European Commission logo
INSPIRE Community Forum

Would you agree on this approach for using HILUCS and HSRCL?

  • 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.

Another question, which is  related to the earlier one

In regional land use plans in Finalans protected areas (S), nature protected areas (SL), relic areas (SM) and built conservation areas (SR) can be represented either by a delineated area or by a point objet, depending on scale: SM and SR are usually small objects, so they are usually represented by points, whereas S and SL usually are areas, but there are exceptions to this.

When the protected area is delineated as an area, it falls within the definition of a zoning element - no other zoning element may overlap. However, all point objects are considered to be supplementary regulations. So in our case it seems we should classify all areas (zoning elements) according to the HILUCS code list and the point objects (supplementary regulation) according to the HSRCL code list.

The HSRCL code, that is 1.4 Nature protection in this case, seems often more suitable and descriptive than the HILUCS code (6 Other uses).

S Suojelualue ja SL Luonnonsuojelualue (English: protected area/ nature conservation area)

The same situation exist for other plan markings, for example

C Keskustatoimintojen alue (English: city centre functions)


MY Maa- ja metsätalousvaltainen alue, jolla on erityisiä ympäristöarvoja (English: agricultural area with special environmental values)

Do you agree to this approach or would you propose another solution?





  • Julián DELGADO

    By Julián DELGADO

    Dear Lena

    HILUCS codes were defined for describing the LU types on the land. LU information is strongly related with other concepts such us land cover or area management and regulations (AM). Protected areas are located in a conceptual place between LU, AM. Please check the figure 1 in the LU specifications (page VII) to see the conceptual map related with LU. AM concepts can be iterpretated like restrictions over the LU, for this reason were omitted from HILUCS and introduced in HSRLC.

    In your case, restrictions concepts are interpretated like zoning element, your codes maping proposals seem right. Only a couple of clarification from my side.

    - Zoning element was not defined to keep HSRLC information, only is able to store HILUCS values about planed LU. In your case, the proposed values for SL, SM, SR, C and MY seems ok for me. But these polygons should be always present because represent the base of the planed LU data.

    - Over the previous zoning element will overlap the geometries for SL, SM, SR, C, MY with your proposed HSRLC values like Supplementary Regulations. Supplementary regalations can have any geometric type (point, surfaces and line if I rememeber well) so any of your geometric types can be represented.

    My best regards

  • Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

    By Lena Hallin-Pihlatie

    Dear Julian,

    Many thanks for your answer. I'm not sure if fully understood what you meant here. We can't change the fact that regoinal land use plans are digitised in a coarse scale and therefore some of the features are represented as points in order for the map to work in the scales 1:100 000 - 1:250 000. For the plan markings digitised as areas we used both HILUCS and HRSCL codes, while for the points only HSRCL. 





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