Table 2.

Logistic regression results for agreement versus fdx.

Change theme	Omission				Commission
	# Obs	Var	D	Concordance	# Obs	Var	D	Concordance
Forest loss	912	fd3	0.73	96.4	852	fd7	0.17	74.7
Forest gain	439	fd3	0.89	99.2	352	fd21	0.08	67.1
Forest, no change	2246	fd3	0.83	98.2	1360	fd5	0.07	71.3
Shrub loss	616	fd3	0.84	98.6	749	fd7	0.06	64.0
Shrub gain	674	fd3	0.87	99.0	608	fd7	0.11	67.9
Shrub, no change	1409	fd3	0.84	98.6	616	fd21	0.38	88.0
Grassland loss	568	fd3	0.92	99.5	735	fd7	0.06	64.4
Grassland gain	441	fd3	0.91	99.4	529	fd5	0.04	58.5
Grassland, no change	1437	fd3	0.83	98.8	493	fd21	0.21	78.6
Urban gain	1573	fd3	0.92	98.7	923	fd5	0.12	68.1
Urban, no change	1330	fd3	0.75	96.5	835	fd15	0.14	81.6
Agriculture loss	303	fd3	0.84	98.5	270	fd15	0.15	71.9
Agriculture gain	95	fd3	0.98	100.0	185	fd7	0.09	68.1
Agriculture, no change	1711	fd3	0.84	98.5	1152	fd7	0.08	69.8
Wetland loss	40	fd7	0.59	97.7	26	fd15	0.46	90.5
Wetland gain	17	fd3	0.83	100.0	27
Wetland, no change	603	fd3	0.81	97.9	462	fd15	0.15	74.1
Water loss	24	fd3	0.85	100.0	20	fd3	0.29	72.0
Water gain	42	fd3	0.85	99.3	18
Water, no change	257	fd3	0.92	99.6	196	fd3	0.30	76.7

The regional classification variable was significant (p < 0.05) for cases in bold typeface. Blank entries denote that none of the explanatory variables was significant. Underlined entries denote use of Firth adjustments.