sign in sign up
<<
Home , Land consumption

How to better describe take? A new classification applied to mainland France

Colin Albizzati, Mathilde Poulhes, Joyce Sultan Parraud

Paper prepared for the 16th Conference of IAOS OECD Headquarters, Paris, France, 19-21 September 2018

Session 5.F, Day 3, 21/09, 10h30: Urbanisation and sustainable

Colin Albizzati Colin.albizzati@developpement- durable.gouv.fr MTES/CGDD/SDES

Mathilde Poulhes [email protected] Insee/DMCSI/SSP Lab

Joyce Sultan Parraud Joyce.sultan- parraud@developpement- durable.gouv.fr MTES/CGDD/SDES

How to better describe land take? A new classification applied to mainland France

DRAFT VERSION 09/08/2018 PLEASE DO NOT CITE

Prepared for the 16th Conference of the International Association of Official Statisticians (IAOS) OECD Headquarters, Paris, France, 19-21 September 2018

Note: This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the Author organisation/s. The views expressed are those of the author(s).

2

ABSTRACT

Limiting the extent of land take (also referred to as land consumption) has become a major political concern since provide a very wide range of vital ecosystem functions. sealing, i.e. the covering of the ground by an impermeable material, is one of the main causes of soil degradation: it often affects fertile agricultural land, puts at risk, increases the risk of flooding and and contributes to global warming. Futhermore, soil is a limited and a quasi non-renewable resource.

France has a long tradition of regulation consisting in a complex range of planning documents which endeavour to mitigate land take and the fragmentation of natural environments. Land consumption has thus been widely documented at the national level but has been poorly analysed at a local stage. This article aims at answering the following questions: where are located the areas recently artificialised? In continuity or in discontinuity of urban areas, into rural zones? What types of human activities are at the origin of new settlements?

Finding out the answers to these questions has been made possible by the use of geographical layers and administrative data of building permits that have been geolocated. When put together, these data can be used to classify land take due to construction into three types: first, constructions located nearby already built-up areas contribute to expand urban zones ; second, constructions that are located in new artificial areas of at least 5 hectares are identified in this paper as “mass urbanisation” ; and third, isolated constructions in rural areas especially contribute to unplanned land take.

The environmental impact of a new construction depends on its location. Between 2005 and 2013, we found that 15,000 hectares are artificialised on average each year by new constructions: 45.41% of them expand urban zones, 41.45% are isolated constructions and 13.14% consist in mass urbanisation. Land consumption is mainly characterised by expanding urban areas in the nord east quarter of France while isolated constructions are more frequent in the west and the south west of the country. Mass urbanisation remains a marginal phenomenon except for the Atlantic coastline. Housing demand is the main driver of land take due to construction over the period. However, collective housing consumes less land compared to individual housing (437 m² against 1 142 m²). Finally, the growth of land take due to construction is higher in low-density zones (in rural areas or small cities) rather than in high-density areas (more than 0.5% on average per year vs less than 0.3%).

Keywords: land take, urbanisation, housing, planning, environment

1. INTRODUCTION

Land take corresponds to the increase in the amount of , forest and natural land taken by urban and other artificial (areas sealed by construction and urban , urban green areas and sport and leisure facilities, etc.). , i.e. the covering of the ground by an impermeable material, is one of the main causes of soil degradation: it often affects fertile agricultural land [L’environnement en France, 2014], puts biodiversity at risk, increases the risk of flooding and water scarcity and contributes to global warming by increasing commuting distances. Futhermore, soil is a limited and a quasi non-renewable resource.

Limiting the extent of land take has become a major political concern and the French law on solidarity and , called the SRU law (appendix 10. 1.) implemented in 2000 advocates for “a sparing and balanced soil management”. Since, the legal environment has developed even if binding measures are rare.

Measuring the increase of artificial surfaces is therefore necessary. The Teruti-Lucas survey and the CORINE Land Cover (CLC) database (appendix 10. 2.) give reference data on the topic: in 2012, they show that artificial surfaces cover from 5.6% to 9.1% of mainland France, respectively. Geographical breakdowns are however not reliable.

This paper allows to better characterise land use consumption by using administrative data of geolocated building permits (appendix 10. 3.) combined with CLC database and a geographic database that describes land use in 2005 (BD CARTO®, appendix 10. 2.). When put together, these data can be used to classify new constructions depending on the distance to built-up areas at the time of construction.

2. A NEW CLASSIFICATION TO CHARACTERISE LAND USE CONSUMPTION

The environmental impact of land take depends on its location. In this study we classify new constructions in four types (figure 1). The first type includes building permits that increase the density of urban zones or contribute to urban renewal. The second type concerns building permits that are located in new artificial areas of at least 5 hectares, identified in this paper as “mass urbanisation”. The building permits of the third type are located nearby already built-up areas and contribute to expand urban zones. Finally, the fourth type of building permits relates to isolated constructions in rural areas.

The 2005 BD CARTO® delimits built-up areas of at least 8 hectares1. From this information, we characterise the location of new constructions: within already built-up areas, in proximity of built-up areas (at a maximal distance of 300 meters) or far from built-up areas (at a distance of at least 300 meters).

The CLC database allows us to identify mass urbanisation. More precisely, it detects the areas of at least 5 hectares that have become artifical between 2006 and 2012.

In this analysis, we have selected the building permits that create net floor area and relate to new constructions, excluding adjacent buildings and changes in building use. The period of interest covers 2005

1 In this study, built-up areas correspond to the definition of BD CARTO® and do not include and railways. They include continuous and discontinuous urban zones, industrial, commercial, recreation and communication areas, , dumpsites. to 2012: it corresponds to the date of submission of building application and is not necessarily equivalent to the beginning of the construction. We have chosen this period because 2005 corresponds to the oldest available version of the BD CARTO® and 2012 is the most recent version of CLC.

When a building permit is located within an already built-up area according to the 2005 BD CARTO®, it increases the density of the urban zone or contribute to urban renewal (type 1, figure 1). In this case, the building permit does not contribute to additional land consumption.

When the building permit is located in a zone of at least 5 hectares, not artificial in 2005, but entirely artificialised between 2006 and 2012 according to CLC2, it contributes to mass urbanisation (type 2, figure 1).

When the building permit is not of type 2 and is located in proximity of built-up areas according to the 2005 BD CARTO® (at a maximal distance of 300 meters), it contributes to expand urban zones.

Finally, when the building permit is isolated, i.e. located outside already built-up areas, far from them (at a distance of at least 300 meters) and is not of type 2, it contributes to land consumption in rural zones.

3. BETWEEN 2005 AND 2013, 59% OF NEW CONSTRUCTIONS ARE LOCATED IN NOT ARTIFICIAL AREAS IN 2005

1,194,385 building permits that create net floor area and relate to new constructions, excluding adjacent buildings and changes in building use, are submitted over the 2005-2012 period (figure 2). Among these building permits, 41% are of type 1 ; 9% correspond to type 2 ; 29% to type 3 and 21% to type 4.

We want to quantify the land consumed by the construction: footprint of the building and artificialised surroundings (gardens, courtyards, etc.) but this information is not directly available in the building permits. We use the land registry (Fichiers Fonciers, appendix 10. 4.) to assess this surface which excludes public roads.

On average between 2005 and 2013, 26,000 hectares by year are consumed by construction. Among them, 15,000 hectares are located on agricultural, natural or forest soils. Between 2005 and 2013, this corresponds to 120,000 hectares (57% of consumed by construction). Expansion of urban areas represents 45.41%, isolated constructions in rural areas 41.45%, and mass urbanisation 13.14%.

2 More precisely the building permit is located in a « change polygon » CLC 2006-2012, corresponding to the transformation of a natural or an agricultural area into an artificial land of at least 5 hectares. 5

4. OUTSIDE ÎLE-DE-FRANCE, ISOLATED CONSTRUCTIONS ARE FREQUENT IN EVERY 3 FRENCH DEPARTMENT

Constructions located in already built-up areas (43% of land consumed by construction) do not lead to additional land take. They are inequally distributed on the territory. The most important rates of urban renewal or densification (more than 68%) are found where urbanisation is already very important: in Île- de-France, Rhône, Bouches-du-Rhône or Alsace (figure 3 – map a). However, in most of the rural departements of the south of France, less than 30% of land consumed by construction are located in already built-up areas.

For the north-east quarter of France, the expansion of urban areas (figure 3 – map c) represents a large part of the land consumed by construction while for the west or the south-west of France, isolated constructions are often predominant (figure 3 – map d).

These disparities are partly due to the fact that a new construction is more likely to be isolated where built- up density is weak (south-west). Another potential explanation is the diversity of spatial patterns of living, inherited from agricultural history [Demangeon, 1927 ; Le Bras and Todd, 2013]. Historically, natural, social and agricultural conditions of lifestyles have resulted in disseminated settlements in west and south and in grouped settlements in east and north of France.

However, actual disseminated settlements are no more constrained by the nature of soils and the environmental consequences of dispersed housing have changed. The environmental impacts of isolated constructions are usually more negative than the impacts of urban expansion, due to the necessity of network expansion, the increase of commuting distance and the cost of the fragmentation of natural . Between 2005 and 2013, more than 6,000 hectares by year are consumed by isolated constructions.

Finally, mass urbanisation (figure 3 – map b) often represents a weak part of the land consumed by construction except for the coastline. This can be due to the Coastline law implemented in 1986. This law states that urbanisation should be in continuity with agglomerations and existing villages, or in new hamlets integrated into the local environment (L.128-1 of the planning code, Code de l’urbanisme).

5. ON THE ATLANTIC COASTLINE, LAND TAKE IS HIGH IN 2005 AND HAS BEEN GROWING SINCE

Built-up areas represent 5%4 of mainland France in 2005 according to the BD CARTO® and are not uniformly distributed throughout the territory. Built-up land is concentrated in departments densely populated (figure 4). Thus, the soil of Paris is entirely built and more than three-quarters of the soil of Hauts-de-Seine, Seine-Saint-Denis and Val-de-Marne are built. Departments of North, Pas-de-Calais and

3 Hereafter, we use the English term of department for the French “département”. It is the intermediary administrative unit to which some of the State's power is delegated. Notably, departments are allowed to raise taxes. In 2014, the 36,681 municipalities are grouped into 101 departments, 96 of them are located in mainland France. 4 This figure is not directly comparable with the quantification of land take in CLC (2006) or in Teruti-Lucas (2006) because some artificial surfaces are not included in the measure of built-up areas (for instance roads). Furthermore, CLC underestimates artificial surfaces because the threshold to identify artificial zones is 25 hectares when it is 8 hectares for the BD CARTO®. 6

Bouches-du-Rhône are characterised by high proportions of built-up areas (respectively 16%, 11% et 14%). The part of built-up areas is greater than the national average rate in the departements of the Atlantic coastline (8% and 9% respectively for Loire-Atlantique and Finistère). Nevertheless, less than 1% of soils are built-up in Lozère.

Between 2005 and 2013, built-up areas would have grown by 4% at least on average with strong local discrepancies. Land take (building permits of type 2, 3 and 4) generally arises in departments with low built-up soil rates resulting in more available land. The growth of built-up areas is estimated at more than 12% in the Gers, Tarn-et-Garonne or Lot-et-Garonne, while it is estimated at less than 3% in the departments of Île-de-France and those of the north-east quarter (with high rates of artificialised surfaces in 2005). This general result does not hold for the departments of the Atlantic coastline where the part of artificial soils was already high in 2005 and its growth was important between 2005 and 2013 (more than 8%).

6. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAND TAKE AND THE ECONOMIC CYCLE OF THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR

The economic cycle of the construction partly explains the slowdown of land take due to construction between 2005 and 2013. The number of building permits concerning new constructions outside built-up areas decreases from 2007 in line with the crisis in the construction sector. In 2009, the number of building permits slightly increases and has stabilised around 80,000 permits by year since, which is below the average level observed in 2005 and 2006 (more than 110,000 permits) (figure 5). The surfaces consumed by construction evolve in the same way (figure 6): 19,300 hectares are consumed in 2005 while 14,000 hectares are consumed in 2012. But land consumption starts with the beginning of the construction, on average from one to two years after the building permit application. The decrease of land take due to construction would have begun only in 2008, in line with the national evolution of land take observed with CLC [Janvier et al., 2015], Teruti [Virely, 2017] or in the land registry [Bocquet, 2016].

However, mass urbanisation seems to have played a counter-cyclical role. It represents 6% of the surfaces in 2005 (1,200 hectares), it grows until 20% of the surfaces (2,400 hectares) in 2009 and then progressively diminishes until 2012 (10% of the surfaces, i.e. 1,400 hectares). Within mass urbanisation, the construction of collective buildings explains a major part of this evolution: on average, it represents 8% of the land consumed by construction over the 2005-2013 period, but this part exceeds 10% in 2008 and 2009, at the top of the crisis. In particular, the construction of social housing may have contributed to reduce the crisis of the construction sector [Faubert et al., 2015].

7. HOUSING IS THE MAIN DRIVER EXPLAINING LAND TAKE DUE TO CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN 2005 AND 2013

More than two thirds of surfaces consumed by construction between 2005 and 2013 (76,000 hectares) are due to a building permit for housing construction (figure 7). New residential building and especially single- family housing construction is the main driver of land take due to construction whatever the location of the building permit is (mass urbanisation, expansion of urban areas, isolated constructions).

However, the second driver of land take due to construction varies according to the type of permits: 7

- for mass urbanisation (type 2), industry is predominant and consumes 11% of corresponding surfaces (which is more than twice than for the other two types of permits); - for expansion of urban areas (type 3), buildings dedicated to public services are the second contributor (10%). These buildings generally correspond to public equipments constructed in the outskirts of the , which need important land availabilty and should be easily accessible to the residents (for instance gymnasiums, etc.); - for isolated constructions (type 4), buildings dedicated to agriculture represent 23% of the land consumed by construction while this type of building is missing in mass urbanisation and concerns only 5% of expansion of urban areas. Buildings dedicated to agriculture should be constructed indeed far from the other types of constructions. This is partly due to the price of land, which is higher in denser areas.

8. COLLECTIVE HOUSING CONSUMES LESS LAND THAN SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING

Housing is the main driver of land take due to construction. To promote a sparing and balanced soil management, it is useful to examine the intensity of land take in function of the type of construction (isolated construction, expansion of urban areas or mass urbanisation) and of the type of housing (collective or single-family housing). Collective housing construction consumes less surfaces by one housing unit compared to the construction of single-family housings (figure 8). Whatever the type of permits, a collective dwelling takes less surfaces (437 m² on average) than a single-family dwelling (1,142 m² on average). But these two types of dwelling consumes much land by housing unit when they are isolated in rural areas, slightly less in case of expansion of urban areas and even less in case of mass urbanisation. Large housing developments, more frequent in mass urbanisation, seem to be optimised for consuming less land by housing units, whether for collective or for single-family housing buildings (840 m² and 288 m² respectively by housing unit).

Housing construction always consumes more land when located far from built-up areas. Moreover, outside the urban units, in areas more concerned by isolated constructions, single-family housing construction is predominant (92%), which strengthens the previous observation. In mainland France, between 2005 and 2013, the part of single-family housing raises 54% on average.

9. , A KEY DRIVER OF THE LAND TAKE DUE TO CONSTRUCTION

To analyse the relationship between , dwelling construction and land take due to construction, it is useful to take into account the diversity of the territory. Construction in large urban units is different than construction in rural areas. Land price, the amount of available land, and the preferences of residents inflence the quantity of land dedicated to human activities.

In the most densely populated zones, like the urban unit of Paris, or in lesser extent in the urban units of more than 200,000 inhabitants, soil is already substantially artificial in 2005 and land take due to construction between 2005 and 2013 moderately grows (0.3% by year or less) (figure 9). At the opposite, outside urban units or in small towns, where 60% of people are living, the part of artificial surfaces is weak in 2005 (11% or less) but the growth of land take due to construction between 2005 and 2013 is higher than in denser zones (more than 0.5% of increase by year).

8

This stronger increase is partly linked to a rapid growth of the population and of the number of dwellings. Outside urban units, population grows by 1.0% on average by year and the number of dwellings by 1.4%. It is more than in the urban units of less than 200,000 inhabitants where the population grows by 0.4% on average by year and the number of dwellings by 1.2%. In urban units of more than 200,000 inhabitants (outside the urban unit of Paris), these growths are weaker (respectively 0.3% and 1.1%). The part of land take due to construction used for housing between 2005 and 2013 is thus logically higher in less densely populated zones where population growth is higher.

Finally, the urban unit of Paris seems to be very specific: population has grown on average by 0.5% by year between 2005 and 2013, with a moderate increase in the number of dwellings (0.6% by year) and a weak consumption of surfaces due to non residential and residential construction. In this densely populated and highly built-up area, high land price contributes to increase the density. Consequently, this leads to a more sparing and balanced soil management than elsewhere.

10. APPENDICES

10. 1. LAWS AND REGULATION

Sparing and balanced soil management has a long legislative story in France. The law of the 7 th January 1983 related to the process of decentralisation (the “Defferre” law) introduced this notion for the first time in the planning code (article L-110). Since, this objective has been the subject of several laws. We mention here only those focusing on urban development.

The French law on solidarity and urban renewal (the “SRU“ law) of the 13rd December 2000 introduces the Territorial coherence scheme (ScoT), a planning document that defines a global project coordinating the local sectoral politicies. The ScoT are required by law since the law of the 12 th July 2010 (the “Grenelle 2”). This law reinforces the local urbanism plans (”PLU”) and the communal maps in terms of fighting and reducing land consumption. However, these two laws do not fix quantitative objectives.

The law on the modernisation of agriculture and fishing activities dated from the 27th July 2010 aims at reducing from a half the rythm of agricultrual land consumption by 2010. It implements a tax on value- added levied after the sale of agricultural lands for development.

There are other laws that try to limit the extent of land take. The law on the new territorial organisation of the French République (the “NOTRe” law, 2015) aims at defining global approaches of land planning in order to optimise areas dedicated to future constructions. The law for the access to housing and renewed urbanism (the “Alur” law, 2014) transfers the decision-making power related to conceiving and applying the local urbanism plans from the municipalities to inter-municipal associations. The law encourages the municipalities to assess the stock of vacant dwellings before planning urban expansion.

10. 2. GEOGRAPHIC LAYERS

Two geographic layers are used to establish the classification used in this study: the CORINE Land Cover (CLC) and the BD CARTO®. 9

The CLC inventory is the European system for monitoring land use. In France, the Statistical Service of the Ministry for an Ecological and Solidary Transition (Sdes) is in charge of producing these data. Data are collected by different sources, including Earth observation satellites and in-situ sensors. Land use and cover changes are classified in three levels. The first level, the most aggregated one, is divided into five categories: artifical surfaces, agricultural areas, forest and semi natural areas, wetlands and water bodies. For each version of the database, the size of the smallest mapping unit is 25 hectares for the description of land use and is 5 hectares for the description of cover changes. Thus, small phenomena are not visible in CLC: for instance, small isolated constructions in rural areas are ignored in the land take measure calculated from this database.

The BD CARTO® is the key geographic database produced by the National Institute of Geographic and Forest Information (IGN). It provides a description of landscape. The BD CARTO® is structured in different layers grouping objects that share the same functionalities. The French territory is divided in connected spaces that are from similar nature. We use the layer “Habillage” in this study. The artificial surfaces correspond to the following categories: 110 (urban areas), 120 (industrial, commercial, recreation zones and communication areas), 130 (quarries, dumpsites) and are considered as built-up areas in this paper. The zones included in the 110 category have a minimal surface of 8 hectares (which allows us to better identify small phenoma), while the zones included in the 120 and 130 categories have a minimal surface of at least 25 hectares.

10. 3. SIT@DEL

Sit@del is the database of the statistical public service monitoring new constructions of dwellings and non- residential buildings (industrial or agricultural buildings, retails, warehouses etc.). This database is constructed from administrative documents: building permits, planning permits, demolition permits etc. Data are monthly reported. For this study, we select the building permits submitted between the 1 st January 2005 and the 31st December 2012 and for which the beginning of construction has been reported. The data producers estimate that the beginning of construction is not reported for 11% of the sample over the 2005- 2012 period. This bias is similar between collective and single-family housing. This under-estimation of construction goes deeper at the end of the period.

Each submission of building permits documents the address and the cadastral plots. For this study, these information have been geocoded. The geographical coordinates have been used to match the building permits database with geographic layers. The geolocalisation has failed for 12% of the building permits (157,917) that are not included in this study.

10

10. 4. ESTIMATION OF LAND TAKE DUE TO CONSTRUCTION FOR EACH BUILDING PERMIT

Land take due to construction includes the footprint of the building and artificial surroundings (gardens, courtyards, etc.) but this information is not directly available in the building permits. We use the 2013 to 2015 versions of the land registry database5, the Fichiers fonciers, to assess this surface because it corresponds to the situation after the construction.

The land registry database is a fiscal source collected by the French Public Finances General Directorate (DGFiP) that gathers information on cadastral plots, buildings and their owners. The land registry database describes the cadastral plots and the land use of each plot . The artificial surface is the sum of the surfaces of plot subdivisions considered as artificial.

When the cadastral plot is missing (geolocalisation has been obtained from the exact address in 7% of the sample), an imputation method is used to approximate the land take due to construction.

10. 5. DEFINITIONS

Mass urbanisation: in this study, this concerns building permits located in a zone of at least 5 hectares, not artificial in 2005, but entirely artificialised between 2006 and 2012 according to CLC.

Isolated constructions: in this study, they concern constructions located in non built-up areas in 2005 and located at a distance of at least 300 meters from an already built-up zone.

Urban unit: a statistical area defined by the French national statistics office (Insee), for the measurement of contiguously built-up areas. An urban unit is a municipality alone or a group of municipalities which: a) form a single unbroken spread of urban development, with no distance between buildings greater than 200 meters and b) have altogether a population greater than 2,000 inhabitants.

5 Public roads are not included in this database. 11

11. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Antoni V., « L’artificialisation des sols s’opère aux dépens des terres agricoles », Le point sur n° 75, CGDD, février 2011.

Bocquet M., « La consommation d’espaces et ses déterminants d’après les Fichiers fonciers de la DGFiP », Cerema Nord-Picardie, décembre 2016.

Demangeon A., « La géographie de l’ rural (premier article) », in Annales de Géographie, t. 36, n° 199, pp. 1–23, janvier 1927.

Faubert V., Monnet E., Sutter C., « Malgré la reprise du pouvoir d’achat, la construction de logements continuerait de baisser en 2015 », Note de conjoncture, Insee, juin 2015.

Le Bras H., Todd E., Le mystère français, Le Seuil, coll. « La République des idées », 2013.

Janvier F., Nirascou F., Sillard P., « L’occupation des sols en France : progression plus modérée de l’artificialisation entre 2006 et 2012 », Le point sur n° 219, CGDD, décembre 2015.

Virely B., « Artificialisation : de la mesure à l’action », Théma Analyse, CGDD, janvier 2017.

L’environnement en France, coll. « RéférenceS », SOeS, p. 79, 148, 181-183, édition 2014.

12 Figure 1. Classification of building permits by type of construction

All the building permits submitted between 2005 and 2013

Type 1 – Urban densification or urban renewal Type 2 – Mass urbanisation

Lecture: building permit located within an already built- Lecture: building permit located in a zone of at least 5 up area in 2005. hectares, not artificial in 2005, but entirely artificialised between 2006 and 2012 according to CLC

Type 3 – Expansion or urban areas Type 4 – Isolated construction

Lecture: building permit that is not of type 2 and that is Lecture: building permit located outside already built-up located in proximity of built-up areas according to the areas, far from them (at a distance of at least 300 meters) BD CARTO® in 2005 and is not of type 2.

Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO®. Figure 2. Evolution of land take due to construction between 2005 and 2013

Number of submitted building permits Equivalent in surface (ha)

Type of construction Type 1 – Urban densification 493 707 88 720 Type 2 – Mass urbanisation 102 826 15 626 Type 3 – Expansion of urban zones 346 018 53 993 Type 4 – Isolated constructions 251 834 49 285 Total 1 194 385 207 624 Note: mainland France. Lecture: between 2005 and 2013, 493,707 building permits corresponding to urban densification are submitted. Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers. Figure 3. Geographical distribution of the types of construction between 2005 and 2013 (in % of built-up surfaces in 2005)

a. Urban densification (national average: 42%) b. Mass urbanisation (national average: 8%)

c. Expansion of urban zones (national average: 26%) d. Isolated constructions (national average: 24%)

Lecture: between 2005 and 2013, in the department of Finistère, 43% of the surface consumed by construction corresponds to urban densification, 11% to mass urbanisation, 28% to expansion of urban zones and 18 % to isolated constructions. Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers. Figure 4. Share of built-up surfaces in 2005 and its growth between 2005 and 2013 by department

Lecture: in Dordogne, the share of built-up areas is 2.2 % in 2005. It grows by 11.7 % between 2005 and 2013. Note: the background colour represents the share of built-up areas in 2005 and the size of the centroid represents the growth of this share between 2005 and 2013. Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers. Figure 5. Annual growth of the number of building permits by type of construction

Number of building permits

120 000

100 000

80 000

60 000

40 000

20 000

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Mass urbanisation Expansion of urban areas Isolated constructions

Note: mainland France. Lecture: in 2005 more than 110,000 building permits for new constructions are submitted in non artificial areas. Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers. Figure 6. Annual growth of the surface consumed by construction, by type of construction

In ha 20 000

16 000

12 000

8 000

4 000

0 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

Mass urbanisation Expansion of urban areas Isolated constructions

Note: mainland France Lecture : in 2005, almost 20,000 hectares are consumed by construction, 46% corresponds to isolated constructions, 48% to expansion of urban areas, and 6% to mass urbanisation. Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers. Figure 7. Contribution to land take due to construction by the use of building and by the type of construction (in % of surface)

A. Construction of type 2 (mass urbanisation) B. Construction of type 3 (expansion of urban areas)

7 % 8 % 10 % 5 % 7 % 3 %

1 % 5 %

11 % 6 %

1 % 3 % 2 % 3 % 7 % 0 %

53 % 4 % 64 % 0 %

C. Construction of type 4 (isolated constructions)

5 % 2 % 4 % collective housing

single-family housing hostel 23 % office

retail

arts and crafts 57% industry

5 % 1 % 1 % 2 % 0 %

Note: mainland France Lecture: for constructions of type 2, between 2005 and 2013, 53% of surfaces consumed by construction are dedicated to single-family housing. Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers. Figure 8. Single-family or collective housing and land take due to construction

Single-family housing Collective housing Land take by dwelling unit (m²/dwelling unit) Mass urbanisation 840 288 Expansion of urban zones 1089 435 Isolated constructions 1370 650 Total 1142 437 % of dwelling units by type of housing Outside urban unit 92 8 Urban unit more than 2,000 and less than 199,999 inhabitants 58 42 Urban unit more than 200,000 and less than 1,999,999 inhabitants 26 74 Urban unit of Paris 17 83 Total 54 46 Note: mainland France. Lecture: between 2005 and 2013, a single-family housing in mass urbanisation consumes on average 840 m². Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers. Figure 9. Analyse of land take due to construction by urban unit in % Stock in 2005 Flows 2005-2013

Average Share of land Share of Population growth by year take due to Part of Part of land Growth of density by of land take construction isolated French take due to Average growth by the number km² due to for housing constructions population construction year of population of dwelling (number of construction purposes (in % of land in 2006 in 2005 inhabitants) (over 2005- (over 2005- (over 2006-2012) units (over take due to 2006-2012) 2013) 2013) construction) Outside urban unit 22.39 32 2.27 0.82 67 1.00 1.43 54.17 Urban unit more than 2,000 and less than 199,999 inhabitants 36.53 221 11.38 0.47 62 0.43 1.21 28.76 Urban unit more than 200,000 and less than 1,999,999 inhabitants 24.37 928 29.12 0.27 58 0.35 1.12 20.57 Urban unit of Paris 16.70 3 580 54.50 0.13 34 0.49 0.60 15.73 Total 100 112 5.01 0.54 64 0.55 1.15 41.45 Note: mainland France. Lecture: between 2005 and 2013, land take due to construction has grown by 0.13 % in the urban unit of Paris. Sources: SDES, Sit@del, CORINE Land Cover ; IGN, BD CARTO® ; DGFiP, Fichiers fonciers ; Insee, census, database of urban units.