Soil sealing

Regulatory Frameworks
Student No: 130443540
Module: TCP8936
MSc Planning for Developing Countries
Architecture, Planning & Landscape
Newcastle University
23rd
May 2014
SOIL SEALING

MODULE: TCP8936 Soil Sealing STUDENT NO: 130443540
1 | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….2
2. The problem………………………………………………………………………………….3
3. The Italian situation…………………………………………………………….………..4
4. The Italian regulatory framework……………………………………………….…6
6. Case study……………………………………………………………………………………..7
7. Lessons to learn: Germany………………………………………………………….…9
8. Brief summary…………………………………………………………………………….11
9. References…………………………………………………………………………………..12

2 | P a g e
1 INTRODUCTION
The soil, according to the definition proposed by the Soil and Water Conservation Society of
America (1986) is “a natural body consisting of mineral and organic particles that forms from the
physical and physiochemical alteration of the rock and the biological and biochemical
transformation of organic residues.” An internal atmosphere, specific flora and fauna and a
particular economy and water characterise soils, which represent the means of dynamic
interaction between atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere (Hill et al., 2000).
The soil is a complex system that provides core and vital functionalities to ecosystems (Haygarth
and Ritz, 2009; Munafò et al., 2010). Among its various biological functionalities, the most
important ones are the maintenance and growth of biodiversity, the absorption and regulation
of the water cycle, the supply of nutrients to ecosystems, filtering water and air and managing
their exchanges (Nannipieri et al., 2003). In a nutshell, soil determines the natural balance of the
planet and its entire living species (Doran & Zeiss, 2000; Doran et al., 1996).
When soil is damaged, or its functionalities are compromised, this balance is lost, leading to
disastrous environmental consequences, which nowadays would be heavily reflected human
societies (Olarieta et al., 2008). A compromised soil loses, in whole or in part, the features that
make it so vital to ecosystems and human life itself. The most evident effects of soil alteration,
which directly affect everyday life, are biodiversity loss and the exponential increase of
hydrogeological risk, such as floods and landslides (Olarieta et al., 2008).
Soil formation is a long process that lasts for geological eras, and is therefore considered a non-
renewable resource. On the other hand, the degradation and alteration of soil can be a rather
fast and rapid process (Johnson and Lewis, 2007) and this is the reason why soil should be used
and managed in a sustainable way, trying not to compromise its functionalities.

3 | P a g e
2 THE PROBLEM
The incredible development of the urbanisation
process has led 52.5% of the world's population
to live in urban areas (World Bank, 2012).
Originally, the growth of cities was related only to
the growth of the urban population (Davis, 1965).
On the contrary, nowadays in Europe, where
population growth is around 0.21% (CIA, 2013),
urbanisation is out of control and is driven by the
quest for “welfare” rather than need (Gibelli &
Salzano, 2006). From 1950 to the present day,
cities in Europe have experienced a growth of
78% compared with an increase of the population
that barely reaches 33% in total.
A severe problem arising from urbanisation is known as soil sealing, described by the European
Commission (2011) as “the coverage of the soil with sealing materials such as concrete, metal,
glass, asphalt, plastic in a way that inhibits the ecological functionality of the soil”, resulting in an
irreversible loss of the biological characteristics of the soil and a loss of soil itself. Soil sealing is
the primary cause of soil loss in Europe, especially agricultural land, where sealed soil accounts
for 9% of land in the entire continent, and is internationally considered as the main cause of
biodiversity loss (Cannon and Horton, 2009; Zhang et al., 2007).
Despite the severity of the problem, soil sealing is often not perceived as such by the population,
because it manifests itself in the “form of a silent degradation” (Salvati et al., 2012; Munafò et
al., 2013). Besides altering in a permanent way the vitality of natural ecosystems, soil sealing
irreversibly changes the features of the land (Johnson, 2001; Genske, 2003; Hough, 2004; Couch
et al., 2007). It creates a barrier between soil, air and water, interfering with the ecosystem’s
functions:
 Prevents groundwater recharge
 Increases the risk of flooding
 Reduces the absorption capacity of carbon (carbon sink), thus the ability to contain
climatic changes
 Destroys and fragments habitats, with a resulting collapse of biodiversity
Soil sealing is generally an irreversible process and, in any case, unsealing processes are
excessively expensive and do not guarantee success (Andreatta, 2012).
52.5%
47.5%
Urban Population
Rural Population
Figure 1. WORLD POPULATION
Source: World Bank, 2012.

4 | P a g e
3 THE ITALIAN SITUATION
Italy is the largest producer of concrete and the first soil-sealer in Europe. In the fifteen years
between 1990 and 2005, in Italy more than 3 million hectares of soil were covered with concrete
and 2 million of these were fertile agricultural land (Agapito et. Al, 2009).
Urbanisation per capita in Italy is approximately 230 square meters per inhabitant, which varies
from 120 square meters per inhabitant in Basilicata, to more than 400 square meters per
inhabitant in Friuli-Venezia Giulia (Agapito et al., 2009). Over 10% of the territory is urbanised in
20% of Italy’s Municipalities. There are about 500 Municipalities where over 15% of their territory
is sealed and around 100 municipalities have been able to urbanise more than 50% of their
territories. For example, the Molise region, one of the smallest in Italy, has increased its
urbanised territory by 500% over the past 50 years (Agapito et al., 2009). On the other hand, Italy
is the first country in Europe for availability of housing: there are about 27 million housing unit,
of which 20% are unoccupied, nevertheless the construction industry keeps building more and
more (Agapito et al., 2009). All this in the name of economic theories, according to which “if it is
not built there is no economic progress.”
Soil sealing is amplified by an increasing urban sprawl, which is characterised by a low-density
urban expansion that tends to occupy horizontally vast shares of territory, thus increasing the
amount of urban areas that may undergo sealing processes (Barberis et al., 2006)
As pointed out by the European Union, one of the main factors of degradation and reduction of
biodiversity is represented by the fragmentation, degradation and destruction of habitats caused
by changes in land use due to increased edification (European Commission, 2011).
Figure 2. Soil sealing at Municipality level in Northern Italy. Source: ISPRA 2011, based on Copernicus data.

5 | P a g e
Soil sealing in Italy reached 7.8% of the national territory, which compared to the European
average of 4.6%, is an alarming number (ISTAT, 2013).
Figure 3. Percentage of sealed soil in Europe. Source: ISTAT 2013.
The scale of this growing phenomenon can be clearly understood by looking at the statistics of
some Italian cities: in the new province of Monza, over 50% of the soil has been covered by
concrete; in that of Naples, 43.2% and in Milan, 37.1% (ISTAT, 2011).
Between 2001 and 2011, the consumption of
soil increased by 8.8%, compared with an
increase of 4.7% of the resident population,
almost all immigrants (ISTAT, 2013). As if in ten
years, a territory equal to the province of
Milan had been completely saturated by
buildings at the average daily rate of 45
hectares. Average because in recent years the
pace has reached peaks of 161 hectares daily
(ISTAT, 2013). Currently 12.9% of Veneto
Region and 12.8% of Lombardy Region are no
longer natural (ISTAT, 2011). In the South, the
increase was 10.2%, compared with 8.7% of
the Northwest and 7.8% in the Northeast
(ISTAT, 2011).
At this rate, the gap between the urbanisation of North and South - though still relevant with
9.2% in the Northwest against 4.7% in the whole South - will soon be filled. Especially in certain
areas of Campania Region, such as the province of Caserta, where the spatial extent covered by
concrete has increased by 18.4% (ISTAT, 2012).
13,4
12,2
11,9
7,7 7,1 6,5
5,3 5,2 5,1
4 3,9 3,9 3,6 3,2
1,6 1,5
7,8
4,6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Figure 4. Increase of soil consumption, 2001-2011 (percentage).
Source: ISTAT 2013.

6 | P a g e
4 THE ITALIAN REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Italy has a set of laws concerning the protection of the environment that can be considered
enviable worldwide. Overall, it comes to complete and strict set of regulations, with appropriate
bodies with the purpose of protection, called “soprintendenze” (super-intendancies) (Gerofilini,
2012). However, the system of environmental protection laws is regularly bypassed mainly for
building purposes.
The protection of the territory in Italy finds its roots in Article 9 of the Italian Constitution,
according to which “The Republic [...] safeguards the natural landscape and the historical and
artistic heritage of the Nation.” This dictate underpins the whole body of laws and regulations
relating to the protection of the landscape and the territory.
The foremost national regulatory text, on which environmental protection has been based, is the
Legislative Decree of 29 October 1999 n. 490 "Consolidated laws in the field of cultural and
environmental heritage" (Title II, Heritage landscape and environment), which was supported by
Regulation 3 June 1940 n. 1357 for the application of the law on the protection of natural beauty.
The Leg. 490/99 has been created in order to gather in a single text the regulatory requirements
that were spread all over through several different policies, and mainly:
• Law of 29 June 1939 no. 1497 "Protection of natural beauty and panoramic views"
• Law of 8 August 1985 n. 431/1985 (known as "Galasso Act"), which supports and
completed the Law n.1497/39 without replacing it.
In 2004, the Government implemented a new legislation code, called the "Urbani Code"
regarding cultural heritage and landscape, which appears to be as a direct implementation of
Article 9 of the Italian Constitution. This new code revokes and replaces completely the
Legislative Decree n. 490/1999, putting an order to the complex subject related to environmental
protection by providing a new united text (Campanelli, 2004).
This is the only significant policy that addresses the soil-sealing problem in Italy. It requires the
preparation and implementation of regional landscape plans for each Italian Region; once the
regional landscape plan is approved, the policy can prevent uncontrolled soil sealing (Campanelli,
2004). The problem with this policy is that many Italian Regions fail to prepare and thus
implement these plans for several reasons (Settis, 2010).
Since Italy has invested a great deal in the estate market, local authorities are subjected to strong
pressures from the construction sector, which pushes to continue to have the opportunity to
build up where they most prefer, under the guise of creating job opportunities (Barberis, 2005).
In addition to this, the unemployed population is pushing for the creation of new employment,
so the local authorities are forced to defer the environmental problems in favour of more
pressing problems.

7 | P a g e
Specifically, many Municipalities are without funds because of the Stability Pact (2011), which
imposes strong and unfair limits on Municipalities’ spending, so it goes against their economic
interest to block the most profitable industry, and consequently environmental protection
objectives fade into the background (Settis, 2010).
On the one hand, each Region requires by law that all their Municipalities equip themselves with
a General Master Plan consistent with the regional Spatial Plan, in order to regulate and control
their own spatial developments through zoning and land use. On the other hand, this
requirement is considered as a guideline only and it is often not followed and even ignored
completely, as it lacks ways of enforcement (Campanelli, 2004). Therefore, it is evident that the
problem lies in both lack of enforcement and lack of updated tools.
One of the possible – if not the only – solutions to this problem is the implementation of policies
and laws that prevent the construction of new buildings without previous implementation of the
General Master Plans (Rizzo et al., 2012).
5 CASE STUDY
Italy is one of the most affected nations by hydrogeological risk, involving 82% of the
Municipalities (Legambiente, 2011). The dimensions of the phenomenon can be clearly
understood taking an overview of some of the events that have affected the Italian area: 5,400
floods and 11,000 landslides in the past 80 years, 70,000 people involved and 30,000 billion in
damages in the last 20 years (ISPRA, 2011).
«Italy collapses. Now everyone is talking about hydrogeological risk
and care of the territory. Tomorrow, however, everyone will return to
idolise the crane and to run the concrete mixer.
(Domenico Finiguerra)
Figure 5. Genoa Province. Google Maps Sky View 2014)

8 | P a g e
The Liguria Region, situated in the north-west of Italy, gives an emblematic example of the soil
sealing effects in Italy. The Liguria Region is one of Italy’s hot spots for flooding risk (99% of urban
areas) and an improper land use can have dramatic consequences (Legambiente, 2011). This has
never been considered in the past and it is barely considered now. In fact, in the 70s, uncontrolled
building started in Genoa, the capital city of the Liguria Region, and has not stopped since then,
spreading throughout all Liguria’s main cities (Travisi et al., 2010). Specifically, huge amounts of
the spreading urban areas have been sealed, particularly without considering plans for the
management of storm water. The current scenario is a platform of concrete and asphalt all over
Liguria’s urban cities, where the soil is incapable to perform its natural functions, leading to an
almost total disappearance of natural measures able to prevent or contain flooding, which
constantly affects the area (Travisi et al., 2010). In the Liguria Region and especially in the city of
Genoa, flooding is extremely dangerous and brings devastating consequences to the whole
environment and to the local population.
Despite all the experienced flooding,
especially the most recent ones of 2013
and 2011, where several people died and
severe damages were made to the built
environment, the Municipality of Genoa
still continues to allow heavy urban sprawl
and its subsequent soil sealing
(Legambiente, 2011 & 2013). Many have
been the initiatives to prevent this
attitude, but for a reason or another the
proposed policies and the guidelines set at
Regional level are yet to be approved and
there are still many difficulties and
impediments to their implementation
(Legambiente, 2013). In fact, around 51%
of the initiatives to mitigate the
hydrological risks are considered to be
negative and not sufficient (Legambiente,
2013).
Furthermore, the Municipality of Genoa,
together with other cities, are focusing on increasing the built environment on non-urban areas
in the name of economic development, withstanding the current economic crisis afflicting the
country (Legambiente, 2011), because, when facing economic difficulties and a very high need of
employment, giving priority to environmental protection is the last thing they think about.
Therefore, until the introduction of a policy that enforces the compliance with the requirement
to implement the General Master Plan, no positive progress will be achieved in cities like Genoa.
Figure 6. Genoa flooding.

9 | P a g e
6 LESSONS TO LEARN: GERMANY
Almost 86% of Germany’s territory is now urbanised,and more than half of it (52%) is sealed (EEA,
2006), accounting for 7.7% of the whole nation’s territory. This is why soil sealing in Germany is
a severe problem (Wessolek, 2008). Nevertheless, the German Government has always been
active towards addressing this issue (German Federal Government, 2008).
Germany has been one of the leading nations in terms of sustainable development and has been
one of the firsts to focus on soil consumption, addressing the issue in its political agenda (FAI,
2012). The Federal Government has be active in this sense since the implementation of a Strategy
for soil protection in 1985, which aimed to limit soil consumption (FEA, 2003). Ever since, the
strategy has been revised, updated and strengthened in order to achieve its target (GIUA1
, 2010).
To prevent the spreading of soil sealing, Germany implemented several approaches amongst
which two in particular could be very useful and inspiring for the Italian situation (WWF & FAI,
2012).
Since 1998, Germany started using fiscal instruments in order to discourage the occupation of
free (non-urban) areas and to encourage the redevelopment of already urbanised land, for
example by providing a different property tax depending on whether or not the development
was carried out on already urbanised areas (GIUA1
, 2010). These financial instruments focus on
incentives for the densification of cities, for the re-use of degraded areas and the use of
construction methods that reduce the impact on the environment (GIUA1
, 2010). To this, the
Federal Government has also added a series of measures to improve the attractiveness of urban
centres, such as providing funding for the restoration of buildings in a state of abandonment or
deterioration (GIUA1
, 2010).
This approach has the potential to be strongly effective in Italy. The Italian regulatory framework
related to environment protection and conservation is fairly robust and comprehensive, though
it lacks enforcement methods (WWF & FAI, 2012). It is also renowned that in Italy the main driver
that triggers decisions is the perspective to pay less, especially taxes.
Figure 7. German cities

10 | P a g e
A financial reform in this sense could be a powerful catalyst to trigger the enforcement of
sustainability and environmental policies: few developers would want to build on free land if this
implies paying overall more taxes compared to the amount of taxes to pay for the redevelopment
of urbanised areas. This strategy could also work according to the fact that, in Italy, there are
many empty buildings that could be restored and also a lot of urban land that is currently not
used for any purpose. Italy needs a law that enforces the reutilisation of urbanised land rather
that free land and this can only be a financial one.
Furthermore, where the usage of free land is inevitable, the German Government implemented
a policy which enforces land compensation,meaning that for each free land that will be urbanised,
the developers must intervene on other compromised lands with un-sealing or naturalisation
interventions, such as planting new green (FEA, 2003). However, if the developers are not able
to do so with their own resources, they will have to pay an additional tax to the Government in
order to enable public bodies to deal with the compensation process (FEA, 2003).
This is another useful policy that could be transferred into the Italian system, perhaps with some
revised details, in order to avoid the nullification of its purpose, by workarounds policies.
To ensure a successful implementation, Germany, together with the European Union,
emphasises on the importance of establishing targets for the reduction of soil consumption at all
levels of government, in order to create a system that covers the entire national territory (German
Federal Government, 2008).
Finally yet importantly, a fundamental feature of soil consumption policies is to be shared by all
political groups, in order to maintain consistency throughout the succession of governments
(German Federal Government, 2008).
Figure 8.. Dresden, Saxony Region, Germany

11 | P a g e
Dresden, capital city of the Saxony Region in Germany, is one of the best examples of good
practices against soil sealing and urban sprawl (European Commission, 2011). In fact, Dresden
implemented several policies to address the sealing problem, in accordance with the Overview
of best practices for limiting soil sealing or mitigating its effects in EU-27 that highlights a three-
tiered approach to address the issue:
 “Limiting the progression of soil sealing with improved spatial planning or by
reconsidering negative subsidies that indirectly encourage soil sealing.
 Mitigation actions to reduce damage when soil sealing can not be avoided. These include
using permeable surfaces instead of conventional asphalt or cement and building green
roofs.
 Compensation measures to partially offset soil losses in one area by measures taken
somewhere else.”
Dresden focuses on limitation and compensation by enforcing limits to urban development and
requiring “new construction projects on non-urban land to offset related soil sealing with
unsealing or greening measures in other parts of the city” (IASS, 2013).
7 BRIEF SUMMARY
It has been shown that, overall, the Italian legislation related to environmental protection, and
particularly land use management aimed to a better use of the land and to contain soil sealing,
is quite rich. What lacks is a strong enforcement policy and the willingness to change direction in
the management of the territory, towards a more sustainable and environmentally friendly
future. This could be achieved through a firm financial reform targeted to address issues of soil
consumption and urban sprawl, and also from seeking support and advice at international level.
Figure 9. Dresden, Saxony Region, Germany

12 | P a g e
8 REFERENCES
1. Agapito, A., Alessi, E., Battisti, C., Benedetto, G., Bologna, G., Bulgarini, F., Ciacci, L., Costantini, M., Fantilli,
P., Ferroni, F., Ficorilli, S., Fioravanti, S., Lenzi, S., Martinoja, D., Meregalli, D., Petrella, S., Pratesi, I., Rocco,
M., Romano, B., Teofili, C. and Tosatti, V. (2009). “2009: l’anno del cemento—Dossier sul consumo di
suolo in Italia.” WWF Italia, Roma.
2. Andreatta, L. (2012). “Soil Sealing.” Bruxelles. [Online] Available at:
http://www.europa.provincia.tn.it/binary/pat_puntoeuropa/newsletter_da_bruxelles/Soil_Sealing_Andre
atta_5.1337605092.pdf
3. Barberis, R. (2005). “Consumo di suolo e qualità dei suoli urbani.” Rapporto APAT 703-729.
4. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, Wege zum nachhaltigen Flächenmanagement – Themen
des Projektes des Förderschwerpunkts REFINA, Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik, Berlin 2010. - Federal
Ministry of Education and Research, trails for sustainable land management - topics of the project the
funding priority REFINA, German Institute of Urban Affairs (GIUA)1
, Berlin 2010. [Online] Available at:
file:///C:/Users/user/Desktop/DB0498.pdf
5. Campanelli, M. (2004). “Guida al nuovo codice dei beni culturali del paesaggio.” Halley Editrice.
6. Cannon, W.F., Horton, J.D., 2009. Soil geochemical signature of urbanization and industrialization –
Chicago, Illinois, USA. Applied Geochemistry 24, 1590–1601.
7. Central Intelligence Agency, CIA (2013).
8. Couch, C., Petschel-Held, G. and Leontidou, L. (2007). “Urban Sprawl in Europe: Landscapes, Land-Use
Change and Policy.” Blackwell, London.
9. Davis, K. (2011). "The urbanization of the human population." City Reader 20. Originally Scientific
American, 1965, 213 (3).
10. Deutsche Bundesregierung, Fortschrittsbericht zur nationalen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie, Für ein
nachhaltiges Deutschland, 2008. - German Federal Government Progress Report on the national
sustainability strategy for a sustainable Germany, 2008. [Online] Available at:
http://www.mwkel.rlp.de/File/2008-Nationale-Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie-Fortschrittsbericht-pdf
11. Doran, J. W., Sarrantonio, M., Liebig, M., (1996). “Soil health and sustainability.” In: Sparks, D.L. (Ed.),
Advances in Agronomy, 56: 1–54. San Diego.
12. Doran, J. W. and Zeiss, M. R. (2000). “Soil health and sustainability: managing the biotic component of soil
quality.” Applied Soil Ecology 15: 3-11.
13. European Environment Agency, EEA (2006). “Urban sprawl in Europe. The ignored challenge.” København,
EU.
14. European Commission (2011). “Overview of best practices for limiting soil sealing or mitigating its effects
in EU-27.” Austrian Environment Agency.
15. Fondo Ambientale Italiano, FAI (2012). “Il suolo: una risorsa.” [Online] Available at:
http://www.forumprovincegiovani.it/public/504880/Il-suolo-una-risorsa.pdf
16. Genske, D.D. (2003). “Urban Land—Degradation, Investigation, Remediation.” Springer, Berlin.
17. Gerofilini, A. (2012). “Tutela del Paesaggio: breve analisi della normative vigente.” Silvae 229-247.
18. Gibelli, M.C. and Salzano, E. (2006). “No Sprawl. Perché è necessario controllare la dispersione urbana e il
consumo di suolo.” Alinea, Firenze.
19. Haygarth, P.M., Ritz, K., 2009. The future of soils and land use in the UK: soil systems for the provision of
land-based ecosystem services. Land Use Policy 26S, S187–S197.
20. Hill, G. T., Mitkowski, N. A., Aldrich-Wolfe, L., Emele, L. R., Jurkonie, D. D., Ficke, A., Maldonado-Ramirez,
S., Lynch, S. T. ans Nelson, E. B. (2000). "Methods for assessing the composition and diversity of soil
microbial communities." Applied Soil Ecology 15: 25-36.
21. Hough, M. (2004). “Cities and Natural Process.” Routledge, London.
22. IASS (2013). Global Soil Forum. Potsdam. Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies e.V.

13 | P a g e
23. ISPRA (2011).
24. ISTAT (2011).
25. ISTAT (2012).
26. ISTAT (2013).
27. Italian Constitution. Article 9.
28. Johnson, M.P. (2001). “Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: a survey of the literature and proposed
research agenda.” Environ. Plann. A 33: 717–735.
29. Johnson, D. L. and Lewis, L. A. (2007). “Land Degradation—Creation and Destruction.” Rowman &
Littlefield, Lahnam.
30. Legambiente (2011). “Ecosistema rischio 2011.” [Online] Available at:
http://www.legambiente.it/sites/default/files/docs/dossier_ecosistemarischio2011.pdf
31. Legambiente (2013). “Ecosistema rischio 2013.” [Online Available at:
http://www.legambiente.it/sites/default/files/docs/ecosistema_rischio_2013_def.pdf
32. Munafò, M., Norero, C., Sabbi, A. and Salvati, D.L., (2010). “Soil sealing in the growing city: a survey in
Rome, Italy.” Scottish Geographical Journal 126: 153–161.
33. Munafò, M., Salvati, L. and Zitti, M. (2013) “Estimating soil sealing rate at national level—Italy as a case
study.” Ecological Indicators 26: 137-140.
34. Nannipieri, P., Ascher, J., Ceccherini, M. T., Landi, L., Pietramellara, G. and Renella, G. (2003). "Microbial
diversity and soil functions." European Journal of Science 54: 655-670.
35. Olarieta, J.R., Rodríguez-Valle, F.L. and Tello, E. (2008). “Preserving and destroying soils, transforming
landscapes: Soils and land-use changes in the Vallès County (Catalunya, Spain) 1853–2004.” Land Use
Policy 25: 474–484.
36. Rizzo, L. S., Rizzo, R. F. and Tizzani, P. (2012) “Consumo del suolo, antropizzazione, alluvioni e reti
ecologiche.” Atti 16a Conferenza Nazionale ASITA - Fiera di Vicenza 6-9 novembre.
37. Salvati, L., Bajocco, S., Ceccarelli, T., Zitti, M. and Perini, L., (2011). “Towards a process-based evaluation of
land vulnerability to soil degradation in Italy.” Ecological Indicators 11: 1216–1227.
38. Scalenghe, R. and Marsan, F.A. (2009). “The anthropogenic sealing of soils in urban areas.” Landscape and
Urban Planning 90 (1-2) 1–10.
39. Settis, S. (2010). “Paesaggio, Costituzione, Cemento. La battaglia per l’ambiente contro il degrado civile.”
Turin, Italy.
40. Soil and Water Conservation Society of America (1986). [Online] http://www.swcs.org
41. Wessolek, G., 2008. Sealing of Soils. Urban Ecology, Section III. 161–179.
42. World Bank (2012).
43. WWF and FAI (2012). “Terra Rubata”.
44. Zhang, X., Chen, J., Tan, M., Sun, Y., 2007. Assessing the impact of urban sprawl on soil resources of
Nanjing city using satellite images and digital soil databases. Catena 69, 16–30.
45. Barberis, R., Di Fabbio, A., Di Leginio, M., Giordano, F., Guerrieri, L., Leoni, I. and Viti, S. (2006).
“Impermeabilizzazione e consumo dei suoli nelle aree urbane.” APAT (Agenzia per la protezione
dell’ambiente ei servizi tecnici): 631-649. Rome, Italy. [Online] Available at: http://www.apat.gov.it
46. Travisi, C. M., Camagni, R. and Nijkamp, P. (2010). “Impacts of urban sprawl and commuting: a modelling
study for Italy”. Original Research Article Journal of Transport Geography 18 (3): 382-392.
47. Umweltbundesamt, Reduzierung der Flächeninanspruchnahme durch Siedlung und Verkehr, Texte 90/03,
Berlin 2003. - Federal Environment Agency (FEA) reduce land consumption by housing and transport, texts
90/03, Berlin 2003. [Online] Available at:
http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/publikation/long/2587.pdf

14 | P a g e
IMAGES
1. http://www.plantday.it/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/il-suolo-che-vive.jpg
2. http://images.vanityfair.it/Storage/Assets/Crops/280224/8/91961/genova-alluvione_650x435.jpg
3. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTky-
GLmDOkuLC0tKlMVvmzxTbKTyrioPzoHLXIOcjM9sy7w-8Xhg
4. http://www.ilsussidiario.net/img/ANSA3/liguria_R400.jpg
5. http://fr.wallpaperswiki.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Berlin.jpg
6. http://www.holidaygermany.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Holiday-Germany-German-Cities-worth-
a-Visit.jpg
7. http://www.dresden.de/media/bilder/dtg/sightseeing/altstadt/20090609_588_dresden_silhouette_som
mer_sd.jpg
8. https://www.dresden.de/media/bilder/dtg/freizeit/20100616_588_kunstakademie1_elbe_rg2.jpg

Soil sealing

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (17)

Similar to Soil sealing

Similar to Soil sealing (20)

Soil sealing