The Driving Forces Inducing Land Cover Changes in Israel's Northern Sharon Plain from the End of the Nineteenth Century to the Present Time

Abstract

This research focuses on Israel's northern Sharon region, an area that underwent radical land cover changes. It examines the driving forces behind the changes in the northern Sharon Plain over four time periods: 1881, 1917, 1954–58, and 2011. To do this, historical land cover was reconstructed using different cartographical sources. The results show that the Sharon Plain has changed from mostly natural land cover features to mostly human-made ones. Some land cover categories have disappeared altogether (marshes, barren sand dunes). Each period examined had different proximate drivers that caused the land cover change. Moreover, at first, the main underlying causes of the change were mainly cultural, but in later periods these became more political and economic. This study demonstrates the importance of using historical map sources and the driving forces approach for understanding land cover changes over time.

Introduction

In recent decades there have been many studies worldwide on landscapes and land use/land cover (LULC) changes.¹ The reasons for the increase in research on these topics are related to two main factors. The first is a growing awareness of the link between LULC changes and environmental change.² Research on LULC changes contributes to the maintenance of a balanced ecosystem and helps humanity more efficiently face present-day challenges such as floods, droughts, food shortages, and climate change.³ The second is the advancements made in geospatial technology since 1990, which make the quantitative analysis of LULC changes more accurate, easier, and faster.⁴

Gaining new insights into LULC changes and the reasons behind them often requires mapping and comparing the results to other sources from the past. To map LULC changes over time, most researchers use sources such as historical and present-day maps, aerial photographs, and satellite imagery, processed within geographic information system (GIS) software programs. Historical cartographic sources contain valuable information about the past, and in recent years there has been a rise in the use of these sources in research.⁵ Nonetheless, errors can be found in these, as well as new errors that form in the process of using them with GIS software programs, and therefore a critical eye is needed when examining them.⁶

Different perspectives and approaches attempt to further understand the causes behind these changes, each with their own strengths and weaknesses.⁷ One useful and encompassing approach is the driving forces approach, which began as an environmental intervention policy framework but was later adopted by different LULC researchers.⁸ The driving forces approach aims to understand the causes, processes, and outcomes by dividing the causes into several driving forces across different levels.⁹ The proximate driving forces are the immediate local forces that have caused the changes. Below this level are the underlying driving forces, which are usually divided into five main types: socioeconomic, political, technological, natural, and cultural forces, and which can be examined at the local, regional, national, or global scales.¹⁰

This research examines the driving forces behind LULC changes in the northern Sharon Plain between 1881 and 2011. The Sharon Plain is a region that has undergone the most radical land cover changes in Israel.¹¹ The Sharon region is a flat plain of approximately 700 km² stretching from the Yarkon River in the south to the Taninim River in the north, and from the Mediterranean Sea in the west to the Samaria Mountains in the east (see fig. 1). Until the nineteenth century, most of the Sharon region was composed of natural features. Large land cover changes in the area began at the end of the nineteenth century. Fortunately, during that time, a growing interest in Palestine had developed, which resulted in many cartographical sources.¹² Today, the Sharon region is one of the most populated regions in Israel, consisting of 101 settlements with a population of 1,208,900.¹³ All this despite its existing environmental conditions such as marsh areas and floods, which make it a less than ideal place to live.

Fig. 1.

The Sharon Plain. The researched area is circled in red.

Today the region suffers from annual winter floods,¹⁴ and it is likely that these could intensify due to climate change.¹⁵ Current predictions for the Middle East signal prolonged periods of drought mixed with heavy precipitation for short periods of time.¹⁶ Indeed, there are already signs of these changes happening in Israel.¹⁷ Moreover, at present several projects aim to bring back some past landscapes, for example, by replanting oak trees.¹⁸ This gives rise to an interesting question: will the projects improve or deteriorate the ecosystem in the region? This study hypothesizes that some present-day environmental challenges in the Sharon Plain—mostly seasonal floods—could be better understood by examining past LULC changes Although this is a local case study, the combination of historical-geographical sources and a driving forces analysis approach can provide a better understanding of LULC changes in this area, and identify the similarities and differences compared with other areas around the world.

Materials and methods

Research Area

The research area chosen is the Ada-Taninim watershed located in the northern part of the Sharon region (see fig. 1). This area covers approximately 279 km², includes eighteen settlements (as of 2019), and still has a larger mixture of LULC categories than other more southern watersheds in the Sharon Plain. Historically, the Sharon Plain can be divided into three distinct areas. For centuries, the area that borders the Mediterranean Sea was mostly covered by sandstone ridges and sand dunes.¹⁹ The middle region was once predominantly marshlands and forests, and the third region, which borders the Samaria Mountains, primarily consisted of oak and carob forests.²⁰

Research Time Frame and Sources

The research examines the land cover changes during four different time periods: 1881, 1917, 1954–58, and 2011. A digital elevation model with a horizontal grid spacing of 30 arc seconds was used to define the Ada-Taninim watershed, as well as a map of the Ada-Taninim drainage area.²¹ The first cartographical source used to reconstruct the late nineteenth century was a map by the British Palestine Exploration Fund (PEF) at a scale of 1:63:360 (see table 1 for all map references).²² The PEF survey was done between 1871 and 1877 and published in 1881. The map is accompanied by three memoirs.²³ The map provides a rare view of the research area before the construction of major settlements and the development of Palestine. The PEF map is considered the first accurate map of Pales-tine.²⁴ The second cartographical source used to reconstruct the early twentieth century was the Caesarea map sheet, which is part of a larger 1917 map of Palestine.²⁵ This map is a reprint of the PEF map with added details. The 1917 map was updated by British Corps for war purposes and is also highly accurate. Since there are no complete maps of the area made in any one particular year in the mid-twentieth century, eight different maps made between 1954 and 1958 were used. To reconstruct the present-day land cover, both satellite imagery from 2011 in a resolution of 0.5 meters and a 2014 map were used.²⁶ While present maps of the area are available, they all have a downside. The Israeli updated present-day maps at a scale of 1:25,000 did not cover the entire area—one area was still in preparation by the Survey of Israel. Furthermore, both updated present-day Israeli maps, at a scale of 1:25,000 and 1:50,000, were done using an orthophoto, and thus some of the land cover classes were unclear and their borders hard to define. For example, the borders of agricultural fields and of built-up and forest areas were much clearer in the satellite imagery than on the map, while other categories, such as water bodies, were much clearer and defined on the maps. Due to these limitations, this research used the satellite imagery from 2011 to digitize the land cover and the 2014 map to verify that the digitization was done correctly and to categorize the land cover accordingly and with accuracy.

Land Cover Reconstruction

The first step to reconstructing the land cover was to georeference the sources. The 1881 PEF map, as well as the 2011 satellite imagery, were already georeferenced.²⁷ The 1917 map, the 1954–58 maps, and the 2014 map were georeferenced using the four corners of the map, formed by the longitude and latitude lines. The second step was to determine the categorization of the land cover. This was done using a similar method to earlier published research.²⁸ For this study, seven broad categories were chosen because they represent the drawn features on all the sources: cultivated land, built-up areas, forests, Batha shrublands, barren sparse dunes and ridges, marshes, and water bodies (table 2). Moreover, water streams and rivers were also digitized. The third step was to digitize the land cover across all sources. This was accomplished using ArcGIS software (version 10.5.1) on a scale of 1:20,000. To compare the different digitized layers to each other during the fourth step, quantitative data was extracted from each layer using the summarize tool. Area sizes of land cover categories were extracted, and the dynamic percentage of change was calculated for each period. Moreover, the tabulate area tool was used to examine the transformation of the land cover categories between 1881 and 1917, 1917 to 1954–58, and 1954–58 to 2011.

Driving Forces Approach

The research uses the driving forces approach to understand the background of the land cover changes. Analysis focuses mainly on the primary driving forces that directly affected the changes in the research area. The driving forces were analyzed qualitatively. However, the importance value of every driving force compared to other driving forces was not measured. Proximate and underlying driving forces were examined for each land cover category that changed between the periods examined.

Table 1.

The cartographical sources used for reconstructing the land cover.

Results

Land Cover Reconstruction

According to the 1881 map, the largest category of land cover area in the study was Batha shrublands (54.83 percent), followed by forests (36.98 percent), while the smallest land cover category was built-up areas (0.15 percent) (see table 3, figure 2). In 1917 the largest type of land cover area was still Batha shrublands (60.36 percent) and forests (32.86 percent), while the smallest land cover area was still built-up areas (0.15 percent) (see table 3, figure 3). According to the 1954–58 maps, the largest type of land cover area was Batha shrublands (76.82 percent), followed by—with a large margin—forests (7.66 percent) and cultivated land (7.01 percent), and the smallest land cover was water bodies (0.51 percent) (see table 3, figure 4). Finally, according to the 2011 source, the largest land cover category in the study area was cultivated land (37.70 percent), followed by Batha shrublands (28.91 percent) and built-up areas (16.37 percent), while the smallest category was water bodies (1.14 percent) (see table 3, figure 5).

Table 2.

Land cover classes used in this research.

Fig. 2.

The digitized land cover map as depicted on the 1881 PEF map.

Fig. 3.

The digitized land cover map as depicted on the 1917 map.

Fig. 4.

The digitized land cover map as depicted on the 1954–58 maps.

Fig. 5.

The digitized land cover map as depicted on the 2011 satellite imagery.

Table 3.

Land cover changes for each period examined. The total area in square kilometers and percentage of the total research area is provided for each land cover category. The magnitude of land cover changes in percentage for each category was calculated between 1881 and 1917, 1917 to 1954–58, and 1954–58 to 2011.

Magnitude of Land Cover Change

According to magnitude of change calculations, between 1881 and 1917 cultivated land had the highest increase (22.1 percent), although the size of this category was still very small, just 3.38 percent of the total research area (see table 3). The greatest decrease (100 percent) was found in marshes, of which 78.08 percent became forests and 21.92 percent became Batha shrublands by 1917 (see tables 3 and 4). Another decrease of 11.44 percent was seen in forests (see table 3). While some new forest areas were planted between 1881 and 1917 in Batha shrublands (13.48 km²) and marshes (4.96 km²), many more were cleared and became Batha shrublands (27.39 km²) by 1917 (see table 4). Regarding the magnitude of change between 1917 and 1954–58, built-up areas had an increase of 2,430.63 percent, while remaining one of the smallest in area size (only 3.86 percent of the total area between 1954 and 1958) (see tables 3 and 4). The biggest decrease in this period was in forests (76.68 percent). Most 1917 forest areas were cleared out by 1954–58 and became Batha shrub-lands (62.89 km²) and cultivated land (6.78 km²) (see table 4). Lastly, according to the magnitude of change calculations, between 1954–58 and 2011, the highest increase was in cultivated land (442.59 percent), followed by built-up areas (327.91 percent), while the biggest decrease was in marshes (100 percent) and barren and sparse dunes and ridges (100 percent) (see table 3).

Table 4 shows that the increase in cultivated land and built-up areas seen in 2011 came at the expense of all land cover category types found there between 1954 and 1958. There are two land cover categories that completely disappeared in the 2011 source: barren and sparse dunes and ridges, and marshes. Marsh areas that existed in 1954–58 disappeared completely and became mostly cultivated land (72.70 percent), Batha shrublands (13.73 percent), and built-up areas (10.11 percent) by 2011. What was barren and sparse dunes and ridges in 1954–58 became Batha shrublands (51.01 percent), built-up areas (25.56 percent), and water bodies (22.49 percent) by 2011 (see table 4). Moreover, it seems large water bodies were not depicted in the 1881 and 1917 maps but only started to appear in the 1954–58 and 2011 maps.

Table 4.

The transformation of land cover categories between 1881 and 1917, 1917 to 1954–58, and 1954–58 to 2011 (amount of change in square kilometers and the dynamic of land cover change in percentage).

Discussion

Historical Background

Throughout history, the Sharon Plain was settled by different people. These settlements were located primarily near a main water source (such as the Yarkon River) or on the coastal strip (for example, Jaffa and Caesarea).²⁹ During the seventeenth century, as the Ottoman Empire began to weaken, Palestine had also witnessed a slow and gradual process of political decline, which was caused by two main factors. The first was the undermining of the regime's foundations and order due to internal revolts and instability. The second was the general disinterest of changing rulers in this geographical area.³⁰ The gradual process of political decline resulted in a lack of security and development and the over-exploitation of natural resources, which then resulted in the abandonment of small settlements and a general decrease in population.³¹ By the beginning of the nineteenth century, the Sharon Plain was one of the most deserted places in Palestine.³² Different proximate and underlying driving forces have contributed to the land cover changes in the studied area since then (see figure 6).

Fig. 6.

The proximate and underlying driving forces that influenced the land cover changes in the research area. The proximate driving forces are divided into the three land cover periods: 1881 to 1917, 1917 to 1954–58, and 1954–58 to 2011. The underlying driving forces are framed in different colored squares. Next to each proximate driving force a colored dot represents an underlying driving force. Figure by author.

Land Cover Changes—1881 to 1917

The first period of land cover changes in this research, from 1881 to 1917, covers the final years of the Ottoman Empire, which ruled the Sharon region for over five hundred years. This period ends in 1917, when the British took control of the territory. The four main proximate driving forces for land cover changes during this period were the development of new rural settlements, agricultural expansion, draining the marshes, and deforestation. These forces were the result of mainly cultural and economic underlying forces. The first part of this period symbolizes the beginning of the new Jewish settlement of Palestine, which started in 1882. Jewish settlements relied on agricultural produce to survive. During this period, study results show a slight increase in cultivated areas, but the largest change was the decrease in marshlands, followed by forest areas.

draining the marshes

To early Jewish settlers, the marshlands were a challenge. Historically the inner Sharon area was mostly marshlands and forests. Marshes were present in the Sharon Plain because of four physical factors. The first factor is that the inner Sharon area lies on clay soil, where the infiltration rate of water is slow.³³ Second, in the past, the entire area was covered in streams and rivers that flowed from the Samaria Mountains in the east, through the Sharon Plain, and into the Mediterranean Sea (see figure 2).³⁴ Third, the sandstone ridges and sand dunes in the west acted as a barrier that trapped mountain waters and rainfall in the area for long periods of time.³⁵ The fourth factor is the high level of groundwater in the region, which sometimes reaches a depth of just 6–20 meters.³⁶

Early Jewish settlers' solution for the marshes was to drain them to a nearby river and plant eucalyptus trees in some of the dried-out areas.³⁷ These actions were carried out in each of the new Jewish settlements. For example, the first in the area was Hadera, founded in 1891 near the Hadera River (see figure 1).³⁸ As settlers would later note, "Hadera was, in those days, a place of marshes, created by sand barriers . . . which prevented the flow of water into the sea, and as a result, the area was an incubation place for the Anopheles mosquito. Indeed, the fever was the greatest enemy of the settlers. Many of them got ill and died."³⁹ In 1891 the first drainage channels were constructed to transfer the water from the marshlands to the Hadera River. Between 1892 and 1893, settlers also began to plant eucalyptus trees in the dried-out marsh. By 1896 some 4,000 dunam of Australian eucalyptus trees had been planted in the area.⁴⁰ Today this area, called the Hadera Forest, is the largest of its kind in Israel.⁴¹ As time passed, the settlers realized that the most effective solution for drying out the marshlands was to drain them rather than plant trees.⁴² These actions increased the flow of water from the marshlands into the rivers. Similar challenges and solutions that preoccupied early settlers can be seen in the other cases of settlement in the Sharon Plain.

Drying the marshes is linked to cultural attitudes. Historically, marshlands were seen as wastelands all over the globe, and as a result, they were drained and their waters diverted.⁴³ The reason behind this negative attitude was the fact that marshlands were a good habitat for the mosquitoes that spread malaria. In addition, marshlands were considered wasted fertile lands that should be drained and used for agriculture. The Hula Valley (in Israel) is another similar example of a large area of wetlands in the Galilee region that was first drained by the British during the Mandate period in Palestine and then completely dried up by the State of Israel. However, there is a fundamental difference between the two cases, and between them and other areas around the world. In the case of the Hula Valley, after draining, settlers discovered that the soil was not suitable for agriculture.⁴⁴ Moreover, drying the Hula Valley destroyed the way of life led by the Bedouin Awarna tribe, who lived on the banks of these marshlands. Furthermore, it caused environmental damage and soil erosion and resulted in fires in the summertime.⁴⁵ Contrary to the Hula case, the soil of the dried-up marshlands in the Sharon area was found to be fertile and good for agriculture. However, due to the land cover modifications made to reduce the marshlands, floods became an even greater annual challenge.⁴⁶

It is important to note that in the 1917 map no marshland cover appears, while in the 1954–58 maps we once again find marshlands, which completely disappear in the 2011 source. There can be two explanations for the disappearance of all the original 1917 marshes. The first is that several years of drought disrupted all marshes, so when the area was mapped, there was no trace of them. Another possible explanation is a mapping error. However, the final disappearance of the marshes in 2011 is certain. Settlements, agricultural land, and artificial water bodies can be found on the map's former marshes.

deforestation

The origin of the name "Sharon" seems to derive from the Acadian name Sarnu, which means "forest."⁴⁷ In the Hellenistic period the region was named Drumos, which means "an oak forest" in Greek.⁴⁸ Ancient historical sources describe the Sharon forests as very wide and covering almost the entire Sharon region.⁴⁹ There is some evidence that the oak trees from this area were used as combustible materials for the glass factory in the Byzantine period (300–630 AD).⁵⁰ There is also proof that the Crusaders (1100–1291 AD) used the wood from the Sharon region for their iron industry.⁵¹

It is argued that until the Napoleonic period (around 1798–99) forests still covered a large portion of the Sharon Plain. Nonetheless, the real change first began in 1831, when Ibrahim Pasha conquered Palestine for a short time. Under Pasha's orders, the trees from forests in the southern part of the Sharon were used for ship construction.⁵² Pictorial tree stump symbols (see figure 7) can be found on the 1881 map. During the First World War (1914–18), the Ottoman Empire continued to cut down trees to operate the Ottoman steam trains and for the war efforts. By the end of the war, only traces of forests could be found.⁵³ The Ottoman Empire's deforestation of the Sharon Plain was quite a common practice during that period. Indeed, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, other parts of the world were also subjected to deforestation. Later, from the mid-nineteenth century on, attitudes changed, and afforestation slowly became the main practice.⁵⁴

Land Cover Changes—1917 to 1954–1958

The second period of land cover change, from 1917 to 1954–58, involved political changes in the region. This period begins with the British occupation of Palestine. In 1948 the British Mandate ended, and the State of Israel was established. The three main proximate driving forces for land cover changes during this period were settlement changes (creation of new settlements, the expansion of existing settlements, abandonment of settlements), agricultural expansion, and deforestation. The most important underlying driving force in this period was politics.

Fig. 7.

The 1881 map legend (left), with the remains of a forest on the upper side and tree stumps at the bottom (right).

settlement changes

Throughout history, the Sharon Plain was settled by different people mostly near the main water sources and coastal area.⁵⁵ Remains have been found of past human settlements such as the Roman harbor city of Caesarea, built between 22 and 10 BC.⁵⁶ However, most settlements did not last long.⁵⁷ In 1881 there were only nine small villages in the research area consisting of just a few hundred people.⁵⁸ The absence of large, long-standing settlements in this region can be linked to security problems: the Sharon is a low and flat area, and therefore has a distinct geostrategic disadvantage.⁵⁹ Moreover, the Via Maris, the ancient road used from 3300 BC onward by various merchants and armies as a path across Africa, Asia, and Europe, was located between the Sharon marshlands in the west and the slopes of the Samaria Mountains in the east, and was another security disadvantage.⁶⁰ Lastly, the reason for the scarcity of human settlement in the inner part of the Sharon was the large amount of water, which acted as a hotbed for malaria and other related diseases.⁶¹

In the nineteenth century new powers entered Palestine and proceeded to acquire and develop land.⁶² These events created new job opportunities and later attracted population, including Arabs from the neighboring areas of the empire and Jews from the Ottoman Empire and Europe.⁶³

Between 1917 and 1954–58, the largest land cover change was the increase of built-up areas (see table 3). Under the British Mandate, population in the Sharon area increased and built-up areas consequently expanded.⁶⁴ In 1917 there were only nine settlements, but by 1954–58 there were twenty-two. However, a closer look at the data in table 4 also reveals other trends. While an increase of 3.71 percent in built-up areas occurred because of settlement creation and expansion, table 4 shows that in 1954–58, 10.13 km² of 1917 built-up areas became forests and Batha shrublands. The explanation for the abandonment of settlements is related to the first Arab-Israeli War of 1948. As a result of this war, eight Arab villages in the research area were abandoned.⁶⁵ Some of these settlements later became new Jewish settlements, such as Givat Ada, which is partly located in the former Arab settlement El Marah. Other abandoned settlements appear on the maps as tree-covered areas or Batha shrublands, such as Subbarin and Sindianeh. From an examination of the maps, it seems that these abandoned villages were drawn on the 1954–58 maps with the land cover that surrounded the area. While the maps do show abandoned buildings, they appear hollow and surrounded by natural features, unlike settled areas that were depicted as black squares.

Changes in land cover following an influx of human settlement are not new. What differentiates one case from another is the reason for the new settlement. Possible reasons include the search for food and water, the search for a safe area, and politics. In the case of the Sharon Plain, the reason for the new Jewish settlement was the ideological reason of Zionism. The primary aim of Zionist ideology was to strive for national salvation for the Jewish people by establishing a Jewish state. This ideology encouraged Jews from around the world to immigrate to Palestine and settle there.⁶⁶ Zionist immigration started in 1882.⁶⁷

Land Cover Changes—1954–1958 to 2011

The third and last period of land cover changes is between 1954–58 and 2011. At the beginning of this period, Israel was still a young developing country, with an economy based on agricultural exports. By the end of this research period, Israel had become a highly urbanized, developed country, and its main exports became services and technologies. Moreover, Israel has opened to globalized economy and trends. The four main proximate driving forces for land cover changes during this period were urbanization, agricultural expansion, afforestation, and creation of artificial water bodies. The three important underlying driving forces during this period are economic, political, and cultural, with natural forces also a factor but to a smaller degree.

urbanization

Despite the increase in population since 1881, the most drastic changes occurred from the 1950s onward. The growth in population is linked to the national trends of that period. With the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, waves of Jewish immigration began to occur. First came Jewish European immigrants that survived the Holocaust, and later Jews who fled Arab countries due to deteriorating relations between these countries and Israel.⁶⁸ Since at that time Israel was still a country whose main export was agriculture, many settled in agricultural areas like the Sharon. The proximity to Tel Aviv and its larger job opportunities was yet another reason to settle in the Sharon.

From the beginning of settlement, built-up areas were located on all past land cover categories. For example, the new settlements in the research area have resulted in the total disappearance of barren sparse dunes and ridges. In the past this type of land cover was considered poor quality land, just like the marshes. For this reason, infrastructures, roads, and settlements were built on this land cover. For example, the first coastal highway (highway no. 2) and Kibbutz Maagan Mikhael, Jisr as-Zarka, Bet Hananya, Or Aqiva, and the new settlement of Caesarea were all constructed on this type of land cover.

Despite the increase in population and settlements from the 1950s onward, almost all settlements were agricultural. However, from the end of the 1970s, the decline in demand for citrus and the general decline of the agricultural sector in Israel, together with the rise in land prices in the center of Israel, caused many who owned agricultural lands to cut down the orchards and sell the land.⁶⁹ The land was sold at a good price for the construction of new settlements and the expansion of existing ones. The process of urbanization in the Sharon region is very similar to the process that took place in the rest of the developed world.⁷⁰

agricultural expansion

The 1881 PEF memoirs note that a "great part of the Plain of Sharon is uncultivated, except close to the villages."⁷¹ Indeed, on the 1881 map the cultivated land cover is minimal. Gradually, though, the cultivated land cover area has increased. In 1881 cultivated land covered just 2.76 percent of the total research area. In the 1950s it reached 7.01 percent. Nonetheless, the great jump happened between 1954–58 and 2011, and by 2011 this land covered 37.70 percent of the total research area. Changes in cultivated land cover are directly linked to human settlement and activity and to national and global economic trends of supply and demand. From the 1950s on, the main branch of agriculture was citrus fruit in most settlements in the Sharon, as it was in great demand at that time in Europe.⁷² The citrus industry prospered, orchard owners managed to recoup their investments, and with their profits they purchased more land and planted new orchards.⁷³ At their peak, near the end of 1975, citrus orchards covered 430 km² of the Sharon region.⁷⁴ At the end of the 1970s, due to the decline in demand for citrus in Europe, citrus trees were cut down and orchard areas became agricultural fields or built-up areas for the growing population in the region.⁷⁵ The 2011 source shows that more than half of the cultivated land covers are fields and less than half are still orchards.

afforestation

After the decrease in forest areas between 1881 and 1954–58, forests doubled in size between 1954–58 and 2011. Afforestation in Israel has a long history. Historically, the increase in forest areas was caused by forest planting as part of Jewish National Fund (JFN) operations.⁷⁶ At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the JFN began to purchase land in Palestine as part of the Zionist ideology. Once the land was purchased, the JNF began planting forests. This practice demarked land ownership and provided economic and employment prospects for new settlers. In addition, landowners could make use of the wood for commercial purposes. After the creation of the State of Israel and following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, afforestation was also used to remove the abandoned Palestinian settlements from the consciousness of Israeli society.⁷⁷ From the end of the 1980s on, cultural attitudes toward forests changed. Afforestation practices continue to this day, but their main goals include creating leisure and recreational places and contributing to the natural environment and the preservation of nature.⁷⁸ The Israeli government has enacted various laws to protect forests and forest areas. In the last few years different private projects have been put forward with the aim of replanting new oak trees in the Sharon Plain in order to restore the forest to its past glory.⁷⁹

creation of artificial water bodies

The creation of water bodies from the 1950s onward is linked to the challenge of floods that existed in this area for many centuries. One of the prayers spoken by Jewish high priests in the Second Temple period (around the first century AD) was a warning to the Sharon people to maintain their mud houses, lest they collapse upon them.⁸⁰ The Sharon region was known for yearly floods due to heavy rains in the winter season, which often caused mud houses to collapse. During excavations in 1924 near the town of Herzliya (see figure 1), researchers discovered an ancient Roman tunnel that had been built to drain the floodwaters.⁸¹

Even though the Sharon region has long suffered from floods, their increase can be linked directly to land cover changes. By the start of the twentieth century, the region had become bare due to the disappearance of forest areas.⁸² Without forests, no trees could slow down the flow of water nor absorb it.⁸³ Many of the new Jewish settlers from 1881 onward established their settlements—such as Pardes-Hanna Karkur—on "empty" lands.⁸⁴ Since the new settlers had minimal knowledge of the area, they often settled in flat areas with water crossings, where land was cheap and less in demand. Moreover, until the 1930s they remained unaware that the groundwater in the area was high—another factor that increased the likelihood of floods. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, early Jewish settlers of the Sharon Plain removed marshes by draining their water into a nearby river.⁸⁵

The appearance of water bodies on the 1954–58 map is linked to economic and political driving forces. Yearly floods damaged settlements, agricultural land, and property, both physically and economically. Since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, the main solution to floods, like that used by early settlers, was to divert the water flow toward large rivers by building drainage channels and adapting the rivers to carry larger amounts of water.⁸⁶ Compared to the 1881 and 1917 sources, we can see that the 1954–58 and 2011 sources show that streams have drastically diminished. Today many water streams are underground channels. However, these actions created new challenges. Rivers received an increased water flow from other areas, which often caused them to overflow and flood the surrounding riverbanks and areas.⁸⁷ Due to the continuous flooding problem, the Drainage and Flood Protection Law was passed in 1957. This law established a statutory body called the Drainage Authority, whose main role was the protection and prevention of floods. The research area is also under two lesser draining authorities, the Sharon and the Carmel.⁸⁸ Since then, many efforts have been made to prevent and minimize flooding, especially in urban areas. Since 1969, part of the overflow of the Hadera River has been diverted for use at the Hadera power plant. Furthermore, the Drainage Authority established a dam on the Taninim River, which in wintertime diverts water to a sedimentation reservoir that enriches underground aquifers.⁸⁹ Another example is the establishment of special pools that collect water in times of need. These pools were constructed in the sand dune area near Caesarea, as well as near the Hadera River.⁹⁰ Lastly, in 2003, to successfully prevent constant flooding in the coastal highway (highway no. 2), an ancient Roman dam near Kibbutz Maagan Michel was reused.⁹¹ Although many efforts have been made to reduce flooding in the Sharon Plain, it remains an issue during the winter months.⁹²

Conclusion

This research has examined the forces behind the land cover changes in the northern part of the Sharon Plain (Israel). It found that these changes were significant and various. This study has demonstrated the existence of different proximate and underlying driving forces over different periods. Whereas in the first period of change cultural forces were dominant, in the second period it was a combination of political, socioeconomic, and cultural forces that led to changes. In the third period it was mainly political and socioeconomic forces. Moreover, this research illustrates how land cover changes are directly linked to the unique history of human development in the region. Some driving forces of land cover changes in the Sharon are similar to other places in the world—for example, the driving forces that reflect the transformations of human attitudes toward nature across different times, such as the drying of marshes, deforestation followed by afforestation, agricultural expansion, and present-day urbanization. Nonetheless, while similar cases to Sharon's land cover changes took place in other parts of Israel, driven by the same forces, the final changes were not always identical. An example of a different change is the drying of marshlands in the Hula Valley. In other cases the driving forces of land cover changes were similar to the ones in the Sharon, but the initial reasons for them were different. For example, at the end of the nineteenth century, some land cover changes in the Sharon Plain were the result of the new Jewish settlers' desire to solve problems they faced, such as diseases from the marshlands and floods. The reasons that brought the Jewish settlers to the Sharon Plain (i.e., Zionism) were different from the reasons of other settlers in other parts of the world. However, in similar conditions, the driving forces might have been the same in other parts of the world.

The advantage of using the approach of the driving forces is that it not only reveals the total outcome of LULC changes but also shows the dynamics in between the different LULC categories over time. Furthermore, this approach helps find the deep roots of LULC changes mostly hidden in various local/national narratives of different regions of the world, allowing us to compare the type, dynamic, and final result of the change. Through the identification of the driving forces and how they acted in a specific place and time, they can help effectively identify the right tools, policies, and solutions to manage the challenges faced at present better and reach a more sustainable future. Lastly, this research has stressed yet again the importance of historical maps as a source for understanding land cover changes over time.