cs.CVJul 9, 2026

Is sub-metre resolution necessary for cocoa mapping? A landscape-stratified evaluation of very high resolution imagery, decametric Earth Observation inputs, and operational products in Cote d'Ivoire

Authors: Kasimir OrlowskiFilip SaboMichele MeroniAstrid VerhegghenMariana BelgiuFelix Rembold

Organizations: Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), University of Twente, Hallenweg 8, 7522 NH Enschede, The Netherlands. · FINCONS S.P.A., Via Torri Bianche 10, Palazzo Betulla, 20871 Vimercate, Italy. · European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Via Enrico Fermi, 2749, 21027 Ispra, Italy. · Seidor Consulting, Carrer de Veneçuela 74, 08019 Barcelona, Spain. · ARHS Developments Italia S.R.L., Via Fratelli Gabba 1/A, 20121 Milan, Italy. · Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Boeretang 200, 2400 Mol, Belgium.

Abstract

Accurate cocoa mapping is increasingly important for deforestation monitoring, supply-chain transparency, and regulatory applications. Spatial aggregation in conventional medium-resolution Earth observation (EO) imagery may limit cocoa detection in heterogeneous smallholder landscapes. In Cote d'Ivoire, we therefore evaluated how mapping performance varies across landscape conditions, whether very high resolution (VHR) imagery provides a meaningful advantage, and whether foundation-model embeddings improve decametric cocoa mapping. We developed models using 0.5 m Pleiades VHR imagery, a 10 m Sentinel-2 annual composite, and embeddings from TESSERA and AlphaEarth Foundations (AEF), and additionally assessed four publicly available cocoa mapping products. Performance was evaluated through a landscape-stratified accuracy assessment using 2,821 independently interpreted reference points distributed across gradients of tree cover density and landscape fragmentation. The VHR model achieved the highest performance (F1 = 0.92) and maintained F1-scores above 0.90 across all strata. Among the decametric inputs, TESSERA performed best (F1 = 0.86), followed by AEF (F1 = 0.82) and Sentinel-2 (F1 = 0.76). Of the existing cocoa products, the Kalischek product performed best (F1 = 0.83), comparable to the internally trained AEF model. Performance differences between VHR and decametric approaches increased with fragmentation and under low and high tree cover density conditions. Targeted VHR acquisition may therefore be particularly beneficial in complex cocoa landscapes, while foundation-model embeddings offer a scalable alternative for large-area mapping.

Explore similar work

CardsList