You are in: Home > Environmental and Spatial Planning > Reduction of land use
Last changed: 18/12/12
There are various metaphors for the voraciousness of consumption in new land area used for human settlements and transport. The rate of consumption of land and area for settlements and transport in Germany lay by about 113 ha per day in 2003-2006. The land was developed for housing, roads, or commercial space, on which about one half was built up or otherwise paved. This represents a very slight slow-down in the land consumption for purposes of settlement and transport. The daily land use increase calculated as a four-year moving average was still 129 hectares in 1997-2000; it decreased to 115 hectares in 2001-2004, and then to 114 hectares in 2002-2005, down to its current level (see Use of land and space table).
According to statistics, every person in Germany makes use of 564 square metres of built-up and transport area — and that figure is on the rise. The continued urban sprawl has a direct impact on climate protection and the protection of resources, for more built-up and transport areas mean more buildings that must be serviced, maintained, heated or cooled. Travelling longer distances gives rise to more traffic and more vehicles on the roads. As a result, there are more greenhouse gas emissions and higher rates of energy and materials consumption.
Settlement and transport area by type of actual use in Germany |
||||||
Type of use |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
|||
km² |
% |
km² |
% |
km² |
% |
|
Total settlement and transport areas |
45,621 |
100.0 |
46,050 |
100.0 |
46,438 |
100.0 |
Of which is: |
||||||
Buildings and open spaces |
23,938 |
52.5 |
24,047 |
52.2 |
24,156 |
52.0 |
Operational area excluding mining |
754 |
1.7 |
775 |
1.7 |
774 |
1.7 |
Recreational areas |
3,131 |
6.9 |
3,338 |
7.2 |
3,526 |
7.6 |
Transport areas |
17,446 |
38.2 |
17,538 |
38.1 |
17,627 |
38.0 |
Cemeteries |
352 |
0.8 |
353 |
0.8 |
354 |
0.8 |
Source: Federal Statistical Office
One of the seven priority fields of action in Germany’s sustainability strategy is to reduce land use for human settlements and transport areas. Sustainable management of land use, as foreseen by the objectives set by the federal government, requires that growth in land consumption for settlements and transport be cut from the average 120 ha/day witnessed in the last 10 years, to 30 ha/day by the year 2020. In the absence of any real changes made in consumer behaviour, investment decisions and governmental framework, it is assumed that an economic upswing will also result in a rise in land and space use in German.
A background paper and a flyer of the German Federal Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt – UBA) describe the environmental consequences, the economic and social problems, and the loss of biodiversity caused by over-exploitation of living areas and the decimation of fertile soil. They also point out what decision makers and individual citizens can do to stop the trend towards uncontrolled urban sprawl.
The background paper Schutz der biologischen Vielfalt und Schonung von Ressourcen – Warum wir mit Flächen sorgsam und intelligent umgehen müssen, 2008 [Protection of biodiversity and sparing use of resources – why we must handle land with care and intelligently], (in German, PDF / 517 KB) provides detailed information on the topic, and in abbreviated form in the Grenzen setzen für Asphalt und Beton (in German, PDF / 2,52 MB flyer.
Some alternatives to this voracious consumption of land are: urban regeneration and maintenance, modernization and upkeep of existing structures. Quality of living environment must also be upgraded wherever possible so that residents in existing settlements can truly feel at home.
The Vice President of the Federal Environment Agency, Dr. Holzmann, already declared in 2004 that we are spreading ourselves out too much. He presented a notion in a lecture (in German, PDF / 97 KB that is still relevant: future approaches to handling the issues of land use and urban sprawl could set an excellent example of the practical implementation of the political principle of sustainable development. Economic, social and ecological aspects must be coordinated and harmonised.
This task involves a clear definition and allocation of tasks as well as better general revenue sharing in favour of the municipalities in German that provide services which others benefit from. Priorities must be clearly defined in future governmental support of industry-related infrastructure and housing construction as well. Municipalities are called upon to become involved in regional coordination processes.
As development to date has shown, mere designation of new residential and commercial land area and infrastructure does not automatically produce more growth and prosperity. Hindrances to growth include excessive infrastructure costs caused by over-development of new building land, exaggerated site development, or the limited mobility of workers who feel tied to their housing property.
Public funds should therefore in future be channelled to new infrastructure selectively and in careful measure. Funds would generally be better invested in revitalising and maintaining existing stock.
A detailed illustration and discussion of strategies, measures and instruments with which to economise land use is in the UBA publication Reduzierung der Flächeninanspruchnahme für Siedlungen und Verkehr UBA-Texte 90/03 in German.
Land consumption earmarked for settlements and transport increased in 2006 by 387 km², or 0.8%, over 2005. Growth in built-up area is thus 298 km², or 1.0%, increase in transport area is 89 km², or 0.5%. Compared to 1992, the first year in which present-day Germany produced such figures, land area use for settlement and transport has increased by 6,133 km² (+15.2%). Settlements account for 4,946 km² (+20.7%), and 1,186 km² (+7.2%) account for transport area (table: Land use in Germany, Federal Statistical Office, see also Daten zur Umwelt - Umweltzustand in Deutschland: Flächennutzung in German
New residential areas, industrial and commercial parks, areas intended for public use and associated infrastructure continue to be built up relentlessly. This increase occurs almost exclusively at the expense of area used for agriculture.
The expansion of built-up areas originates in the population growth in the old federal states as well as a prosperity which gradually grew along with higher expectations and demands made of the home and living environment, in addition to the presence of more private passenger cars and low energy prices. As a result, many were able to fulfil their desire for more living space, more room for leisure and sport activities, to own a home in greenfield areas, or to go shopping in an ‚adventure park’ — all at moderate prices on the outskirts of cities. However, it is questionable whether the hopes concerning health and quality of life associated with living in greenfield areas have been fulfilled, and whether in the long term it offsets the stress caused by the longer travel times of adults and children to work and school. What actually happened is that infrastructure near settlements — especially shopping areas and regional public transport – was thinned out, and quality of living environment deteriorated on account of the impact of traffic growth.
In the new federal states the pent-up demand for housing and transport and supply infrastructure initially propelled growth of settlements and industrial estates. Abundant public funding continued to support this growth even when economic downturn and population migration was resulting in no demand for new housing and industrial sites. As a result, there are now thousands of vacant flats and widespread brownfield areas.
Businesses’ cost-saving strategies are another influencing factor. For example, commercial enterprises reduce costs for sales staff and distribution to smaller stores by concentrating on their larger shopping centres in greenfield areas, thus shifting the costs of travel and time to the consumer. One incentive leading to urban sprawl is also connected to planning policy and the envisioned property value gains resulting from the transformation of farmland into building land, which amounts to competition among municipalities for residents and taxpayers.
Regional and state-level planning, which is meant to steer municipal land-use planning in a sensible way, make too little use of the instruments at their disposal. In light of demographic change in German and the shrinking population in many regions, there is an urgent need to coordinate future municipal activities by setting clear objectives in spatial and land-use planning. Excessive designation of building land, poorly exploited construction areas, and the emergence of residential waste land could thus be avoided.