In Latvia, since the beginning of the land reform and the restoration of dependence in 1990, land has been perceived more as an object of property, but not as a resource and a component of nature, which must be rationally used and protected. Land is used as a unique resource for biomass production in agriculture and forestry. An unbalanced legal framework for land use was the main reason why the Land Management Law (LML) was enforced in 2015. Thus, the purpose of the LML is to promote sustainable use and protection of land ^[1][2][19,20]. This law was a prerequisite implementing land policy guidelines to promote rational use of land-related resources, compliance with land protection conditions, including the prevention of land degradation risks and the establishment of a land monitoring system, as well as the development of buildings in an orderly way.

The overall dynamics of land cover in Latvia (Figure 4) have considerably increased observing the observation periods since 1990. Latvia is known for its extensive coverage of forests (53.63% of total area) and agricultural land (39.71% of total area) according to Land and Ecosystems Accounting (LEAC) 2018 data ^[3][21]. Urban sprawl was observed as much more intensive in the period 2006–2012 compared to the previous period as the annual net take rate was 0.38%, reaching the European average ^[4][22].

LT is comparatively low. In the most recent observation period (2012–2018), the proportion of areas converted to urban (developed) land in Latvia is with a yearly rate of 38.3 m²/km² (recultivation—3.9 m²/km²) (EEA, 2021).

The State Land Service of Latvia (SLS) maintains the State Immovable Property Cadaster (SIPC), which includes annual land use stocks by types of land-use from registered land units in Latvia (SLS, 2021). Over the last 20 years (2001–2021) the shares of stock changed quite little: agricultural land from 38% to 35%; forest land from 44% to 48%. Using SIPC data and official statistics on population, the developed land per capita shows an increase from 918 to 1304, while the population decreased from 2.38 million to 1.89 million for the same period in Latvia ^[5][6][23,24].

2. Average Level of Land Take: Italy

Starting from the end of the Second World War, it is possible to create a parallelism between the main Italian regulatory developments in urban planning and the phenomena that have occurred to understand the rationale that binds these two types of events. This aspect also let to analyze the different types of development that can be found by analyzing the growth of Italian settlements over the last 70 years. It is viable to see that the first generation of regulatory plans that marked the growth of settlements in the second half of the twentieth century were created to try to regulate the expansion of cities, especially industrial ones which, had seen an exponential growth of the resident population and must equip themselves with new residential areas to accommodate the new classes arriving in search of work. To understand the interest of Lombardy as a case study, it is necessary to see it within the Italian context. Official data taken from ISPRA (the Higher Institute for Environmental Protection and Research) shows that in 13 regions, the land consumed exceeds 5%, with the highest percentage values in Lombardy (which, with the latest revisions that exclude certain types of land consumption, stands at 12.05%) ^[7][25]. Naturally, both the different regional morphology and the historical and peculiar evolution of the territory must be considered in interpreting the relevance of the values found. The comparison between geographical areas confirms the highest values of land consumed for the two Northern areas, which are the only ones above the national percentage. Lombardy also holds the record in absolute terms, with over 288 thousand ha of its territory artificially covered (13.4% of Italian artificial areas is in this region), against the 7000 ha of Valle d’Aosta which is the Italian region with less amount of land consumed ^[7][25]. As a parameter to compare the development of the different Lombard municipalities, the level of urbanization of the territory was chosen (Figure 5), in other words, for each municipality it was possible to measure the amount of man-made soil in relation to the extent of the municipal area. In detail, three distinct levels of analysis were carried out: the first involves the absolute value of urbanized land, the second relates the land consumed to the extent of the municipality while the third analyzes land consumption by referring to certain historical thresholds. The source used to carry out these analyses is the DUSAF dataset (Destination of Use of Agricultural and Forest Soils) drawn up by ISPRA and consists of a regional downscaling of the information layer CLC drafted by the Copernicus program of the European Spatial Agency (ESA). This database is available for different years: 1954, 1980, 1999, 2007, 2012, 2015 and 2018. The DUSAF is made up of five levels: urbanized, agricultural areas, wooded areas, wetlands, bodies of water and each level is composed of a minimum of three up to a maximum of five sub-levels that further characterize each single portion of the territory.

3. High Level of Land Take: The Flanders Region (Belgium)

Since the federalization of Belgium in 1980, the country has been divided into three regions: Flanders, Wallonia, and central Brussels. These three regions have a very different spatial condition; Brussels, as Europe’s capital, has internationalized and is largely urbanized (approx. 1.2 million residents), Flanders also has a high population concentration but little urban concentration, and Wallonia has a low population concentration and most of the Belgian forests. The difference in the artificial surface is remarkably large within the country: whereas the total built-up area in Belgium covers 21%; that of the Flemish region is 33% and still increasing ^[8][26]. The Flemish and Brussels regions are part of the urban concentration in Western Europe consisting of Greater London, Paris-Ile de France, Lille-Roubaix, the Dutch Randstad, and the German Ruhr. In contrast to these neighboring metropolitan areas and despite a high population density (487 inhabitants per km², 2020), the building density in Flanders is rather low due to scattered building, ribbon development and urban sprawl. The flat landscape of the Flemish region is highly degraded and fragmented by small developments and urban sprawl, which leads to a lower measurement of LT by the EEA. Identical observations as Decoville and Schneider and Barbarosa have made for Luxembourg and Malta can be made for Flanders; because the CLC maps artificial areas of at least 25 ha, much of the urban sprawl is overlooked and not measured. According to CLC the artificial surface covers 27% of the Flemish territory (370,379 ha). Since 2013, the Flemish government has been monitoring land use and LT every 3 years with more detailed GIS maps ^[8][26]. The Land Use Map (Landgebruikskaart) is a grid measurement at a resolution of 10 m × 10 m that classifies the land use in 18 categories (agriculture, pasture, forests, and other land-use types). The most recent measurements ^[8][26] show a LT of 33 % (453,488 ha) or 6% more than measured by CLC (Figure 6). Furthermore, 51% of the territory is occupied by agriculture and pasture and 16% by forest and nature. The share of nature is especially difficult to measure due to high fragmentation and overlap of nature with other land uses. Outside the urban concentrations of Bruges, Ghent, Kortrijk, Antwerp and Leuven, Flanders consists of a diffuse nebula of scattered built-up areas resulting in high fragmentation of agriculture, forest, and nature. One-third of this high LT is occupied by housing, the second large take consists of transport infrastructures (18% of roads, waterways, railways).

4. High Level of Land Take: Malta

Malta has strong land-use pressures and high land use intensity given its inherently small size, growing population, and very high population density ^[9][27] At 1595 people per sq.km ^[3][21]), Malta’s population density is the highest in the EU. Artificial surfaces total 29.9% of the land cover in Malta. Altogether, 51.7% is dedicated to agriculture and farmland, whilst around 16% is composed of natural, wetland and woodland ^[10][28] (Figure 7). The CLC data is generalized. Its scale may not portray the real LT situation in Malta since changes in parcels of less than 5 ha are not registered. Malta uses other statistical data to monitor LT. In Malta’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2012–2020 development permits in ODZ and in protected areas are indicated as other data sources, which can illustrate LT outside development zones. Areas that fall outside the established urban development areas, as defined in the various local plans, are referred to as Outside Development Zone (ODZ) areas. The type of development in non-urban areas is guided by the SPED (2015) and the relevant local plans, pertaining to the area in question. Malta’s 2018 State of the Environment Report presents statistics on the number of approved permits for dwellings in ODZ, as well as the total floor space approved for non-dwelling uses between 2008 and 2015. Over this specific period, permits for dwellings in ODZ represent an average of around 2.6% of the total dwelling units approved in Malta. The built fabric for non-dwelling uses amounted to 44.35% of the total approved floor space in the countryside and 55.65% was related to recreational use, including gardens, parks, and afforestation sites ^[10][28]. Further non-dwelling categories of development that are approved in ODZ areas include hospitals, schools, and cemeteries. Whilst rural settlements cover most of the dwelling uses in ODZ areas, Areas of Containment including areas of industrial containment (12%) and warehousing (29%) contribute mostly to the non-dwelling, non-leisure categories in ODZ areas. Such categories include uses such as quarries and waste management facilities ^[10][28]. As part of the Urban Capacity Survey carried out by the Planning Authority in 2016, a study was conducted to determine the footprint of land, which is zoned for development, but is vacant or uncommitted by permits. A comparison was made between this type of vacant land for the years 2010 and 2016. Between 2010 and 2016 this vacant land was reduced from 435 ha to 341 ha ^[11][29]. i.e., in six years, 94 ha of land were developed within development boundaries. In a survey which the Environment and Resources Authority Carried out in 2017 entitled: The Environmental Attitudes and Behavior Survey, 76% of respondents were highly concerned about land use for buildings, 67% of the respondents disagreed with building permits granted in the countryside, while 80% felt that Malta is too built-up ^[12][30].