*4.2. Adopted Instruments*

Experience has shown there is no ideal tool to be used for managing land use. On the contrary, sustainable urbanization and land use could be achieved through the implementation of a variety of instruments. Examples are discussed below in relation to visions and strategies, rules and legal devices, land use regulations, programs and projects.

#### 4.2.1. Visions and Strategies

Visions and strategies are future-oriented and non-mandatory instruments that set out the main directions for development. One of the characteristics of successful visions and strategies is establishing ambitious, future-oriented objectives and, even more importantly, identifying realistic ones; while conversely, underfunded, incoherent or unrealistic strategies can erode credibility and commitment [25]. On the basis of the examples gathered, strategies introducing an ambitious target that have influenced the use of land include the Vision Rheintal of Vorarlberg (2004, update in 2017) in Austria and the Tri-City metropolitan area planning (2007) in Poland. The objective of the former is to create an interconnected polycentric region, promoting cooperation within it, supporting cross-border cooperation and creating an interconnected living space, fostering and enhancing regional awareness and regional identity, while the objective of the latter is to have a harmonious, complete and dynamic development of the metropolis of Tri-City (Gda ´nsk, Sopot and Gdynia). Both initiatives promote a more integrated approach to urban containment by facilitating investment on e-mobility transportation, encouraging densification along public transport routes and improving intercity connections within the region. Another successful case is the Corona Verde in Italy where 81 municipalities banded together to promote a new and alternative vision of the territory based on the quality of the environment and high quality of life [40]. The success of the strategy is demonstrated by its capacity to mobilize substantial funds for implementing short-term projects within a wider long-term strategy. Another interesting strategy is the Kooperationsplattform Stadtregion (2014) of Salzburg in Austria. For the expert informant the strategy recognizes the negative impact of diffuse urbanization on quality of life and that is why it aims to limit fragmented settlement and

commercial development in the suburban belt of the main cities. To promote containment, the strategy implemented a regional green belt approach using development compensation measures to guarantee equal benefits for participants. At the national level, one clearly successful strategy is the zero-growth goal for car traffic (2018) applied in Norway that aims to introduce non-motorized models of transport [48].

However, visions and strategies are not always successful and face various challenges in addressing sustainable land use. This has proved the case for a number of strategies for European cities, which were challenged by sustainability trade-offs, implementation difficulties and lack of institutional will and capability. For example, the new Finger Plan of Copenhagen (2016–2019) to promote a more efficient transport network paved the way for sacrificing valuable green areas in the countryside [49]. Similarly, the Cork Area Strategic Plan in Ireland (2001–2020) aimed to reduce the loss of agricultural land, but in actual fact rural land consumption increased. Again, while the Athens Master Plan of 2014 introduced innovative concepts, it failed to combine its attention to environmental causes due to a lack of public consultation processes [50,51], while the Sustainable Metropolitan Plan of Rome Capital City 2003 has never been implemented due to limited political and institutional will [52]. Similarly, at the central level, the Climate Adaptation Program in Portugal shows that the success of this type of intervention can be undermined by a lack of political will at the local level [53].

#### 4.2.2. Rules and Legal Devices

Sustainable land use can be addressed by establishing specific legal devices, such as binding laws and bylaws, to create a supportive institutional framework. Decision and policy makers can activate a plethora of different legal devices that can be mandatory or non mandatory—allowing authorities a certain level of flexibility. Sustainable land use can be promoted by introducing ad hoc laws and norms (for land use or environmental protection), as well as by promoting disincentive measures (fees, ad hoc taxes). Based on the experiences gathered, legal devices are not always successful. Contradictions emerge, for instance, in the case of the Poznan Metropolitan Area Planning Law (Poland) [54], which, despite having the merit of introducing concepts like "compact city" and "energy-efficient spatial structure", does not offer enough legal clarity to enforce them.

Sustainable land use can also be achieved by introducing successful economic disincentives or compensation mechanisms. Thus, various initiatives to disincentive excessive land use consumption have been widely experimented in Europe. Among others, it is worth mentioning the cases of the Development and Maintenance Fee applied in the region of Upper Austria (Austria), the double urbanization fee in Emilia Romagna (Italy) and the soil compensation account introduced in Dresden (Germany) [55]. In the Austrian case the initiative establishes that the infrastructure fee is the responsibility of the owner, in order to limit urban expansion, while the Emilia Romagna region decided (by resolution No. 186/2018), on the one hand, to double urbanization fees for projects that convert agricultural land into built up area and, on the other hand, to decrease these by at least 35% (local administrations are allowed to reduce them to 100% if necessary) for projects aiming at regenerating abandoned areas. Finally, the soil compensation account of Dresden aims to confine built-up land for settlements and traffic to 40% of the total urban land, as well as to force investors to carry out compensation measures by themselves or to pay a compensation fee.

An example of a successful land use initiative taken in Europe is the referendum to limit land take (2013) in Switzerland. The aim of the referendum was to curb urban sprawl and promote internal development, forcing municipalities to limit urban expansion. In fact, additional land can only be zoned if there is a real need for it [25]. This kind of direct democracy instrument is typically used for enhancing citizens' awareness on the issue and obtaining political legitimation for sensitive issues like land consumption. Even though not easily replicable—due to institutional mechanisms and cultural attitudes—the importance should be taken into consideration of responsibilizing citizens towards land use, which can be done at a central, as well as at a local level, by increasing participatory mechanisms.

Another restrictive example of land use from Switzerland is the Weber Law (2012). This initiative is interesting from two different perspectives. Firstly, it aims to fight land consumption by limiting the construction of second homes to preserve Switzerland's natural landscape from overbuilding by pursuing containment objectives. Secondly, it establishes measurable targets: no more than 20% of a municipality's housing can be second homes otherwise there will be building restrictions. This is particularly useful for preserving touristic destinations from being overexploited and thus reducing the diffusion of empty or temporarily occupied building structures.

#### 4.2.3. Land Use Regulations

Land use regulations establish binding principles, usually through zoning, that define how land can or cannot be transformed. Historically, this occurs through dedicated local land-use planning tools, aiming at regulating physical development or, in some cases, to forbid development and to leave the land as it is [56]. Based on the experiences gathered, plans are shown to act in different directions according to their final objective. Some plans may promote policies aiming at reducing land exploitation or increasing its optimal use (e.g., Municipal Operative Plans of Reggio Emilia and Bassa Romagna). In both cases, the decision was taken to reduce the buildable surface by 30% and 50%, respectively, to guarantee a more sustainable use of land, while preventing landowners from paying higher taxes on buildable land.

In relation to the overestimation of buildable areas, the municipal operative plan of the City of Reggio Emilia (Italy) was employed to reduce the number of areas which had been zoned for urban uses but remained unbuilt. Since landowners pay taxes based on the value of the zoned land, stripping development rights also yields a financial benefit. The cooperation between municipalities and landowners has succeeded in downzoning over 135 ha of potential urban land to rural functions since 2015. A second phase has so far removed an additional 70 ha from potential urbanization. In so doing, the municipality takes back the possibility of (re)organizing its territory without having any restriction or impediment to changing its planning trajectory. Similarly, the Province of Utrecht (Netherlands) is experimenting with the de-zoning of urban areas back to agricultural use via the imposed land-use plan, primarily regarding unbuilt office space [25].

Land use regulation can also contribute to reducing spatial competition, which has been recognized as one of the main drivers of diffuse urbanization among municipalities. In this respect, the Municipal Structural Plan of the Union of Municipalities (2009) of Bassa Romagna in Italy offers a good example of what can be done to limit competition among municipalities [57]. Based on a cooperative approach and the predisposition of an appropriate institutional arrangement, nine municipalities decided to come together in drafting planning tools to better address sustainable land use. The adopting of the new plan and the further consolidation of the "Union" as a level of administration have contributed to limit the potential negative impact of the divergent interests, through the introduction of a system of compensation across municipalities.

Other land use plans, instead, may focus mainly on protecting and improving existing agricultural land like the Territorial Action Plan of the Huerta de Valencia (2018) in Spain and the Rural Park South (1990) in Milan (Italy), or limiting urban expansion as done by the Physical Environment Special Plan Protection (1980) of the Andalucía Region in Spain.

However, land use regulations cannot guarantee per se the achievement of sustainable land use objectives. In some cases, plans can increase land transformation to respond to market mechanisms (see the Sofia General Urban Development Plan of 2007 in Bulgaria and the Spatial Plan of Zone Chalupkova of 2009 in Bratislava, Slovakia) [42]. Land-use regulations can also promote, indirectly, the explosion of informal development due to their rigidity or lack of clear implementation mechanisms. The Urban Development Plans (starting from 1999) of Prishtina in Kosovo, are an example that, despite their original intentions, led to urbanization processes outside formal rules [58]. Similarly, even if the aim of the Outside Development Zones of 2006 in Malta is to safeguard the integrity of rural areas, they have been accused of justifying speculative initiatives as construction limits are easily exceeded.
