Ratio of Land Consumption Rate to Population Growth Rate—Analysis of Different Formulations Applied to Mainland Portugal

Abstract

This paper presents a methodological approach for the assessment of the indicator 11.3.1: “Ratio of Land Consumption Rate to Population Growth Rate” proposed by the United Nations (UN), discussing the definitions and assumptions that support the indicator quantification, and analysing the results provided by different formulations applied to mainland Portugal, at the municipality level. Due to specific limitations related to the actual formula proposed by the UN (LCRPGR) for the computation of the indicator, an alternative formulation derived from Land Use Efficiency (LUE) was explored. Considering that the land to which the indicator refers may be described by specific classes represented in Land Cover Land Use (LCLU) maps, in the estimation of the land consumption rate we tested two LCLU datasets: Corine Land Cover and COS—the Portuguese LCLU reference map. For the estimation of the population growth rate, prior allocation of inhabitants to the areas where people are most likely to reside was deemed necessary, using a dasymetric mapping technique based on LCLU information. The results obtained for 2007–2011 and 2011–2015 showed, in most municipalities, an increase in the urban area and a decrease in urban population, leading to negative values both in LCRPGR and LUE in most of the territory. Clearly, LUE performed better than LCRPGR in what urban development monitoring and urban area dynamics trends are concerned. Furthermore, LUE was much easier to interpret.

Multi-Scale Estimation of Land Use Efficiency (SDG 11.3.1) across 25 Years Using Global Open and Free Data

“…presented at the High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development 2018, a concise list of country practices and reports of SDG 11.3.1 monitoring (including France, Italy, Colombia and the United Kingdom), and a few peer-reviewed research articles on methodological perspectives and quantitative results on 11.3.1 case study monitoring at the national level [65] and global scale [66]. National reporting from data-rich parties underlines the heterogeneity in the selection of input data and time spans to quantify the indicator, while reporting from the Global South is still in the exploratory phase.…”

“…Instead, scientific contributions have focused on the limitations and opportunities to apply the presently agreed methodology. In particular, in [65], it is emphasized that further work is needed to clarify and agree on concepts and assumptions but also on mathematical formulations and methods for the estimation of the indicator. This paper aims to nurture this ongoing science-policy debate with major and comprehensive analytics of the SDG 11.3.1 indicator by analysing the interplay between land consumption and sustainable urban development (in its spatial and demographic components) from a global point of view.…”

“…The scientific community provides empirical results, critical reviews and scientific advice for improving SDG monitoring. The main documentation and reporting on SDG 11.3.1 includes a training module produced by UN-Habitat on "Land Consumption" (with methodological insights, proposed data sources and hints to interpret results of calculations), a preliminary "Progress Report on SDG11" presented at the High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development 2018, a concise list of country practices and reports of SDG 11.3.1 monitoring (including France, Italy, Colombia and the United Kingdom), and a few peer-reviewed research articles on methodological perspectives and quantitative results on 11.3.1 case study monitoring at the national level [65] and global scale [66]. National reporting from data-rich parties underlines the heterogeneity in the selection of input data and time spans to quantify the indicator, while reporting from the Global South is still in the exploratory phase.…”

“…Instead, scientific contributions have focused on the limitations and opportunities to apply the presently agreed methodology. In particular, in [65], it is emphasized that further work is needed to clarify and agree on concepts and assumptions but also on mathematical formulations and methods for the estimation of the indicator.…”

Global Ambitions, Local Contexts: Alternative Ways of Knowing the World

“…Further, for several indicators the production of data is not yet clear. A number of SI contributions [30,[37][38][39][40][41][42] engage with the production phase, in particular with sourcing or creating data that can support the measurement and monitoring of conceptually clear indicators, albeit allowing for additional refinements.…”