Welcome to Smart Agriculture 中文

Smart Agriculture

   

High Spatiotemporal Resolution Remote Sensing for Precision Agricultural Disaster Early Warning: Progress, Bottlenecks, and Integrative Pathways

XU Xiaobin1, ZHU Hongchun1, LI Feng2, HE Wei3, YANG Jiaming1, LI Zhenhai1()   

  1. 1. College of Geodesy and Geomatics, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
    2. Shandong Provincial Climate Center, Jinan 250031, China
    3. State Key Laboratory of Information Engineering in Surveying, Mapping and Remote Sensing, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China
  • Received:2025-12-03 Online:2026-02-12
  • Foundation items:National Natural Science Foundation of China(42501486); National Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province(ZR2024YQ063)
  • About author:

    XU Xiaobin, E-mail:

  • corresponding author:
    LI Zhenhai, E-mail:

Abstract:

[Significance] Under climate change, the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events have increased markedly, posing persistent threats to global food security. Agricultural meteorological disasters, including droughts, floods, heat stress, frost damage, and mechanically induced events such as lodging and hail, are increasingly characterized by rapid onset, strong spatial heterogeneity, and compound interactions. Conventional management strategies relying mainly on post-event assessment are insufficient for timely warning and precision intervention. The development of high spatiotemporal resolution remote sensing and integrated observation systems combining satellite, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), and ground-based sensing has substantially advanced agricultural disaster monitoring. These technologies enable field-scale characterization of spatial variability and detection of short-duration disaster processes at hourly to daily timescales. This review synthesizes recent progress in sky–air–ground integrated remote sensing for agricultural meteorological disaster management and establishes a unified framework linking monitoring, early warning, and decision-making, with emphasis on hydrological stress, thermal stress, and structural damage. [Progress] At the observation level, a multi-tier sensing architecture has emerged. Satellite remote sensing provides broad coverage and regular revisit cycles, forming the backbone of regional monitoring. Optical sensors support retrieval of crop structural and biochemical parameters, thermal infrared data enable canopy temperature and evapotranspiration estimation, and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) offers all-weather capability for soil moisture and flood detection. Solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) provides direct information on crop photosynthetic function and enables early identification of physiological stress. UAV platforms complement satellites through flexible deployment and centimeter-scale resolution, allowing detailed mapping of canopy temperature and three-dimensional crop structure using multispectral, thermal, and LiDAR sensors. Ground-based meteorological stations and sensor networks provide continuous measurements for calibration and validation, although scaling point observations to spatially continuous products remains challenging. Consequently, multi-sensor integration is evolving from data stacking toward physically complementary constraint frameworks. Methodologically, two dominant approaches are used: physically based inversion and data-driven recognition. Radiative transfer models, surface energy balance methods, and SAR scattering models offer strong physical interpretability but depend on prior information and data quality. Machine learning and deep learning methods effectively capture nonlinear relationships and complex spatial patterns for disaster identification, yet remain limited by interpretability and cross-regional generalization. At the early-warning stage, crop growth models, hydrological models, and spatiotemporal prediction networks are applied to simulate disaster evolution. Hybrid models embedding physical constraints into data-driven frameworks have become a key research direction to enhance predictive robustness. Decision-support systems have expanded from threshold-based rule engines toward optimization algorithms and multi-objective frameworks, enabling warning information to be translated into actionable irrigation scheduling, protective measures, and emergency responses. Regarding specific hazards, drought monitoring has shifted from vegetation indices toward coupling root-zone soil moisture with crop physiological responses, with SIF-based indicators showing strong potential for early stress detection. Flood studies rely primarily on SAR-based inundation mapping and extend toward quantitative damage assessment. Heat and frost stress research emphasizes growth-stage-dependent dynamic thresholds. Lodging monitoring integrates structural parameters derived from optical, LiDAR, and SAR data, while hail-related studies focus on rapid post-event damage mapping. Compound and cascading disasters have become an important research frontier. [Conclusions and Prospects] High spatiotemporal resolution remote sensing has greatly enhanced the observability and early-warning potential of agricultural meteorological disasters. Nevertheless, key challenges remain, including heterogeneous data integration, scale inconsistency, uncertainty propagation, and insufficient coupling among monitoring, warning, and decision-making components. Future progress requires a systems-engineering perspective. Physically guided machine learning can bridge mechanistic understanding and data adaptability, while agricultural disaster digital twins provide a framework for dynamic interaction among observation, simulation, and decision optimization. In parallel, multi-factor time-series risk modeling and multi-agent learning are needed to better represent compound disaster processes and support intelligent, adaptive, and precision-oriented agricultural disaster management systems.

Key words: high spatiotemporal resolution remote sensing, agricultural disaster monitoring, disaster remote sensing warning, policy decision, machine learning

CLC Number: