Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41568164›Full record

ReviewLandscape ecology2026

Causal machine learning methods for understanding land use and land cover change.

F Eigenbrod, Peter Alexander, Nicolas Apfel, Ioannis N Athanasiadis, Thomas Berger, James M Bullock, Gregory Duveiller, Julian Equihua, Isaura Menezes, Rodrigo Moreira and 5 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Landscape ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

F EigenbrodSchool of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, SSO17 1BJ UK.
Peter AlexanderSchool of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JW UK.
Nicolas ApfelDepartment of Economics, University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Ioannis N AthanasiadisArtificial Intelligence, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Thomas BergerDepartment of Land Use Economics, University of Hohenheim, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany.
James M BullockUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, OX10 8BB UK.
Gregory DuveillerMax Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, 07745 Jena, Germany.
Julian EquihuaDepartment of Computational Landscape Ecology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), 04318 Leipzig, Germany.
Isaura MenezesArtificial Intelligence, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Rodrigo MoreiraEnvironmental Sciences Graduate Program, Federal University of Rondônia, Ji-Paraná, RO 76900-726 Brazil.
Dilli PaudelArtificial Intelligence, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Vasileios SitokonstantinouImage Processing Laboratory, Universitat de València, Paterna, 46980 València, Spain.
Markus ReichsteinMax Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, 07745 Jena, Germany.
Simon WillcockSchool of Environmental and Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2DG UK.
Tamsin WoodmanSchool of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JW UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context: Understanding the roles of different drivers in land use and land cover change (LULCC) is a critical research challenge. However, as LULCC is the result of complex, socio-ecological processes and is highly context dependent, achieving such understanding is difficult. This is particularly true for causal modelling approaches that are critical for effective policy formulation. Causal machine learning (ML) methods could help address this challenge, but are as yet poorly understood or applied by the LULCC community. Objectives: To provide an accessible introduction to the state of the art for causal ML methods, their limitations, and their potential applications understanding LULCC. Methods: We conducted two workshops where we identified the most promising ML methods for increasing understanding of LULCC dynamics. Results: We provide a brief overview of the challenges to causal modelling of LULCC, including a simple example, and the most relevant causal ML approaches for addressing these challenges, as well as their limitations. Conclusions: Causal ML methods hold considerable promise for improving causal modelling of LULCC. However, the complexity of LULCC dynamics mean that such methods must be combined with domain understanding and qualitative insights for effective policy design.

Indexed as

Agricultural expansionComplex systemsDeforestationLand use changeMachine learningSocio-ecological systems

Identifiers

PMID41568164
PMCPMC12816019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.