suitability classification using different sources of information: Soil maps and predicted soil attributes in Jordan. Geoderma 2007, 140, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Daigle, J.J.; Hudnall, W.H.; Gabriel, W.J.; Mersiovsky, E.; Nielson, R.D. The National Soil Information System (NASIS): Designing soil interpretation classes for military land-use predictions. J. Terramech. 2005, 42, 305–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ziadat, F.M. Application of GIS and Remote Sensing for Land Use Planning in the Arid Areas of Jordan. Ph.D.Thesis, Cranfield University, Bedford, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  23. Behrens, T.; Scholten, T. Digital soil mapping in Germany—A review. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2006, 169, 434–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. McBratney, A.B.; Mendonca Santos, M.L.; Minasny, B. On digital soil mapping. Geoderma 2003, 117, 3–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Roell, Y.E.; Beucher, A.; Møller, P.G.; Greve, M.B.; Greve, M.H. Comparing a Random-Forest-Based Prediction of Winter Wheat Yield to Historical Yield Potential. Agronomy 2020, 10, 395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rentschler, T.; Gries, P.; Behrens, T.; Bruelheide, H.; Kühn, P.; Seitz, S.; Shi, X.; Trogisch, S.; Scholten, T.; Schmidt, K. Comparison of catchment scale 3D and 2.5 D modelling of soil organic carbon stocks in Jiangxi Province, PR China. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0220881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Minasny, B.; McBratney, A.B. Digital soil mapping: A brief history and some lessons. Geoderma 2016, 264, 301–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Teng, T.; Viscarra Rossel, R.A.; Shi, Z.; Behrens, T. Updating a national soil classification with spectroscopic predictions and digital soil mapping. Catena 2018, 164, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Behrens, T.; Schmidt, K.; Zhu, A.-X.; Scholten, T. The ConMap approach for terrain-based digital soil mapping. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2010, 61, 133–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Nabiollahi, K.; Golmohammadi, F.; Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, R.; Kerry, R. Assessing the effects of slope gradient and land use change on soil quality degradation through digital mapping of soil quality indices and soil loss rate. Geoderma 2018, 318, 482–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nabiollahi, K.; Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, M.; Eskandari, S. Assessing and monitoring the soil quality of forested and agricultural areas using soil-quality indices and digital soil-mapping in a semi-arid environment. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2018, 64, 482–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Nabiollahi, K.; Eskandari, S.; Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, R.; Kerry, R.; Triantafilis, J. Assessing soil organic carbon stocks under land use change scenarios using random forest models. Carbon Manag. 2019, 10, 63–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, M.; Nabiollahi, K.; Minasny, B.; Triantafilis, J. Comparing data mining classifiers to predict spatial distribution of USDA-family soil groups in Baneh region, Iran. Geoderma 2015, 253–254, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, M.; Nabiollahi, K.; Kerry, R. Digital mapping of soil organic carbon at multiple depths using different data mining techniques in Baneh region, Iran. Geoderma 2016, 266, 98–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pahlavan-Rad, M.R.; Toomanian, N.; Khormali, F.; Brungard, C.W.; Komaki, C.B.; Bogaert, P. Updating soil survey maps using random forest and conditioned Latin hypercube sampling in the loess derived soils of northern Iran. Geoderma 2014, 232–234, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kidd, D.; Webb, M.; Malone, B.; Minasny, B.; McBratney, A. Digital soil assessment of agricultural suitability, versatility and capital in Tasmania, Australia. Geoderma Reg. 2015, 6, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Vasu, D.; Srivastava, R.; Patil, N.G.; Tiwary, P.; Chandran, P.; Singh, S.K. A comparative assessment of land suitability evaluation methods for agricultural land use planning at village level. Land Use Policy 2018, 79, 146–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dang, K.B.; Burkhard, B.; Windhorst, W.; Müller, F. Application of a hybrid neural-fuzzy inference system for mapping crop suitability areas and predicting rice yields. Environ. Modell. Soft. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Harms, B.; Brough, D.; Philip, S.; Bartley, R.; Clifford, D.; Thomas, M.; Willis, R.; Gregory, L. A comparative assessment of land suitability evaluation methods for agricultural land use planning at village level. Glob. Food Sec. 2015, 5, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mansourian, S.; Izadi Darbandi, E.; Rashed Mohassel, M.H.; Rastgoo, M.; Kanouni, K. Comparison of artificial neural networks and logistic regression as potential methods for predicting weed populations on dryland chickpea and winter wheat fields of Kurdistan province, Iran. Crop Prot. 2017, 93, 43–51.
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : , , , ,
View Times: 5.7K
Revisions: 3 times (View History)
Update Date: 30 Oct 2020
Video Production Service