Land use – Mitigation

Article

In terms of climate change mitigation in Finland, the continuing decentralisation of the social structure creates a problem.

Decentralisation of the social structure forms a problem

The greenhouse gas emissions caused by heating of buildings and traffic is crucially influenced by the structure of communities. Nowadays, the most trips take place between the home and recreational sites and home and shopping and business sites. For example, centralising trade to large units outside town centres leads to long shopping trips requiring the use of a private car. A third notable travel type are the trips between the home and workplace.

When the residential areas are located at the fringes of the working areas and sparsely populated areas in particular, this increases the greenhouse gas emissions caused by traffic, heating of buildings and technical management networks. It has been estimated that sparsely populated areas consume 60% more energy than population centres[1].

Construction should be aimed in the vicinity of existing traffic and technical maintenance networks so that distances to workplaces and services would remain as short as possible. To achieve a sound and tight social structure, the current legislative means to direct and promote the implementation of construction should be used effectively.

Harmonising, strategic level planning is required

Land policy and community planning should be based on harmonising planning on a strategic level. In this, land use structural models and traffic systems create a functioning and energy-efficient social structure. Concurrently with the planning the placement of functions (trade, recreation, work) in new areas, a traffic network should be planned that is based on public transportation and bicycle and pedestrian traffic.

In addition, all those means should be studied in cooperation to notably reduce the share of sparsely populated areas in growing city regions from the current level.

References [1], [2], [3], [4]

Wahlgren, I. 2007. HAJA-ASUTUS – ongelma ilmastonmuutoksen hillinnässä. Maankäyttö 2/2007. http://www.maankaytto.fi/arkisto/mk207/mk207_1023_wahlgren.pdf
Motiva: Liikennejärjestelmä http://www.motiva.fi/julkinen_sektori/liikennejarjestelma
Motiva: Yhdyskuntasuunnittelu http://www.motiva.fi/julkinen_sektori/yhdyskuntasuunnittelu
Kononen, A. & Pihala, A. 2007. Yhdyskuntarakenne hajaantuu kehyskuntien maaseutualueilla – onko kaavoituksella keinoja sen hallintaan? Maankäyttö 2/2007. http://www.maankaytto.fi/arkisto/mk207/mk207_1024_kononen.pdf

Checklist

Energy saving and energy efficiency: Are new areas planned so that they are energy efficient in terms of movement and buildings?

**Preparation of energy master plans**
Strengths, factors in favour	Weaknesses, uncertainties	Costs, economic impacts
An area can – and it must – be planned in extensive co-operation between authorities, energy producers, builders, equipment manufacturers and other businesses, and future residents.	The land-use planning process is challenging as many new actors are involved and it requires many types of new know-how.	+/- The new method requires training and efforts, but results may be good.
The process can create business models for energy companies in the area to support energy efficient building and more sensible energy consumption among residents. Housing construction can involve the end user in the product development process.	Application of new technology is in most cases not problem-free.	+ In the long term, energy efficient urban planning may generate very considerable sa

Sustainable community structure: Is the municipality exercising the methods provided by law to secure a sustainable community structure?

**Prevention of real-estate speculation with steering of land use; Steering of construction through land-use planning and building permits**
Strengths, factors in favour	Weaknesses, uncertainties	Costs, economic impacts
Fragmentation of the community structure is a problem in Finland in terms of mitigating climate change.	The existing infrastructure may restrict the development of a climate-friendly community structure.	+ Sound planning and steering may bring remarkable savings in the long term.
Placement of residents in the fringe areas of commuting zones, and particularly in rural areas, increases greenhouse gas emissions caused by transport and heating of buildings.	Even subtle lobbying by real-estate speculators and other interested parties may undermine the steering process and the standards of land-use planning and granting of building permits.	+ Placement of residents near a compact centre will enhance trading and provide synergy benefits for shops and services. It also increases employment.
Construction should be centralised in the vicinity of existing transport and technical service networks so as to render the distances to workplaces and services as short as possible.	Steering, the planning process or granting of permits is not often based on proper, sufficient climate expertise, or it is not available.	- Old structures may be expensive or impossible to repair.

Sustainable community structure: Are retail services and other services within a walking distance of residences and workplaces?

**Favouring neighbourhood services in land-use planning and building permits**
Strengths, factors in favour	Weaknesses, uncertainties	Costs, economic impacts
The number of trips is highest in Finland between the home and leisure locations and the home and shopping and personal business locations.	Changing existing infrastructure, and developing it to a more climate-friendly direction, is often a slow process.	+ A pleasant urban centre, easily accessible on foot and with public transport, encourages trading and offers synergy benefits for shops and services. It also increases employment.
Centralising trade in large units outside urban centres leads to long trips requiring the use of a private car.	Decreasing private motoring has so far conflicted - and will probably continue to conflict in near future - with an attitude environment highly favourable for motoring, both among citizens and decision-makers.	+/- Neighbourhood shops and services benefit, large shopping centres outside urban centres lose.
In future, the costs of moving about will rise as fuel prices rise, which will render large shopping centres outside urban centres unprofitable.		- The need for transport services will decrease. This increases unemployment in the sector.

Traffic planning: Is the community structure efficient and pleasant even for people without a car?

**Attention to cyclists and pedestrians in land use planning**
Strengths, factors in favour	Weaknesses, uncertainties	Costs, economic impacts
A transport network based on light transport and public transport should be planned at the same time as the placement of activities in new areas (trade, leisure, work) is planned.	Successful reconciliation requires a strategic insight and strong intent by highest-ranking municipal decision-makers, and seamless co-operation by land use and transport planners.	+ Neighbourhood shops and services will benefit. Jobs generated in local shops and for public transport employees.
	Changing existing infrastructure and developing it to a more climate-friendly direction, is often a slow process.	+ Sound planning may generate savings in future costs.
	Decreasing private motoring has so far conflicted - and will probably continue to conflict in near future - with an attitude environment highly favourable for motoring, both among citizens and decision-makers.	- Changing the existing infrastructure may prove expensive or impossible.

Land use – Mitigation

Decentralisation of the social structure forms a problem

Harmonising, strategic level planning is required

References

External links

Checklist

Publishers