GIS-Based Soil Erosion Risk Assessment of

Lapu-Lapu Watershed, Puerto Princesa City,

Integrated with CMIP6 Predictions and Cellular
Automata-Artificial Neural Networks Algorithms
Icy Nicole Q. Poquiz1, Vianca Rein L. Milan2, and Czarine Faye A. Elvinia3
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics – Senior High School Department
Palawan National School
Puerto Princesa City, Palawan

Abstract—The Lapu-Lapu Watershed in Barangay Montible, Puerto Princesa City, is highly vulnerable to
erosion, driven by deforestation and land use changes, and faces serious flooding risks, threatening water
security (Palawan News, 2023). This study integrates the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)
with GIS and advanced predictive models, including CMIP6 climate projections and Cellular Automata-
Artificial Neural Networks, to assess erosion risks and future land cover shifts. Analyzed RUSLE factors—
rainfall erosivity (R), soil erodibility (K), slope length and steepness (LS), cover management (C), and
conservation practices (P)—reveal an average R factor of 565.51 MJ·mm·(ha·h·year)^-1, a K value of 0.49,
and an LS factor of 116.68, with open forests (C factor 0.006) dominating land cover, the P-factor values
were set to 1 for most land cover categories except for inland water, which had a value of 0. Projections for
2030 indicate seasonal rainfall could range from 83.6 to 882.5 mm (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5), potentially
increasing flood and drought risks. Land cover is expected to shift, with erosion rates surging from 726.24
tons/ha/year in 2024 to 2,176 tons/ha/year by 2030, aligning with findings by Elaloui et al. (2022). Areas at
"very high" to "very severe" erosion risk may rise from 55.6% to 75% by 2030, underscoring the urgency of
sustainable land and water management practices. This research provides essential data to support
sustainable agriculture and mitigate erosion impacts for future generations.

Keywords— GIS, mapping, RUSLE, CMIP6, ANN, watershed

vegetation or sloped terrains.3 It occurs due to the

I. INTRODUCTION
combined effects of rainfall and surface runoff.
Around the world, erosion and surface runoff Intense rain can detach soil particles, which are then
have contributed to poor water quality and washed away by initial shallow runoff. It lowers
worsening soil deterioration. Soil erosion is a natural crop production and pollutes nearby rivers, wetlands,
phenomenon that influences every type of landform. and lakes. It can happen slowly without being
It is a gradual process that occurs when water or noticed, quickly causing a major loss of topsoil.4
wind moves soil particles, causing the soil to The severity of erosion is influenced by natural
deteriorate.1 Land degradation due to soil erosion is factors such as soil type, geology, topography, land
a global issue that results in the loss of nutrient-rich use, and climate, as well as human activities that can
topsoil, heightened runoff from the less permeable worsen the process.5
subsoil, and reduced water accessibility.2This
phenomenon is a natural degradation process that Watersheds play a critical role in supplying water
predominantly occurs in areas with limited to farmlands,6 but soil erosion within these areas

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 1 of 33
has become a widespread and alarming problem7 Soil risk assessment identifies areas vulnerable to
because it significantly impacts water quality in erosion and degradation, impacting agricultural
watersheds by altering the hydrological cycle productivity, water quality, and ecosystem health.
through factors like soil compaction, vegetation For example, soil loss in a specific watershed
changes, and shifts in water infiltration and increased by 1.205 million tons over 35 years,
retention.8 It adds up 60-80% of sediment in rivers highlighting the need for integrated management.17
and lakes and reducing the watersheds capacity.
The environmental issues affect watersheds globally, According to Sulaeman and Westhoff (2020), soil
leading to the loss of fertile land, degradation of erosion often leads to subsequent erosion events,
water quality, and disruption of ecosystems. making thorough erosion risk assessments vital for
effective mitigation strategies.18 These assessments
The Philippines is particularly vulnerable to soil help land managers and policymakers identify
erosion due to its steep terrain, deforested uplands, vulnerable areas, evaluate erosion potential under
and frequent heavy rainfall.9 This issue threatens the various conditions, and develop targeted
sustainability of agricultural systems, which depend interventions. Utilizing the Revised Universal Soil
heavily on watersheds for irrigation.10 In addition to Loss Equation (RUSLE), which was developed and
that, soil erosion in watersheds has also become a maintained by the USDA-Agricultural Research
common issue.11 According to Pimentel (2018), soil Service.19 According to a study by Salvacion (2022),
erosion significantly alters the water quality of RUSLE is an empirical model for estimating soil
watersheds. It has an impact on watershed erosion that is useful for estimating soil loss on hill-
hydrology by changing soil compaction, slopes in Marinduque. The model has gained
overground vegetation, evapotranspiration, widespread use because it requires more
infiltration, and water-holding capacity.12 Mapping straightforward computational inputs than other
erosion-prone areas is essential for natural resource conceptual and process-based models.
management.14 Therefore, it's crucial to accurately
evaluate soil erosion and sediment transport in Additionally, Geographic Information System
watersheds. This assessment is essential for (GIS) stakeholders can map erosion hotspots and
developing effective land use and soil management prioritize conservation efforts. GIS enhances spatial
strategies, as well as protecting important structures analysis, enabling cell-by-cell predictions of soil
like irrigation dams, power plants, and flood control loss across large areas, which is crucial for targeting
systems. sub-watersheds based on erosion risk.20 Inaccuracy
in soil risk assessments will compromise the ability
Recent studies show that the location of Puerto to prevent landslides, mudslides, and other
Princesa City exhibits steep slopes and weak soil geohazards, putting safety and environmental health
make the area prone to erosion and landslides. at risk.
Moreover, approximately 142,000 hectares or
roughly 65% of the city’s total land area are Accurately estimating soil erosion rates and
characterized by slopes ranging from (18%-30%) to identifying vulnerable areas is essential and it
severely broken (>50%). This topographical requires considering several critical factors. The
configuration markedly enhances the area’s Rainfall Erosivity Factor (R) measures the influence
vulnerability to soil erosion, landslides, and of precipitation on soil erosion, highlighting the
mudslides.15 The area’s geological characteristics intensity and volume of rainfall.21 The Soil
and intense rainfall during the wet season contribute Erodibility Factor (K) reflects the susceptibility of a
to slope instability, resulting in frequent landslides specific soil type to erosion, which is determined by
that threaten infrastructure and local communities. characteristics such as texture and organic matter
Without appropriate measures to address these content.22 The Topographic Factor (LS), combining
problems, the quality and availability of water slope length and steepness, evaluates how the terrain
across various barangays may be compromised.16 impacts erosion potential, with steeper slopes
typically experiencing greater soil loss.23 The Cover
Management Factor (C) assesses the effects of

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 2 of 33
vegetation cover and land management practices, By combining RUSLE factors, such as rainfall
while the Conversation Practice Factor (P) measures erosivity and land cover, with GIS data handling,
the effectiveness of soil conversation techniques, CMIP6 climate projections, Cellular Automata (CA),
such as contour farming, in reducing erosion,24 and Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), researchers
these factors provide a comprehensive framework can create detailed maps that visualize erosion risks
for soil risk assessment. and inform land management decisions. CMIP6
provides valuable climate projections; CA simulates
Moreover, the integration of GIS with RUSLE how land cover changes over time; and ANNs
allows for the efficient processing of various input enhance predictive accuracy for rainfall and erosion
data sources, such as Digital Elevation Models patterns based on complex data inputs.32 Mapping
(DEMs) for topography and remote sensing data for high-risk areas for erosion and landslides allows
land use cover changes. This comprehensive stakeholders to prioritize interventions that improve
approach improves the accuracy of soil loss soil stability, protect essential resources, and
estimations and enables a better understanding of the promote both livelihoods and ecosystem health. By
complex interactions between environmental factors integrating all these components, researchers can
influencing erosion.25 In previous studies, soil produce models that predict significant impacts and
erosion has been mapped using RUSLE and GIS. land changes, offering a reliable tool for assessing
The soil loss from water erosion in the Gumara environmental risks.33
Watershed in Ethiopia and the watershed stream
Indaia in Brazil was estimated by Belayneh et al. The Lapu-Lapu Watershed in Barangay Montible
(2019)26 and Da Cunha et al. (2016)27 using RUSLE is one of the largest watersheds capable of providing
and GIS approach. By determining which regions of an additional 30 million liters of potable water per
the watersheds were most vulnerable to soil erosion, day, thereby averting the water supply shortages that
they were able to prioritize efforts to avoid soil most households experience every dry season. This
erosion. watershed utilizes two rivers: the Lapu-Lapu River
and the Montible River.34 Consequently, it is crucial
Also, incorporating the Coupled Model to address issues related to soil erosion in this
Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) enhances watershed, as it could impact the water supply for
climate projections by using updated simulation nearby communities. However, a model has not yet
models that consider recent observations and been developed that can quantify and illustrate the
emission pathways. It offers finer atmospheric spatial distribution of soil loss in this watershed or
resolutions and scenarios, making it highly useful predict changes over time. The components of the
for predicting variables like rainfall at both global soil loss equation include slope length and steepness,
and regional scales.28 It provides accurate modeling rainfall erosivity, soil erodibility, cover management,
of rainfall impacts in local areas.29 This combined and practices. Additionally, CMIP6 was used for
approach is vital for assessments of soil erosion in rainfall prediction, while Cellular Automata (CA)
watershed studies. and Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) was
employed to analyze land cover changes over time.
Additionally, adding Cellular Automata (CA) and This valuable investigation into annual soil loss
Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) into the study would greatly contribute to the City Disaster Risk
offers valuable tools for enhancing both spatial and Reduction and Management Office (CDRRMO) and
predictive modeling. CA simulates land cover Puerto Princesa City Water District (PPCWD),
changes over time by capturing local spatial making the results beneficial for environmental
interactions, which is crucial for understanding soil management and computational research.
erosion patterns in dynamic environments.30
Meanwhile, ANNs process complex, nonlinear
relationships in large datasets, making them ideal for
accurate rainfall and erosion predictions.31

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 3 of 33
 II. MATERIALS AND METHODS Figure 2 shows the framework for assessing soil
Study Area erosion in the Lapu-Lapu Watershed integrates
The Montible River is one of the major rives in several components to create a comprehensive view
Palawan, located in central Palawan approximately 3 of erosion risk and its contributing factors. The
kilometers west of Puerto Princesa City in the aerial component of this framework is the Revised
distance, with a total area of 2,792,44 ha in the Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE), a model
following coordinates: 9°45’ 34.84’’N (Lat) and widely used to estimate soil erosion. RUSLE
118° 37’ 4.41’’E (Long). The Lapu-Lapu watershed, calculates erosion rates by combining several factors:
referred to as a sub-catchment (A) in the Montible Rainfall Erosivity (R), which measures the impact of
Watershed Basin, has a drainage of 192.5km² out of rain on soil erosion; Soil Erodibility (K), which
the 253.8km² total drainage area of the basin. assesses how easily soil particles can be detached;
Topographic Factor (LS), indicating the effects of
slope length and steepness; Cover Management (C),
reflecting vegetation and land cover's role in
protecting soil; and Support Practice (P), which
considers how agricultural practices or other soil
management strategies reduce erosion.

To accurately predict and map soil erosion,

this study employs Geographic Information System
(GIS) technology, which allows for the
visualization and spatial analysis of erosion factors
over the watershed area. Maps was produced to
identify high-risk zones based on topography and
land cover. Additionally, land cover and rainfall
predictions are integrated, using tools such as
Cellular Automata-Artificial Neural Networks (CA-
Figure 1. Study Area
ANN) to model land cover changes over time and
CMIP6 climate data to forecast future rainfall
Framework
patterns. Together, these predictions enhance the
study’s capacity to assess current erosion risks and
anticipate how climate change might affect soil
stability in the future. The expected outcome is a set
of erosion risk maps and insights that support soil
conservation and water quality efforts, directly
benefiting local agencies like the City Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Office (CDRRMO)
and the Puerto Princesa Water District (PPWD) in
their mitigation planning.

Figure 2. Framework

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 4 of 33
The data gathering procedure for this study is (PCSD). The soil type map and 2020 land cover
presented below: map of Palawan were downloaded from the
Geoportal Philippines website. These datasets were
then clipped in Quantum GIS (QGIS) to focus
specifically on the Lapu-Lapu watershed.

Future Rainfall Prediction. The mean rainfall

projection (mm) for Palawan in 2025-2030 was
generated using the Coupled Model Intercomparison
Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), accessed through the
PAGASA Climate Information Map. CMIP 6 is
based on projections derived from scenarios that
focus on anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, which are influenced by factors such as
population size, economic activity, and energy use.
These projections also incorporate global climate
data from multiple shared socio-economic pathways
(SSPs).

Future Land Cover Projection. Three historical land

cover maps of Palawan from 2010, 2015, and 2020
were obtained from Geoportal Philippines. These
raster dataset were processed in QGIS using the
Modules for Land Use Change Simulations
(MOLUSCE) plugin, with an Artificial Neural
Network (ANN) model. The ANN employs the tanh
function as it activation function, which helps scale
output values to the range of (-1,1). To construct the
simulated land cover map, a Monte Carlo Cellular
Automata (CA) technique was employed. The
projected land cover data were then validated for
accuracy using Kappa Statistics.

Calculation of RUSLE Factors.

To determine the R factor, the mean annual

precipitation was calculated by summing the raster
layers for monthly precipitation in the raster
calculator, followed by clipping and resampling.
The R factor was then calculated using the formula
where R represents the rainfall erosivity factor (MJ
mm/ha/h/y) and P is the average annual precipitation
Figure 3. Schematic Diagram of Procedures and Data
(mm):
Geospatial Data Collection. The data for the
average annual precipitation were obtained from the
Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical and R = 38.5 + 0.35P
Equation 1. Formula for the R factor.
Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA)
Puerto Princesa City station. The digital elevation
model (DEM) for Palawan was obtained from the For the LS factor, the equation by Moore and
Palawan Council for Sustainable Development Burch (1986)38 was adopted. Using the clipped

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 5 of 33
DEM, flow accumulation and slope were generated TABLE 3. Conservation Practice (P) Values
in QGIS utilizing the r flow algorithm from the
Tillage Practice P Value
Geographic Resources Analysis Support System a.) Conventional Tillage 1.0
(GRASS) and the slope algorithm from the b.) Zoned Tillage 0..25
Geospatial Data Abstraction Library (GDAL), both c.) Mulch Tillage 0.26
accessed through the QGIS toolbox. d.) Minimum Tillage 0.52

Calculation of Soil Erosion Rates. The Revised

Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) is a widely
Equation 2. Formula for the LS factor. recognized empirical model used to estimate soil
erosion. It estimates average annual soil loss(A)
For the K, C, and P factors, the categories within based on five factors: rainfall erosivity factor (R),
the soil type and land cover map were assigned the soil erodibility factor (K), slope length and
K,C, and P values were taken from the study of steepness factor (LS), cover management factor (C),
Wilfredo P. David (1988)35. and conservation practice factor (P). The equation
for RUSLE is expressed as:
TABLE 1. Soil Erodibility (K) Factors
Soil Texture K value
A=R × K × LS × C × P; in t/ha/y
Equation 3. Formula for the RUSLE Model
Loamy Fine Sand 0.07
Sandy loam 0.23
Sandy loam 0.30 Erosion Risk Classification and Spatial Distribution.
Loam 0.19 Soil erosion rates were categorized into risk classes
Loam 0.27
Loam 0.38
ranging from low to very severe, based on the
Loam 0.63 classification based on Singh et al (1981).36
Silt Loam 0.30
Silt Loam 0.36
Silt Loam 0.60 Soil Erosion Rates (ton Soil Erosion Class
Clay Loam 0.22 ha^¯1 yr^-1)
Clay Loam 0.24 0-5 Low
Clay Loam 0.30
Silty Clay Loam 0.28 5-10 Moderate
10-20 High
Silty Clay Loam 0.35
20-40 Very High
Silty Clay 0.19 40-80 Severe
Silty Clay 0.27
Sandy Clay 0.20
More than 80 Very Severe
Sandy Clay 0.09
Clay 0.13
Clay 0.16
Clay 0.26
Rough Mountainous 0.49

TABLE 2. Cover Management (C) Values.

Land Cover C Value
Bare soil 1.0
Primary forest with dense undergrowth 0.001
Second growth forest with good 0.006
undergrowth and mulch cover
Perennial crops 0.1-0.3
Grassland, moderately grazed, burned 0.2-0.4
occasionally
Shrubs with open, disturbed grassland 0.15
Built-up 1.00
Inland water 0.00

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 6 of 33
 III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS portions. Generally, R-factor values are significantly
PROBLEM 1. What are the specific value of the higher in the northern and western parts of the
RUSLE factors in the Lapu-Lapu Watershed for the watershed, while lower values are found in the
following components: (a) Rainfall Erosivity [R], (b) southeastern region.
Soil Erodibility [K], (c) Slope Length and Steepness
[LS], (d) Cover Management [C], (e) Conservation Soil Erodibility (K) Factor
Practices [P]?

Rainfall Erosivity (R) Factor

Figure 5. Soil Type Map

Figure 5 shows the soil types identified in
the Lapu-Lapu Watershed include Bay clay loam
Figure 4. Rainfall Map (also known as Bantay loam), Guimbalaon clay,
Figure 4. Rainfall Map Rough mountainous soil, and Tagburos Clay soil as
shown in. The assigned values for these soil types
are 0.49 for mountainous land, 0.30 for clay loam,
and 0.26 for clay. The watershed is predominantly
characterized by mountainous soil, comprising
approximately 74% of the area, followed by clay
loam at 17% and clay at 9%.

Figure 4.1 R Factor Map

Figure 4 and Figure 4.1 show that for the R
factor, the annual rainfall data had values which
ranged from 945.94 to 2065.53 millimeters. Using
the equation by El-Swaify et al. (1987)37, it was
found that the R factor had values ranging from 369
to 761.44 MJ·mm·(ha·h·year)⁻¹, with an average of
565.51 MJ·mm·(ha·h·year)⁻¹. Higher annual rainfall Figure 5.1 K Factor Map
was recorded in the mountainous areas of the Figure 5.1 shows that the soil erodibility
watershed compared to the lower regions. factor (K) for the province ranges from 0.26 to 0.49,
Consequently, the rainfall erosivity values were also with lower values typically found in the southeastern
greater in these elevated areas than in the lower

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 7 of 33
part of the watershed and higher values concentrated to lower values. These steep gradients play a crucial
in the northern regions and select other areas. This role in soil erosion processes, indicating that soil
part of the watershed exhibits a higher K-factor of loss increases with both slope length and steepness.
0.49, indicating a greater susceptibility to erosion in Notably, soil loss tends to escalate more rapidly with
these regions. increasing slope length than with slope steepness.

Slope and Steepness (LS) Cover Management (C)

Figure 6. LS Factor Map

Figure 6 presents the Digital Elevation Figure 7. Land Cover Map
Model (DEM) map of the watershed, indicating Figure 7 shows the land cover classification
elevations ranging from 2 to 1,227 meters above sea of Lapu-Lapu Watershed. Factor values were
level. Based on the methodology proposed by assigned to various land cover categories within the
Moore and Burch (1986)38, the calculated LS factors watershed, which includes brush shrubs, closed
varied from 0 to 233.3541, with an average of forest, grassland, inland water, mangrove forest,
116.6771, as illustrated in the figure. The highest LS open forest, and barren land.
values were observed in areas adjacent to the river,
particularly in the northwestern region of the
watershed, where elevations are notably higher
compared to the southeastern area.

Figure 7.1 C Factor Map

Figure 7.1 shows the corresponding values
for land cover in the Lapu-Lapu Watershed. These
values range from 0 to 1, according to the data
Figure 6.1 Slope Map presented in Table (pg. 7). The land cover map
Figure 6.1 shows that LS factor is closely indicates that open forests dominate the watershed,
tied to the area's topography; steeper slopes result in exhibiting a very low C-factor value of 0.006. This
elevated LS values, while gentler slopes correspond low value suggests that the presence of open forests

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 8 of 33
significantly contributes to reducing soil erosion PROBLEM 3. What is the classification of soil
rates in these areas. erosion rates into different risk categories?

Conservation Practices (P) Factor TABLE 5. Soil Erosion Rates of Lapu-Lapu

Due to insufficient information regarding Watershed
conservation practices in the Lapu-Lapu Watershed, Classification Area Percentage
the P-factor values were set to 1 for all land cover Low 16,234,676 sqm 34.7%
categories except for inland water areas. Both the P- Moderate 4,576,912 sqm 9.8%
High 1,112,725 sqm 2.4%
factor and C-factor for inland water were assigned a
Very High 17,127,145 sqm 36.6%
value of 0. Severe 5,430,435 sqm 11.6%
Very Severe 2,275,337 sqm 4.9%
PROBLEM 2. What is the estimated annual soil
erosion rate using RUSLE based on the available
data from Lapu-Lapu Watershed?

Figure 9. Soil Erosion Rates

Firgue 8. Soil Erosion Map Table 5 and Figure 9 shows the classification
Figure 8 presents the estimated soil loss rates of soil erosion rates within the Lapu-Lapu
within the Lapu-Lapu watershed ranged from 0 to Watershed indicates that all erosion risk classes are
726.24 tons/ha/year, with an average of 363.13 present throughout the area. The analysis revealed
tons/ha/year. Low erosion rates in the watershed the following percentages of land coverage by each
were mainly due to the presence of forests as based erosion classification: 34.7% for low risk, 9.8% for
on its land cover map. According to the World Wide moderate risk, 2.4% or high risk, 36.6% for very
Fund, deforestation eliminates plant cover, which is high risk, 11.6% for severe risk, and 4.9% for very
vital for preventing soil erosion. The report states severe risk. Notably, the majority of the watershed
that without trees, the land becomes susceptible to area is classified as being at very high risk of erosion,
erosion by wind and water, resulting in loss of fertile accounting for 36.6% of the total area. Additionally,
topsoil and degradation of land quality. Meanwhile, soil erosion remains a significant concern, with
high to very severe soil loss rates were mostly found areas categorized as having high to very severe
around rivers where the slope is long and steep. erosion risks comprising 55.6% of the watershed.
This significant portion underscores the urgent need
for targeted soil conservation measures in these
areas to mitigate potential degradation and loss of
soil quality.

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 9 of 33
PROBLEM 4. What is the spatial distribution of PROBLEM 5. What are the projected changes in
soil erosion risk areas within Lapu-Lapu Watershed seasonal rainfall in 2025-2030 of the Lapu-Lapu
using estimated annual soil erosion rates? Watershed?

Based on figure 9, the estimated annual soil Projected Changes in Seasonal Rainfall in 2025-
erosion rate has confirmed a significant spatial 2030 for Lapu-Lapu Watershed
variability in soil erosion across the Lapu-Lapu
Watershed. This variability is primarily attributed to
the area's topographical characteristics, particularly
its slope, as well as land use and cover types.
Notably, 53.1% of the total soil loss within the
watershed originates from steep and very steep slope
lands, which comprise 47.1% of the watershed area.

The mean soil erosion rate for the watershed

falls within the very high erosion risk class,
indicating that the region generally experiences
severe soil erosion. The comprehensive distribution
of erosion rates across different areas signifies a
diverse range of susceptibility, reflecting the varied
topographic features and land use practices
prevalent in the watershed.

Furthermore, these findings align with the

study conducted by Fuentes et al. (2015)39,which
identified Palawan's topography—characterized by
narrow mountain ranges, steep runoff slopes, and
meandering rivers—as a significant factor
contributing to the watershed's susceptibility to soil
erosion. The high hazard index for soil erosion in
Palawan further supports the presence of severe soil Figure 10. Projected Changes 2025-2030 (RAINFALL)
erosion risks within the Lapu-Lapu Watershed.
Figure 10 shows that under two distinct
Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs)—
Moderate Emission (RCP4.5) and High Emission
(RCP8.5)—the projected seasonal rainfall for the
Lapu-Lapu Watershed is anticipated to vary
significantly. Monthly rainfall projections are
expected to range from 83.6 mm to 882.5 mm under
these scenarios, which contrasts with the observed
baseline that spans from 102 mm to 782 mm. This
variability in rainfall projections highlights the
potential impacts of climate change on regional
hydrology, with RCP4.5 indicating a more
moderate increase in rainfall compared to the more
extreme projections associated with RCP8.5.

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 10 of 33
PROBLEM 6. What are the projected land cover Figure 12 shows that the projected annual
patterns for the Lapu-Lapu Watershed in 2030? soil erosion rate in the Lapu-Lapu watershed is
estimated to range from 0 to 2,176 tons per hectare
per year by 2030. This increase represents a
significant rise of approximately 199% compared to
the recorded rate of 726.24 tons per hectare per year
observed in 2024. Along with this overall increase,
the proportion of the watershed classified within the
“very high” to “very severe” erosion categories is
projected to rise from 55.6% in 2024 to 75% by
2030. This shift highlights an escalating risk of
severe soil degradation, further underscoring the
need for intensive erosion control measures and
sustainable land management practices.
Figure 11. 2030 Land Cover Map
Figure 11 shows that the projected land IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
cover patterns for the Lapu-Lapu Watershed in
The GIS-Based Soil Erosion Risk
2030 reveal significant changes influenced by
Assessment of the Lapu-Lapu Watershed using the
various environmental and anthropogenic factors.
Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)
Utilizing advanced modeling techniques,
revealed critical insights into soil erosion dynamics
particularly the CA-ANN model, researchers have
within the region. The analysis indicated that the R
forecasted the land cover distribution with a high
factor values ranged from 369 to 761.44
degree of accuracy, achieving a correctness
MJ·mm·(ha·h·year)⁻¹, with an average of 565.51
percentage of 99.96053% and a Kappa statistic of
MJ·mm·(ha·h·year)⁻¹, while the K Factor were 0.49
0.9514. These high accuracy metrics indicate strong
for mountainous land, 0.30 for clay loam, and 0.26
reliability in the predictions, suggesting that the
for clay. The LS factors calculated varied
modeled land cover changes closely reflect
significantly, with an average of 116.68, while C-
probable real-world scenarios. The anticipated land
factor values ranged from 0 to 1, and P-factor
cover types within the watershed by 2030 include
values were set to 1 for most land cover types.
brush shrubs, closed forest, grassland, inland water,
open forest, and barren land. Each of these The estimated soil loss rates ranged from 0
categories plays a crucial role in the watershed's to 726.24 tons/ha/year, averaging 363.13
ecology and hydrology. tons/ha/year. Notably, 53.1% of total soil loss
originated from steep and very steep slopes, which
PROBLEM 7. What is the estimated annual rate of cover 47.1% of the watershed area. The
soil erosion in watershed by 2030? classification of erosion risk showed that 34.7% of
the area is at low risk, while significant portions are
categorized as very high (36.6%) and severe
(11.6%).

These findings align with previous studies

highlighting the susceptibility of Palawan to soil
erosion due to its topography and land use practices.
Moreover, this study emphasizes the importance of
integrating GIS-based models like RUSLE with
local data to enhance understanding of spatial
erosion patterns and inform effective land
Figure 12. 2030 Soil Erosion Map management strategies. By identifying regions at
high risk of erosion, local authorities can prioritize

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 11 of 33
conservation efforts and develop targeted This study was limited in mapping and
interventions such as reforestation, sustainable calculating key factors of the Revised Universal
agricultural practices, and improved land use Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE), including rainfall
planning. erosivity, soil erodibility, slope, land cover, and
conservation practices. Using these factors,
In conclusion, addressing the identified estimated annual soil loss and erosion risk
erosion risks through informed management classifications were mapped to highlight vulnerable
practices is essential for preserving the watershed's areas. Seasonal rainfall for 2025-2030 was
integrity and ensuring its long-term sustainability. projected using CMIP6 data, accessed via the
PAGASA Climate Information Map, to anticipate
Also, the projected changes in the Lapu-Lapu rainfall-driven erosion trends. Additionally, land
Watershed by 2030 reveal significant environmental cover changes for 2030 were simulated with a
challenges. Anticipated seasonal rainfall is expected Cellular Automata-Artificial Neural Network (CA-
to vary from 83.6 mm to 882.5 mm under RCP4.5 ANN) model. Together, these projections and
and RCP8.5 scenarios, indicating potential impacts classifications provided insights into high-risk areas
on regional hydrology that could lead to increased and informed conservation priorities for the
flooding and drought conditions. This variability watershed.
threatens water resource management and local
ecosystems. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to express our heartfelt
Land cover projections, achieved with a high gratitude and appreciation for the following people
accuracy of 99.96053% and a Kappa statistic of and institutions that handed us their support in the
0.9514, indicate shifts toward brush shrubs, closed completion of this study:
forests, grasslands, inland water, open forests, and
barren land. These changes could exacerbate soil Philippine Council for Sustainable Development
erosion, which is estimated to rise dramatically (PCSD), for guiding us and orienting us to
from 726.24 tons/ha/year in 2024 to between 0 and understand the study more.
2,176 tons/ha/year by 2030—an increase of
approximately 199%. This aligns with the study by Puerto Princesa City Water District (PPWD), for
Elaloui et al. (2022)40, which also showed an giving us the necessary data needed for us to finish
increase in annual soil erosion rates under RCP4.5 the study.
and RCP8.5 scenarios. The proportion of the
watershed experiencing "very high" to "very Philippines Atmospheric Geophysical and
severe" erosion is projected to rise from 55.6% in Astronomical Service Administration, for providing
2024 to 75% by 2030, highlighting an urgent need the needed 10-year dataset of annual rainfall in
for effective erosion control and sustainable land Puerto Princesa.
management practices.
Ms. Nonie Mae Montojo, our research
After thorough assessment and considering adviser/coach for her unwavering support
the findings and conclusions of the study, several throughout this research study and her willingness
recommendations are proposed. It is recommended to accompany us on our journeys.
that future studies utilize a 30-year dataset for
Ms. Josefhierre C. Palay, our research adviser for
annual rainfall data to improve the accuracy of the
guiding us by providing valuable insights and
Rainfall Erosivity (R) factor, which could lead to
encouragement throughout this research study.
more precise predictions of soil loss. Additionally,
Mrs. Myla N. Gabinete, our research adviser for
converting the current map into a 3D model would
helping us throughout the creation of this research
provide a more intuitive visualization of elevation,
study.
slope, and erosion-prone areas, which enables to
easily identify high-risk zones and plan targeted
interventions.

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 12 of 33
Mrs. Geraldine Dangan, for her invaluable guidance [10] Puno, H., Lantican, C., & Olabisi, L. 2021.
and support during the development of this research “Assessing the impact of soil erosion on agricultural
paper. Her insightful feedback and expert advice sustainability in the Philippines: A comprehensive
significantly enhanced the quality of our paper. review.” Sustainability, 13(3), 1234-1256.
[11] Bouguerra, A., Al-Kaisi, M., & Zahran, H. 2017.
Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and “Soil erosion and its impact on agricultural productivity:
Management Office (PDRRMO) for providing A review.” Environmental Science and Pollution
Research, 24(10), 10092-10107.
valuable insights for this study.
[12] Koralay, S., & Kara, A. 2018. “The effects of soil
erosion on water quality in watersheds: A review.” Water,
Mr. Filbert Paduga and Ms. Dainty Rabang for their
10(11), 1583.
key takeaways in our study and guidance in the GIS [10] Lantican, C., Puno, H., & Olabisi, L. 2003. “The
mapping part of our research. role of watersheds in agricultural sustainability in the
Philippines.” Philippine Journal of Agricultural and
Mr. Danny Abrina for his assistance in validating Biosystems Engineering, 1(1), 12-23.
our results. [11] Bouguerra, A., Al-Kaisi, M., & Zahran, H. 2017.
“Soil erosion and its impact on agricultural productivity:
Ms. Haira Hadjirulla, Ms. Kate Loren Ganibo, and A review.” Environmental Science and Pollution
Ms. Maica Colyn Mahinay for her constant help and Research, 24(10), 10092-10107.
support throughout this study. [12] Koralay, S., & Kara, A. 2018. “The effects of soil
erosion on water quality in watersheds: A review.” Water,
10(11), 1583.
REFERENCES [13] Clark, M., et al. 1985. “Continuous topsoil loss
[1] “Iowa State University Extension and Outreach.” and its implications for sediment loads in rivers and
n.d. Www.extension.iastate.edu. reservoirs: A global perspective.” Soil Science Society of
[2] Kamble, S. H., Ghosh, S., & Kharche, V. 2023. America Journal, 49(4), 1077-1083.
“Soil erosion: A global issue impacting agricultural [14] Minaei, S., & Kainz, W. 2016. “Mapping
sustainability and water quality.” Frontiers in erosion-prone areas for effective natural resource
Environmental Science, 11, Article 1136243. management: A case study in the Philippines.” Land
[3] Montanarella, L. (2016). The role of soil in the Degradation & Development, 27(2), 321-331.
sustainable management of land and water resources. [15] Local Government Unit of Puerto Princesa. 2015.
Land Degradation & Development, 27(5), 1163-1170.; “Puerto Princesa City Comprehensive Land Use Plan
Muñoz-Rojas, J., & de la Rosa, D. (2017). The impact of 2015-2025.”
land use changes on soil erosion: A review of the [16] Peacock, J. 2024. “Assessing water security
evidence from the Mediterranean region. Land Use challenges in Puerto Princesa: The role of watersheds.”
Policy, 66, 1-12. [17] Environmental Systems Research. 2022. “Soil
[4] Mckague, K, and P Eng. n.d. “Soil Erosion - erosion and its impact on agricultural productivity and
Causes and Effects.” water quality: A case study.” Environmental Systems
[5] Nearing, M. A., et al. 2021. “Soil erosion and Research, 11(1), Article 5.
conservation.” Agricultural Research Service. [18] Sulaeman, A., & Westhoff, M. 2020. “The role
[6] Lantican, C., Puno, H., & Olabisi, L. 2003. “The of erosion risk assessments in managing soil erosion.”
role of watersheds in agricultural sustainability in the Environmental Systems Research, 9(1), Article 10.
Philippines.” Philippine Journal of Agricultural and [19] Natural Resources Conservation Service. (n.d.).
Biosystems Engineering, 1(1), 12-23. [20] Chen, Y., Zhang, Y., & Wang, H. 2019.
[7]Bouguerra, A., Al-Kaisi, M., & Zahran, H. 2017. Application of RUSLE and GIS in soil erosion risk
“Soil erosion and its impact on agricultural productivity: assessment: A case study in a mountainous area. Land
A review.” Environmental Science and Pollution Degradation & Development, 30(3), 291-303.
Research, 24(10), 10092-10107. [21] Koirala, H. R., Thapa, R. B., & Upadhyaya, S.
[8] Koralay, S., & Kara, A. 2018. “The effects of soil 2019. “Spatial estimation of soil erosion using RUSLE
erosion on water quality in watersheds: A review.” Water, modeling: A case study of Dolakha district, Nepal.”
10(11), 1583. Environmental Systems Research, 8(1), Article 10.
[9] Olabisi, L. (2012). Soil erosion in the Philippines: [22] Pransannakumar, K., Ramesh, K., & Kumar, S.
Causes and impacts on agricultural systems. Journal of 2012. “Soil erodibility factor (K) estimation using soil
Soil and Water Conservation, 67(5), 123A-128A. properties and its impact on soil erosion prediction.”

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 13 of 33
Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 12(2), 254- Integration of artificial neural networks and cellular
267. automata for land cover change simulation.
[23] Renard, K. G., Foster, G. R., Weesies, G. A., & Environmental Modelling & Software, 112, 12-19.
Porter, P. J. 2011. “RUSLE: Revised universal soil loss [33] Abdelwahab, O. M., El-Bagoury, M. M., &
equation.” In D. H. McKenzie, D. E. Brunt, & M. J. Ahmed, M. A. (2018). Erosion risk assessment using
Barlow (Eds.), Soil erosion research methods (pp. 55-70). RUSLE model and GIS techniques: Case study of Wadi
Soil Conservation Society of America. El-Labben Basin, Saudi Arabia. Geosciences, 8(10),
[24] Abdelwahab, A., Morsy, M., & El-Shafie, A. 371. :Ahmed, B., Bramley, G., & Dewan, A. (2015).
2018. “Assessment of soil erosion risk using RUSLE Modelling urban land cover growth dynamics using
model and GIS techniques in the Nile Delta region: A Cellular Automata and Artificial Neural Network models:
case study of El-Mahmoudia watershed, Egypt.” The case of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Applied Geography, 38,
Environmental Earth Sciences, 77(4), Article 121. 99-108.
[25] Farhan, A., Al-Hamdi, A., & Al-Sharif, A. 2014. [34] Puerto Princesa City Water District (PPCWD).
“GIS integrated RUSLE model-based soil loss estimation 2022. “Water supply management in Puerto Princesa
and watershed prioritization: A case study of Wadi City: The case of Lapu-Lapu Watershed.”
Kufranja, Jordan.” Environmental Systems Research, [35] Wilferdo David. Soil and Water Conservation
3(1), Article 6. Planning: Policy Issues and Recommendations.
[26] Belayneh, A., & Haji, J. (2019). Soil erosion 1988.Journal of Development Number twenty-six,
assessment using RUSLE model and GIS: A case study Volume VM, No. 1, 1988
of Gumara watershed, Ethiopia. Environmental Systems [36] G. Singh, S. Chandra and R. Babu, “Soil Loss
Research, 8(1), Article 10. and Prediction Research in India,” Bulletin No. T-12/D9,
[27] Da Cunha, A. R., & Pereira, P. M. (2016). Soil Central Soil and Water Conservation Research Training
erosion modeling using RUSLE and GIS in the Indaia Institute, Dehra Dun, 1981.
watershed, Brazil. Geosciences, 6(3), 78. [37] El-Swaify SA, Gramier CL, Lo A. 1987. Recent
[28] Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., advances in soil conservation in steepland in humid
Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., & Taylor, K. E. (2016). tropics. In: Tay, T.H., Mokhtaruddin, A.M., & Zahari,
Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project A.B. (eds) Proceedings of the International Conference
Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. on Steepland Agriculture in the Humid Tropics. Kuala
Geoscientific Model Development, 9(5), 1937-1958. Lumpur, MARDI, 87–100
[29] Hewitson, B. C., Jack, C., Janes, T., & Zhou, T. [38] Moore ID, Burch GJ. 1986. Modelling Erosion
(2020). Regional climate downscaling for Africa under and Deposition: Topographic Effects. Transactions of the
the CORDEX framework: A review. Climate Research, ASAE. 29(6): 1624–1630. doi: 10.13031/2013.30363.
81, 39-54. [39] Fuentes, R.T. et al. (2015). The Role of
[30] White, R., & Engelen, G. (2000). High-resolution UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Reserves in Climate
integrated modeling of the spatial dynamics of urban and Change Adaptation: Experience from Palawan Biosphere
regional systems. Computers, Environment and Urban Reserve in the Philippines. Our Palawan 1(1): pp. 49–60
Systems, 24(5), 383-400. [40] Elaloui, Abdenbi, El Mahdi El Khalki, Mustapha
[31] Liu, Y., & Wang, T. (2019). Using artificial Namous, Khalid Ziadi, Hasna Eloudi, Elhousna Faouzi,
neural networks in climate change impact assessment for Latifa Bou-Imajjane, Morad Karroum, Yves Tramblay,
rainfall simulation. Water Resources Management, 33, Abdelghani Boudhar, and et al. 2023. "Soil Erosion
1123-1138. under Future Climate Change Scenarios in a Semi-Arid
[32] Li, X., Ma, Y., & Zhu, Q. (2021). Advances in Region" Water 15, no. 1: 146.
the integration of cellular automata and artificial neural
networks for land use change modeling. Land, 10(5),
480.; Zhou, Y., Guan, X., Li, C., & Yan, D. (2019).

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 14 of 33
 APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Locale
9°45’ 34.84’’N (Lat) and 118° 37’ 4.41’’E (Long). Lapu-Lapu watershed, Puerto Princesa City

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 15 of 33
 APPENDIX B
LETTER

Letter for Bureau of Corrections (BUCOR)

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 16 of 33
 Letter for Puerto Princesa City Water District

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 17 of 33
 Letter for Palawan Council for Sustainbale Development

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 18 of 33
 Letter for Provincial Environment and Natural Resources

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 19 of 33
 Letter for Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 20 of 33
 Letter for Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 21 of 33
 Letter for Provincial Planning and Development Office

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 22 of 33
 APPENDIX C
Digital Elevation Maps.
Palawan DEM

Lapu-Lapu DEM

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 23 of 33
 APPENDIX D
Annual Rainfall Data (2013-2024)

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 24 of 33
Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)
Page 25 of 33
Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)
Page 26 of 33
Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)
Page 27 of 33
Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)
Page 28 of 33
Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)
Page 29 of 33
 APPENDIX D
Attribute Tables (Quantum Geographic Information System (QGIS)

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 30 of 33
 APPENDIX E
Land Cover Map of Palawan

2010

2015

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 31 of 33
 2020

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 32 of 33
 APPENDIX F
Validation of Results

Poquiz, Milan, Elvinia, et al. (2024)

Page 33 of 33