European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

HILUCS question related to protected areas

  • General

    The INSPIRE Community Forum is now part of the INSPIRE helpdesk system, based on GitHub (, so please start there any new discussions.

    The current platform will remain available in read only mode in its current form and URL address until 31/01/2021, then its content will be archived and then published in a different URL which will be announced when it becomes available.

Dear PLU experts,

Could some one help me with this one? What does it mean that "A supplementary regulation 'protected' is always needed"?

Source: HILUCS Frequently asked questions page 186 in the TG on LU

Q2: How can protected areas be classified?

A2: They are classified according to the land use (e.g. if forestry is allowed under 1.2). If no use is allowed they are classified under 6.3.1 ‗Land areas not in other use‘. A supplementary regulation 'protected' is always needed.

  • Emmanuel Verigos

    By Emmanuel Verigos

    No it is not the same (I think). HILUCS is used only in Areas that a Master Plan (or other Plan) regulating the land use. Otherwise (no land use plan) 6.3.1 code is used. 

  • Julián DELGADO

    By Julián DELGADO

    Hi Lena, Emmanuil

    HILUCS codes can be used for all types of geometries that describe the LU. Existing LU polygons, points, and Zoning Elements from a Spatial Plan.

    Protected Areas concept is not a LU. They are places with special restrictions over the LU. These restrictions are defined in LU specifications by 'SupplementaryRegulation' elements that you can find in the Planed LU schema. Q2 only clarifies that in case you have a protected area in your dataset, to use a HILUCS code would not be sufficient, you need describe better the area with a code from SupplementaryRegulation type (if you are available to do it, of course, if you have this information).

    Complete list of SupplementaryRegulation values are at

    My best regards

  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

    By Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

    Hi Julian, Emmanuil,


    @Julian: So your recommendation would be to put all polygons that are to their nature restricted/regulated zones, such as protected areas into the feature type Supplementary Regulation and to use the HSRCL for them?

    One concequence of taking these polygons out is that we create holes, which seems to be ok:

    "Where in a SpatialPlan, areas are not subject to zoning, it is up to the data provider to decide on one of the following solutions:

    - consider the area as a ―hole

    - consider the area as a ZoningElement with the HILUCS code corresponding to ―notKnownLandUse" Source TG on LU page 37

    I wouldn't go for the other option, because then we get problems with the same inspireId:s for the zoning elements that has the HILUCS code 'notKnownLandUse' and the corresponding Supplementary regulation objects. Agree? 




  • Julián DELGADO

    By Julián DELGADO

    Hi Lena

    Restriction of land uses should be described with Supplementary Regulations elements, because HILUCS has not any class for it. So, the layer of ZoningElements can have holes if you consider. As you commnet, the data specifications give preference on the data provider decision. From my personal side, I would include also the geometry in ZoningElement layer with a HILUCS code to avoid holes. 

    Best regards

  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

    By Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

    Hi Julian,

    Thank you for answer and for giving your personal opinion. I will go back and discuss with the Finnish regional land use data providers and we will make a joint agreement on how to deal with it. 

    BTW, it seems the inspireIds are not a problem after all.  If we go for your proposal, providing the protected areas both as zoning elements and as supplementary regulation objects, then the inspireIds would be structured the following way according to our national recommendation (examples, not working URIs):

    In this way the localIds from the objects the same, but the URIs are unique. I also need to double check that this is ok though :)





  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

    By Lena Hallin-Pihlatie


    I just realised I never got back to report on our decision. We decided to use include the protected areas both as zoning elements ( and supplementary regulation features.




This discussion is closed.

This discussion is closed and is not accepting new comments.

Land Cover & Use

Land Cover & Use

Join this group to share your knowledge, learn and collaborate in solving issues related to the Land Cover and Land Use themes