Correction to: Does mangrove plantation reduce coastal erosion? Assessment from the west coast of India
- PDF / 171,106 Bytes
- 3 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 85 Downloads / 233 Views
CORRECTION
Correction to: Does mangrove plantation reduce coastal erosion? Assessment from the west coast of India Saudamini Das 1
# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020
Correction to: Regional Environmental Change https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-020-01637-2 Our recently published paper contained errors in tables 2 and 3. Corrected tables are provided here. The original article has been corrected.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The online version of the original article can be found at https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10113-020-01637-2 * Saudamini Das [email protected]; [email protected] 1
Institute of Economic Growth, University of Delhi Enclave, Room 209, North Campus, Delhi 110007, India
98
Page 2 of 1
Table 2
Reg Environ Change
(2020) 20:98
Estimated coefficients of variables on tehsil level erosion in Gujarat
Variables
Physical vulnerability index Rate of growth of population ΔM L ΔM / L Kori Creek Gulf of Kutch Gulf of Khambhat South Saurashtra Kori Creek × ΔM Gulf of Kutch × ΔM Saurashtra × ΔM Gulf of Khambhat × ΔM South Gujarat × ΔM Kori Creek × (ΔM / L) Gulf of Kutch × (ΔM / L) Saurashtra × (ΔM / L) Gulf of Khambhat × (ΔM / L) South Gujarat × (ΔM / L) Constant Number of observations R square F value Root mean square error
Dep var = sq km of erosion in a tehsil
Dep var = sq km of erosion in a tehsil / L
Model 1
Model 2
3.91 (0.62) 4.04 (0.25) 0.07 (0.85) 0.34*** (3.02) -13.43 (0.77) -19.51*** (3.05) 9.76 (0.99) -14.96** (2.11)
5.14 (0.44) 44 0.51 5.67 p < 0.001 21.97
Model 1A 5.6 (0.79) 4.81 (0.24)
0.12 (0.83) 0.004 (0.01) 0.001 (1.27)
Model 2A 0.05 (0.24) -0.16 (0.32)
Model 3 0.10 (0.71) 0.10(0.18)
Model 3A -0.16 (0.70) -0.01 (0.02)
0.24 (1.51) -26.54** (1.89) -12.81** (2.12) 9.83 (0.98) -13.38** (2.00) 0.35 (1.85) 0.03 (0.97) 1.66 (1.27) -0.68 (1.23) 0.52 (0.60)
-5.58 (0.45) 44 0.57 1885.79 p < 0.001 21.91
-0.27 (1.27) -0.37*** (3.10) 0.49 (0.78) -0.34** (2.44)
0.25 (0.86) 44 0.09 6.89 p < 0.001 1.39
-0.21 (1.22) -0.27** (2.23) 0.62 (0.82) -0.33** (2.46) 0.001** (2.33) 0.0004 (0.92) 0.001 (0.24) 0.03 (0.52) 0.02 (1.21)
0.34 (0.92) 44 0.11 159.96 p < 0.001 1.46
0.94 (1.02) -0.52 (1.21) -0.76 (1.74) 0.66 (0.91) -0.29 (1.38)
-0.78*** (2.94) -0.42 (1.92) 0.56 (1.06) -0.56** (2.17)
0.11 (0.31) 44 0.19 1.87 p < 0.001 1.31
0.79*** (12.18) 0.01 (0.10) -0.01 (0.34) 4.35 (1.59) 0.32 (0.97) 0.76 (1.66) 44 0.53 24.95 p < 0.001 1.07
Note: *** and ** imply 1% and 5% level of significance, respectively. ΔM = Change in mangrove (in sq. km); L = Length of coastline (in km); ΔM/L = Change in mangrove per km of coastline; South Gujarat is the comparison regional dummy.
Reg Environ Change Table 3
(2020) 20:98
Page 3 of 1
98
Estimated coefficients of variables on tehsil level accretion in Gujarat
Explanatory variables used in estimation
Dep var = sq km of accretion in a tehsil Dep var = sq km of accretion in a tehsil / L Model 1
Physical vulnerability index
Data Loading...
