109

1969

1997

1954

urban fabric

wetlands

industrial andcommercial areas

forests and semi-natural areas

agricultural areas

water bodies

Map 13.2.Urban sprawl around Copenhagen

Notes: Example of urbansprawl along coasts androads.Source: JCR - Moland

http://www.ubavie.gv.at

Soil sealing by built-up areas, as a result ofurban sprawl, the construction of transportinfrastructure, etc., continues to increase at afaster rate than the population. A decouplingwould be desirable instead.

Quality of information

Figure 13.2.Built-up area, road network and populationincreases, selected EEA countries

Notes: Coverage Belgium,Czech, Republic, Denmark,France, Germany, Latvia,Lithuania, The Netherlands,Poland, Slovakia and Spain.Source: OECD; Eurostat;various national sources

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

125

1980 = 100

population densitydensity of road network

built-up area

13.2. Soil sealing

Over the past 20 years the extent of built-up area in many western and easternEuropean countries has increased bysome 20 % and far exceeds the rate ofpopulation growth in the EU over thesame period (6 %). Due to the lack ofprecise information, increase in built-uparea has been used as a proxy indicatorfor the amount of soil being sealed andfor quantifying land-take by urbanexpansion.

Land

signal02.p65 15-05-02, 12:44109

Environmental signals 2002110

Soil sealing refers to the covering of soilas a result of urban development andinfrastructure construction; with theresult that soil is no longer able to per-form the range of functions associatedwith it. Soil sealing is not adverse per se;rather it is the irreversibility in practicalterms of sealing the soil and the conse-quent loss of soil functions that is signifi-cant. It should be noted that built-upareas also include land that is not actu-ally sealed (e.g. gardens and publicparks). In Germany, for example, it isestimated that 52.2 % of the soil in built-up areas is actually sealed. However, theimpacts of soil sealing go beyond the

sealed area and can extend to the sur-roundings.

Although the geographical coverage ofeach data set differs substantially, thedifferences in growth rates are suffi-ciently large to suggest that the area ofbuilt-up land and soil sealing is stillincreasing at a faster rate than the popu-lation. The reasons for this are many, butimportant ones include increased de-mand for bigger houses, out-of-towndevelopments like supermarkets andleisure centres, and associated develop-ments of transport infrastructure. InAustria, the yearly increase of soil sealing

Map 13.3. Urban sprawl around Grenoble

Notes: Example of urbansprawl along valleys.

Source: JCR- Moland

1960

1981

1997

urban fabric

wetlands

industrial andcommercial areas

forests and semi-natural areas

agricultural areas

water bodies

signal02.p65 15-05-02, 12:44110

111

Map 13.4.Urban sprawl between Padua and Venice

1988

1963

1997

urban fabric

wetlands

industrial andcommercial areas

forests and semi-natural areas

agricultural areas

water bodies

Notes: Example of urbansprawl in rural landscapes.Source: JCR - Moland

is estimated at 7 to 12 m² per person.For the city of Vienna, it is estimatedthat, compared to 1 m² of sealed surfacefor a pedestrian, a biker is needs 7.7 m²/person, public transport between 12 and17.6 m²/person and a car driver 60 m²/person (UBA, 2001).

Developments in soil sealing are largelydetermined by spatial planning strategieswhere unfortunately the effects of irre-placeable soil losses are often not suffi-ciently taken into account. There is alack of Europe-wide information. Dataon the extent of built-up areas are onlyavailable for a limited number of coun-

tries and many of these data are notcomparable since countries use differentmethodologies (EEA, 2000). There isalso no information about the type ofsoil being sealed.

Some decrease in soil availability isinevitable, but if the sealed soil plays avaluable role in food production, natureconservation, recharge of water re-sources, flood control or any other keyfunction, then the consequences ofsealing are damaging to sustainabledevelopment.

Land

signal02.p65 15-05-02, 12:44111

Environmental signals 2002112

13.3. Fragmentation and partitioningof habitats by transportinfrastructure

The construction of transport infrastruc-ture (e.g. roads and railways) can lead tothe fragmentation of natural or semi-natural areas, which can reduce theresilience of biotopes and their capacityto host wild species. This, in turn, candisrupt the movement of species (e.g.through the elimination of ‘wildlifecorridors’) and reduce the capacity ofthe habitat to maintain viable residentspecies populations. Most areas of theEU are highly fragmented as a result ofdevelopment. For example, the averagesize of continuous land units that are notdissected by major roads ranges fromaround 20 km² in Belgium to nearly600 km² in Finland, with an EU averageof about 130 km² (see Environmentalsignals 2001, Chapter Transport).

Large transport networks have developedrapidly in recent decades. Several factorspoint to the continuation of this process.For example, in some areas where accessto services is at a premium, problems ofcongestion may lead to more road build-ing, reflecting the lack of balanced modalsplit for both passenger and freighttransport (see Chapter 4). EU enlarge-ment and the integration of new coun-tries into the common market will in-crease the movement of people and thetransport of goods. The need for in-creased cohesion across Europe suggeststhat more infrastructure will be built toensure that peripheral regions are ad-equately connected with the centre.

The development of transport infrastruc-tures has negative effects on the naturaland rural landscape both locally andmore widely. Locally, traffic noise onmajor routes affects the health of citizensas well as the wild fauna. Intensive use ofherbicides alongside highways and trainlines creates local problems of contami-nation. The land taken by infrastructuresalso contributes to soil sealing (seesection 13.2).

BelgiumLuxembourg

GermanyDenmark

NetherlandsAustria

United KingdomCzech Republic

ItalySlovakiaHungary

EUPortugal

FranceIreland

SloveniaAccession Countries (7)

PolandBulgaria

SpainGreece

RomaniaSwedenFinland

0 100 200 300 400 500 600km²

Figure 13.3. Average size of land parcels, EU and selectedAccession countries

Source: EEA

Figure 13.4. Average size of land parcels versus total countryarea, EU and selected Accession countries

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

0

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

500 000

600 000

country area (km²)

land parcel size (km²)

FI

SE

RO

ES

DK

GRBG

PL

SI

IS

FR

PTHU

SK

IT

CZ

UK

AT

NL

DE

LUBE

Source: EEA

signal02.p65 15-05-02, 12:44112

113

Natura 2000 is the EU’s principal policyinstrument for ensuring the conserva-tion of valuable European habitats andcomprises a network of Special Areas ofConservation (SACs) and Special Protec-tion Areas (SPAs) (see Chapter 14). Toensure the continuing protection ofthese habitats, the objectives of Natura2000 must be reconciled with those of

http://themes.eea.eu.int/Sectors_and_activities/transport/indicators/consequences/fragmentation/index_html

Most areas of the EU are highly fragmented and this has negativeimplications for biodiversity. Transport infrastructure is a major cause offragmentation and transport policies should be reconciled withconservation policies.

Quality of information

30˚ 20˚ 10˚ 0˚

0˚

10˚

10˚

20˚

20˚

30˚

30˚

40˚

40˚

50˚ 60˚ 70˚

40˚

40˚

50˚

50˚

60˚

60˚

roads

railroads

Map 13.5.Footprint of transport infrastructure

Source: EEA

other policy areas that have a land-usedimension. In particular, the balancedand polycentric development proposedby the European Spatial DevelopmentPerspective should be fully integratedwith the objective of sectoral policies fortransport and agriculture as well as theenvironmental objectives of Natura 2000.

Land

signal02.p65 15-05-02, 12:44113