Hello,

very briefly talking and cover is all that can be observed on the surface of the earth while land-use is referred to the way in which these biophysical assets are used by humans.

I can suggest you to have a first look to the following references:

Cihlar, J., & Jansen, L. J. M. (2001). From land cover to land-use: A methodology for efficient land-use mapping over large areas. The Professional Geographer, 53(2).

Comber, A. J. (2008). The separation of land cover from land use using data primitives. Journal of Land Use Science, 4(4), 215–229. doi:10.1080/17474230802465173

Fisher, P. F., Comber, A. J., & Wadsworth, R. A. (2005). Land use and land cover: Contradiction or complement. In Fisher, P., & Unwin, D. (Eds.), Re-presenting GIS. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Jansen, L. J. M., & Di Gregorio, A. (2000). Land use data collection using the ‘‘land cover classification system: Results from a case study in Kenya. Land Use Policy, 20, 131–148. doi:10.1016/ S0264-8377(02)00081-9

Hi Joshi,

I´m agree wiht Daniele...

Fiser et al, 2005. Land Use and Land Cover: Contradiction or complement. In Re-presenting GIS, John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

Its a good reference,

Regards.

in very primitive words: land use present man-made areas such as buildings, farms, urban areas, roads, ....

Land cover refers to natural (original) cover of earth surface: forests, deserts, mountains, ...

Well, as highlighted earlier,land use generally includes residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial land uses as per the usage of the land in question whereas land cover describes the natural physical distributions on the surface of the earth, e.g vegetation, forest etc.

Land use can be mapped with high resolution imagery.

The word ' land use' is self explanatory. Land cover can also be mapped thru. Remote sensing technique.

It is more geomorphology to denote land cover.

The high resolution imagery clubbed with some random ground checks can bbe dependable.

For urban areas land cover and use may confirmed with other parameters.

Parashar

Land use is the totality of land usage in an area for different purposes e.g. agriculture, residential, educational, commercial etc. While land cover is the extent of land coverage by vegetation or flora l species. You could use high resolution satellite imagery to map out land use area while you use remote sensing technique like Arial photography to map out land cover area>

While land cover is the biophysical attributes of the earth’s surface, land use is defined in terms of the utilization of land for a given human purpose.

Personally I do not like to down or negatively vote a post or response. To me the best way is to point out shortcomings of a post or response. However, in the case of Eleiche's very correct response with example, I find a negative vote as nonacademic and unlike scholarly.

Thank you all for the valuable information. Your answer and references really helped me.

Land is:

An area of the earth’s surface. OR

Any delineable area of the earth’s surface.

The characteristics of which embrace all reasonably stable or predictably cyclic,

Attributes of the biosphere vertically above and below this area including:

(1) Atmosphere (Near surface climate),

(2) The soil , terrain forms and underlying geology,

(3) The surface hydrology (Shallow lakes, river, marches and swamps),

(4) Near surface layers and associated groundwater and geo-hydrological reserve,

(5) The plant and animal populations and human settlement patterns and physical results of past and present human activity (roads, building, water storage, drainage structure, industrial zones, …etc)

Land cove is:

The observed physical cover, as seen on the ground or through Remote sensing including:

The vegetation (Natural or planted)

Human constructions (Building, etc) which cover the earth’s surface.

Water resources

Ice and bare rocks or sand

Salt flats or similar un-vegetated surface also comprise land cover.

Land use is:

A series of operation on land, carried out by humans, with the intention to obtain products and / or benefits thought using land resources.

Land cover--> the physical coverage on earth system ex:mountains, natural water bodies.

Land use--> human modified terrestrial earth surface.

Some people interchange these definitions with one another..

Please look at the Anderson Land Cover/Use Classification System. The top categories are primarily land cover, while the lower level categories include mostly land use. Only the top level classes have been relatively easy to distinguish with satellite remote sensors.

Land cover describes exactly what makes the cover - grass, e.g.

Land use classifies what is the use from - the grass can be a part of parks in urban areas forming recreational areas, the grass can be cultivated for cattle and it belongs to agriculture areas, etc.

I suppose the most clear and all encompassing definition has already be given by Erik. Suppose in an area where water table is near surface, where one places a dug well, dug by humans, for water supply and a natural waterhole from which wild animal drink water. Similarly a natural depression where runoff accumulates and a depression or tank made by humans to accumulate runoff for water supply for household use, irrigation of fields or for fishery. If one can distinguish what is under nature and what is modified, added or extracted by man to serve his purpose, I don't think one will face any difficulty in distinguishing between land cover and land use.

Mohammad Firoz Khan sir You are correct but some people especially Europian journals when my friend submitted a paper they made this interchanging definitions...and they asked him to change accordingly. then we convinced them by our earlier works and literature.

This is an important question that is often poorly understood, leading to critical classification and mapping errors as well as wasted time and frustration in the classification process. This is especially true when working with geographic object based analysis (GEOBIA), where the interest is typically in object features and related characteristics rather than just broad cover classes (though this is not always the case, as GEOBIA, can be applied to any Earth Observation data set)....

In simple terms: "land cover is what is there, land use describes how it is used."

However it is critical to understand that ONE land cover (eg, a deciduous forest) can have MULTIPLE land uses [eg, habit for a specific species; merchantable fibre; a national, provincial, municipal park; a place to go hunting for animals and or specific vegetation (eg. morel mushrooms), etc] and this is where the issues really begin.

Too many try to immediately use RS data for land use analysis, when really the 'primary' image processing tools are developed to allow for land cover analysis. Once land cover has been well defined (eg using traditional pixel and/or object-based approaches), tools can then be used to assign land use to them. This may be best done with a GIS; or by aggregating specific cover classes together in a RS platform eg, using decision trees; or by creating semantic rules in a GEOBIA platform, which typically involves an integration of fairly sophisticated image processing and GIS capabilities, along with (detailed) user knowledge...

Data from a remote sensor can be used to define the physical characteristics of a scene based on how they interact with the electromagnetic radiation as quantified by the sensor. Land use can, and does certainly influence the structure of the scene, but my experience has shown that the best classification approach is to define the physical characteristics of the scene (as well as possible), then define and apply appropriate "use" classes depending on user needs. Thus, ONE land cover classification may be used by others to generate MANY different land use classifications....

(I) "land cover" describes the physical structure(s) that COVER the surface of the earth under investigation (i.e, it's what is there - which is dependent on the resolving power (spatial, spectral, temporal, radiometric, etc) of the sensor, and the ability of the analyst to identify the scene and its components), as well as the tools that are available to do so, the visual contrast in the scene (within and between bands) and a host of other components...

(II) In contrast, "land use" describes how the land surface under investigation is used, which I would venture is more subjective, thus more open to variability in the results...which is where the challenges really begin.

Define the cover first, then the use within each cover class can be assigned/defined.

... Comments welcome.

Land cover is a physical aspect that describe what occupies space whereas land use in anthropogenic in sense that how people use l and, it describes the activities. Land cover eg a mountain, land use eg settlement.

Fully captured! in Summary cover can be observed or sensed. Use needs human description/explanation of the cover which needs local knowledge.

exactly Fred.... u mentioned about local knowledge which is essential when analysing LULC of any region.

Http://www.gisdevelopment.net/application/lis/overview/ma06_137pf.htm

I would just add a bit more to the land use side of the description, since this is also often associated with urban scale. Land use within the context of urban areas can also take on a political dimension as it is described in terms of residential, commercial, industrial or institutional uses (very generally defined). Additionally, property, which defines the boundaries of the land being used can also be described in terms of the existing use, primary use, permitted uses, secondary uses, accessory uses, so on and so forth. One example could be, a natural use, such as a wetland, which may be one of only a very few permitted uses, in a nature preserve or ground water recharge area. Future land uses as part of a comprehensive plan or one of its elements, may also introduce a different scale to the political and human geography of the urban area and/or the region.

Thus scale of the human geography also plays an important part in defining land use and how human - environment interactions are interpreted.

It is amazing to see how we keep saying the same things with different words! ;-)

Land use types in a given area are a subset of land cover categories. Therefore it's contradictory to use both terms (land use/land cover) as usually found in literature. Preferably we should use land cover alone, unless the focus is on human utilisation of land- excluding natural covers such as forest, rock outcrops and natural water bodies.

This article link may be of help for the users.......... http://landcover.usgs.gov/pdf/anderson.pdf

:-)

Land cover indicates the physical land type such as forest or open water whereas land use documents how people are using the land

Land cover map

By comparing land cover data and maps over a period of time, coastal managers can document land use trends and changes.

Land cover data documents how much of a region is covered by forests, wetlands, impervious surfaces, agriculture, and other land and water types. Water types include wetlands or open water. Land use shows how people use the landscape – whether for development, conservation, or mixed uses. The different types of land cover can be managed or used quite differently.

Land cover can be determined by analyzing satellite and aerial imagery. Land use cannot be determined from satellite imagery. Land cover maps provide information to help managers best understand the current landscape. To see change over time, land cover maps for several different years are needed. With this information, managers can evaluate past management decisions as well as gain insight into the possible effects of their current decisions before they are implemented. (http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/lclu.html)

If simply says, Land cover is permanent and Land use is temporal (changes due to climate and season)

Land cover is what covers the surface of the earth, and land use describes how land is used. Examples of land cover classes include : water, snow, grassland, deciduous forest and bare soil. Land use examples include: wildlife management area, agricultural land, urban, recreation area etc. Two land parcels may have similar land use , but different land cover. For instance, A golf course and an office building are both commercial land uses. The former would have a land cover of grass while the latter would be considered built up.

Ah this old chestnut.. Well, land cover is what is physically there obviously. But it is almost impossible to usefully define landcover without defining it in land use terms.

A field vs a golf course is a classic example. Both grass, but very different uses which imply a rather different cover also. In principle I suppose you could map different grasses by length, but then the question would be what lengths? The length at which it can be cut for sileage? Or the length at which it is feasible to play golf on? Or some arbitray length?

Or you might just map "all grass" without distinguishing type. Then the question arises at what scale? Depends why you are making the map, eco-system services? They each have different minimum scale requirements, too small a scale and you will exclude some areas of grass which are relevant to some ESS.

As soon as you select and define certain landcovers you are implying an application of the map to a subset of the potential land uses. Even a satelite image does so, through the choice of resolution and spectral frequency.

The idea of landcover independent from land use ignores the fact that maps are a human construct.

Land cover is a description of the land (woodland, soil, geology)

Land Use has the human factor (farming, forestry, industrial, urban, recreational etc)

Land Cover is the complex array of all attributes covering the earth surface. example, vegetation, soil, water bodies, buildings, farms etc. while land use is the value put on the cover in terms of utilization. this is the human-defined attribute. example grassland is cover when is put to pasture, it becomes land use.

I invite you to visit my paper: "Comparison of methods for land-use classification incorporating remote sensing and GIS inputs"

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0143622810001517

Where I discuss this issue from a remote sensing perspective.

I think we can use both terms joined. I mean we can make a map whose title say "Map of use and cover land of etc...." I say this because everytime that we will make a map, we will draw all uses and covers of the land from any area of study. The most important thing is to use a good clasificator of the categories of these uses and covers of the land.

Certainly, is it possible to obtain use land (pineaple crop, sugar cane crop, rice crop, and others) from satellite images at 1:60000.

Land Use is how human being utilized for certain purpose at present.

land cover is what is existing on the land,

I like the simple definition of Yoganandhan Ram without making huge complexity. Yes, Land use is defined based on human activities performed on the land, on the other hand land cover is the artificial classification of existing natural or man made features of the land.

Thank you kazi ullah

Land cover indicate what type of phenomena covered physically the land and easy to determine with satellite image in comparison of land use. Forests types, water types, wetlands, and agriculture are the land cover examples.

But land use carried out by humans for obtain benefit, products, and other facilities. Land use Usually Is associated with some operations.

Simply put, landcover are pristine or recovered vegetation in a particular geographical location while land use are the human activities or consequences of such activities that take such resources away.

Land cover is "the observed physical and biological cover of the earth's land, as vegetation or man-made features." In contrast, land use is "the total of arrangements, activities, and inputs that people undertake in a certain land cover type((FAO,1999)

There is a series of paper by Lex Comber and Pete Fisher that look at the distinction:

A.J.Comber, P.Fisher, and R.Wadsworth, 2005. Comparing statistical and

semantic approaches for identifying change from land cover datasets.

Journal of Environmental Management 77, 47-55.

A.J.Comber, P.Fisher, and R.Wadsworth, 2005. What is Land Cover?

Environment and Planning B 32, 199-209.

P.Robinson, P.Fisher and G.Smith, 2005. Analysis of uncertainty in the

Land Cover Map 2000: A comparison with an alternative evaluation of

uncertainty. Photogrammetic Engineering and Remote Sensing 71 (3),

269-276.

A.J.Comber, P.Fisher, and R.Wadsworth, 2005. You know what land

cover is but does anyone else?…an investigation into semantic and

ontological confusion. International Journal of Remote Sensing 26 (1),

223-228.

A.J.Comber, P.Fisher, and R.Wadsworth, 2004. Integrating land cover

data with different ontologies: identifying change from inconsistency.

International Journal of Geographical Information Science 18 (7), 691-708

Dave Unwin

Might sound like repeating what has already been said, but my take is that land cover relates to the physical manifestation of what is on the ground, while land use refers to the way the particular land is being utilized. For illustration we could say this: the land cover in part A of an image is maize, forest, lake, while the land use of the said part A, could be said to be agriculture, forestry or fishing. Thus, land use goes deeper than just what we are able to see from the image (cover) to interrogating (interpreting) what it is being used for (use).

I agree with David Kuria, this is the simplest way to understand the difference.

About the question on how making maps from very high resolution satellite images, yes, this is possible as long as you have either some ground data or you can distinguish by eyes the categories. In both cases, you can use an object-oriented classification technique to extract the features from the satellite images, and create a land use map.

Q: What is the difference between land use and land cover?

R: In simplest terms, the 'land use' refers to the purpose of / usage of land, e.g: residential, commercial, institutional etc; while the 'land cover' refers to the type of coverage, e.g : built-up, open, green cover, forest, etc. The 'land use' is a sub-set of 'land cover' and each land cover type may further be classified into different 'land uses'.

Q: How can we make land use map from high resolution satellite imagery?

R: Each of the land use types can be classified / categorized into sub-categories (e.g: Residential - Informal Settlements, Low Income Settlements, Middle Income Settlements, High Income Settlements etc; Industrial - Chemical, Electronics, Agro, Bio, etc). Along with ground truthing of 20% sample of each of the land use categories would lead to more accurate map from high resolution satellite imagery.

Q: Does making confusion matrix to access the accuracy of land use make any sense, or it is applicable to access the accuracy of land cover only?

R: I think, its more applicable to land cover, e.g from the imagery it may be ascertained about the land cover (built up etc), but the same land cover may have multiple land use (e.g, commercial on ground floor, and residential on upper floors).

I think what have been said so far are nearly similar but still it may need to explicitly differentiate between what land use and land cover really stand for. I would say Land cover is what a certain area (landscape) is comprised of, e.g. forest, wetland, grassland, buildings, streams etc., while land use is how people have been and are using this particular area (landscape), e.g. a wetland (which is one of land cover type) could be utilized for grazing and as well as for traditional irrigation during the dry season-two land use types. Hence, we may easily see and identify land cover types from satellite imageries but may not be possible for land use types. To add one more example, a forest cover can be used for recreation, wildlife park etc... land use types. Hope this make sense. 

Land cover refers to features on the ground. Land use to human activities, such as agriculture, commercial areas, etc.

LAND COVER REFERS TO NATURAL FEATURES AND LAND USE REFERS TO MAN-MADE FEATURES

The observed biophysical cover of the earth’s surface, termed

land-cover, is composed of patterns that occur due to a variety of

natural and human-derived processes. Land-use, on the other hand,

is human activity on the land, influenced by economic, cultural,

political, historical, and land-tenure factors. Remotely-sensed data

(i.e., satellite or aerial imagery) can often be used to define land-use

through observations of the land-cover. 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0143622810001517

It is inaccurate to use land cover and land use interchangably.

In my opinion, when rural area is turning into urban area, the land cover is changing together with land use (agriculture to industry/commercial). However, given a strongly urbanized catchment, the land cover may not change (that much) but the economic use of the land cover can be changed (factories to banks).

Attached please find two highly cited literature for your reference.

Rozenstein, O., & Karnieli, A. (2011). Comparison of methods for land-use classification incorporating remote sensing and GIS inputs. Applied Geography, 31(2), 533-544.

Rawat, J. S., & Kumar, M. (2015). Monitoring land use/cover change using remote sensing and GIS techniques: A case study of Hawalbagh block, district Almora, Uttarakhand, India. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 18(1), 77-84.

Land cover refers to all things that can be seen or observed on the earth's surface, including natural features and man-made features; such as buildings, urban, forest and etc. land cover can be determined from satellite imagery or aerial photos.

Land use documents how the land are used by men or is defined in terms of the utilization of land for a given human purpose, on the other hand, it is the purpose the land serves. Sometimes it can be determined from satellite imagery or aerial photos, but not usually. For example buildings are land cover but residential area, commercial area, industry area and recreation area are land uses. Another example, forests, shrub-lands and grasslands are land covers but a wildlife habitat land use can include all mentioned land covers.