Question: What has given rise to concerns about the use of land in Switzerland?
About the article "Switzerland", section "Urbanization".

Candidate passages:
Rapid increase of German immigration to Switzerland during the 2000s (decade) has given rise to "germanophobia" in German-speaking Switzerland. 
Access to and use of land for infrastructure activities often gives rise to disagreements in Indonesia.
Some concerns have already been expressed about land issues in connection with the project.
A second set of technical issues concerns the geological risks involved in locating such a major project close to sites of possible volcanic activity.
The Krakatoa island group, for example, is nearby.
A third set of concerns relates to whether it is best to build a bridge at all, or whether alternative approaches (such as improved ferry services) might be a better way of responding to the rapidly-growing demand for improved transport services across the strait. 
Between two thirds and three quarters of the population live in urban areas.
Switzerland has gone from a largely rural country to an urban one in just 70 years.
Since 1935 urban development has claimed as much of the Swiss landscape as it did during the previous 2,000 years.
This urban sprawl does not only affect the plateau but also the Jura and the Alpine foothills and there are growing concerns about land use.
However from the beginning of the 21st century, the population growth in urban areas is higher than in the countryside.
Switzerland has a dense network of cities, where large, medium and small cities are complementary.
The plateau is very densely populated with about 450 people per km2 and the landscape continually shows signs of man's presence.
The weight of the largest metropolitan areas, which are Zürich, Geneva–Lausanne, Basel and Bern tend to increase.
In international comparison the importance of these urban areas is stronger than their number of inhabitants suggests.
In addition the two main centers of Zürich and Geneva are recognized for their particularly great quality of life.
 ""Global Fund" redirects here.
For other uses, see The Global Fund for Children and Global Fund for Women.
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (often called The Global Fund or GFATM) is an international financing organization that aims to "and disburse additional resources to prevent and treat HIV and AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria."
A public–private partnership, the organization has its secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland.
The organization began operations in January 2002.
Microsoft founder Bill Gates was one of the first private foundations among many bilateral donors to provide seed money for the project.
The Global Fund is the world's largest financier of anti-AIDS, TB and malaria programs and by mid-2012 has approved funding of USD 22.9 billion that supports more than 1,000 programs in 151 countries.
According to the organization, it has financed the distribution of 270 million insecticide-treated nets to combat malaria, provided anti-tuberculosis treatment for 9.3 million people, and provided AIDS treatment for some 3.6 million people.
In 2009, the Fund accounted for around 20 percent of international public funding for HIV, 65 percent for tuberculosis, and 65 percent for malaria.
The Global Fund is a financing mechanism rather than an implementing agency.
This means that monitoring of programs is supported by a Secretariat of approximately over 400 staff (as of mid-2012) in Geneva.
Implementation is done by Country Coordinating Mechanisms, which are committees consisting of local stakeholder organizations in-country that include some or all of government, NGO, UN, faith-based and private sector actors.
This has kept the organization smaller than other international bureaucracies, but also given rise to concern over its capacity to ensure appropriate use of its funds.
It has also raised concerns about conflict of interest, as some of the bodies who sit on the CCMs also receive money from them. 
The increasing use of ICTs in the workplace has presented organizations with new ethical challenges.
It has been argued that ICT use in organizational settings can contribute to counterproductive behaviour and deviancyas the line between personal and professional lives becomes blurred[27.
Usually this behaviour consists of non-sanctioned use of ICTs during work hours, such as updating personal blogs, playing games, doing personal banking online, and using email for non-work related activities.
In response to these popular misuses of technology in the workplace, some organizations have implemented workplace surveillance technologies and content-control software to monitor and restrict employees’ activities online.ICT use in medical organizations has also given rise to new ethical dilemmas, such as the use of electronic medical records.
These have created privacy concerns relating to potential breaches of doctor-patient confidentiality as well as concerns with information storage.