The Lucas survey : European statisticians monitor territory.
Date: 2003-09-22
Institutions: Eurostat
Subjects: EU statistics, agricultural statistics, environmental statistics, land use, remote sensing, statistical method

N
O

I
T
I

D
E

3
0
0
2

The Lucas survey
European statisticians 
monitor territory

Updated  edition  –  June  2003

5

THEME 5
Agriculture  
and  
fisheries

E U R O P E A N
C O M M I S S I O N

 
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union

New freephone number:
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.
It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int).

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2003

ISBN 92-894-4984-5
ISSN 1725-0714

© European Communities, 2003

eurostat

1.

2.

INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................................................2

OBJECTIVES OF THE LUCAS SURVEY ............................................................................................................................3

3. METHODOLOGICAL IMPLEMENTATION ......................................................................................................................4

3.2.1.
3.2.2.

3.1. A TWO-STAGE AREA FRAME SYSTEMATIC SAMPLING DESIGN.................................................................................................4
3.2. A MULTI-PURPOSE INFORMATION SYSTEM ..............................................................................................................................5
Land cover and land use information............................................................................................................................5
Environmental information............................................................................................................................................5
3.3. TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SURVEYS.....................................................................................................................6
3.4. DATA TREATMENT AND ESTIMATES .........................................................................................................................................6
3.5. QUALITY ASSURANCE...............................................................................................................................................................6

4.

REALISATION OF THE SURVEY.........................................................................................................................................7

4.1.1.
4.1.2.

4.1. QUALITY OF OBSERVATIONS ....................................................................................................................................................7
Precision of the location ................................................................................................................................................7
Surveyors ........................................................................................................................................................................8
4.2. METADATA CONCERNING THE 2001 DATA COLLECTION............................................................................................................9
4.2.1. Period and observation time ..............................................................................................................................................9
4.2.2. Observation distance ........................................................................................................................................................10

5. MAIN RESULTS OF PHASE I SURVEY AT EU 15 LEVEL ...........................................................................................11

5.1. LAND COVER...........................................................................................................................................................................11
5.2. LAND USE ...............................................................................................................................................................................12
5.3. MIXED LAND USE-LAND COVER .............................................................................................................................................13
5.4. ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES ................................................................................................................................................14
Visible traces of Natural Hazards ...............................................................................................................................14
The perception of noise................................................................................................................................................15
Linear features .............................................................................................................................................................15
5.5. LANDSCAPE PHOTOS ...............................................................................................................................................................16

5.4.1.
5.4.2.
5.4.3.

CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................................................................17

6.

7.

REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................................................................18

ANNEX 1: NOMENCLATURE AND CODIFICATION OF VARIABLES....................................................................20

7.3.1.
7.3.2.

7.1. LAND COVER NOMENCLATURE...............................................................................................................................................20
7.2. LAND USE NOMENCLATURE....................................................................................................................................................21
7.3. CODIFICATION OF THE VARIABLE: "EROSION" ......................................................................................................................21
Linear Erosion..............................................................................................................................................................21
Accumulation................................................................................................................................................................21
7.4. CODIFICATION OF THE VARIABLE "NATURAL HAZARDS"......................................................................................................21
7.5. CODIFICATION OF THE VARIABLE "NOISE" ............................................................................................................................22
7.6. CODIFICATION OF THE VARIABLE "LINEAR FEATURES" (TRANSECT)....................................................................................22
7.7. CODIFICATION OF THE VARIABLE "LAND COVER TRANSITION"( TRANSECT) .......................................................................22

8. ANNEX 2: FIELD FORM FOR PHASE I SURVEY................................................................................................................23

1

eurostat

1.  Introduction 

)  area  frame  sampling 

Area  frame  surveys  are  common  approaches  to 
gather  land  cover  and  land  use  data.  In  contrast 
to mapping approaches, (e.g. the CORINE Land 
1
Cover  project
is  a 
statistical method (EUROSTAT 2000). Based on 
the  observation  of  sample  points,  area  estimates 
are computed and used as a valid generalisation 
without 
area  under 
the 
investigation. 

studying 

entire 

In 2001, the first LUCAS pilot survey was carried 
out in 13 of the 15 Member States of the European 
Union.  It  had  to  be  postponed  to  2002  in  the 
United  Kingdom  and  Republic  of  Ireland  because 
2
of  the  foot  and  mouth  disease
.  The  survey  is 
in 
organized 
springtime  (phase  I)  to  collect  data  on  land 
cover/use,  as  well  as  on  the  environment,  and  a 
farmer  interview  survey  in  autumn  (phase  II)  to 
information  on  yields  and 
gather  additional 
agricultural techniques. 

two  phases:  a  field  survey 

in 

To support policy formulation, Eurostat launched 
-  in  close  co-operation  with  the  Directorate 
General  responsible  for  Agriculture  and  the 
technical  support  of  the  Joint  Research  Centre  - 
the  pilot  project  “Land  Use/Cover  Area  frame 
the 
statistical  Survey  (LUCAS)”,  following 
Decision  N°1445/2000/EC  of 
the  European 
Parliament and of the Council of the 22.05.2000 
“On  the  application  of  area-frame  survey  and 
remote-sensing  techniques  to  the  agricultural 
statistics for 1999 to 2003”. 

Objective of this paper is to describe the aims, the 
methodology  and  the  first  results  of  the  LUCAS 
phase  I  survey,  presenting  a  first  picture  of  land 
cover and land use at the EU level. 

1Technical guide, available at: 
http://reports.eea.eu.int/COR0-landcover/en 

2 Due to the foot-and-mouth disease occurred in 2001, it was 
impossible for the surveyors to move around the countryside. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat

achieved:  a  complete  set  of  technical  reference 
documents have been drafted describing e.g. the 
the 
sampling  design, 
observation process, issues of quality assurance 
and  control,  data  control  procedures,  reporting 
and estimation methods; 

the  nomenclature, 

(cid:127) 

(cid:127)  to  get  early  estimates  of  areas  that  refer  to  the 
current  year,  and  the  possibility  to  quantify  in 
real-time the changes with previous situations; 
to provide the statistical information needed for 
the implementation of indicators to monitor the 
integration  of  environmental  concerns  into  the 
Common  Agricultural  Policy,  as  described  in 
Communications 
the 
COM2000(20)  and  COM2001(144):  on-going 
analysis  and  studies  are  concerned  with  the 
potential  of  the  LUCAS  data  to  satisfy  data 
needs to fill some of the described indicators. 

Commission 

It is important to emphasise that for the time being 
many of these objectives are not fulfilled regarding 
the  state  of  land  cover  statistics  at  EU  level,  a 
domain  in  which  data  are  often  out-of-date, 
incomplete or not enough harmonised. 

2.  Objectives of the LUCAS survey  

The LUCAS survey was carried out in 2001 for 
the  first  time,  and  currently  it  is  still  in  a  pilot 
phase.  The  pilot  exercise  can  be  seen  as  having 
two main purposes: 
1.  the 

surveys 
themselves  during  the  years  2001  and  2003, 
which  has  provided  for  2001  and  will 
provide  for  2003  a  picture  representative  at 
EU level; 

implementation 

the 

of 

2.  the  detection  of  changes  in  land  use  /  cover  
In fact, besides the picture given in a specific 
year  by  LUCAS  estimates,  one  of  the 
strengths  of  the  project  is  the  opportunity  it 
offers  to  monitor  and  quantify  changes  in 
land  cover,  land  use  and  landscape  structure 
over  time.  This  temporal  comparison  is  of 
major  importance,  first  of  all  thanks  to  the 
uniqueness  and  richness  of  the  information 
provided,  and  secondly  due  to  the  fact  that 
this  information  will  constitute  a  precious 
data  source  for  many  other  analysis  and 
studies  (e.g.  the  implementation  of  agri-
environmental indicators). 

In the above mentioned framework, for the time 
being only the first part of the pilot exercise has 
been covered, and there is already evidence and 
a  strong  belief  that  the  survey  can  be  seen  as  a 
dynamic  and  efficient  approach  capable  of 
answering to the following objectives: 
(cid:127)  to  obtain  harmonised  information,  trying  to 
overcome the lack of tightly harmonised data 
at European level; 

(cid:127)  to  represent  an  extension  of  a  pure  land 
use/land  cover  information  system  towards  a 
multi-purpose  and  multi-user  system:  the 
information  collected  does  not  only  satisfy 
agricultural 
also 
environmental  experts  who  can  have  at  their 
disposal  a  homogeneous  database  for  various 
environmental  related  questions  such  as  soil 
erosion,  landscape,  natural  hazards,  noise, 
etc.; 

statistical 

users, 

but 

collection 

(cid:127)  to  offer  a  common  methodology  and 
nomenclature 
and 
for  data 
computation  of  estimates,  as  well  as  a  co-
survey  execution,  enabling  a 
ordinated 
complete  comparability  of  results  between 
different  years  and  geographical  areas  once 
the  desired  geographical  representativity  is 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat

3.  Methodological implementation 

In  the  following  paragraphs  the  methodology  of 
the survey is reported. For a detailed description 
of  the  methods,  a  set  of  nine  documents  was 
drafted, each one focusing on a specific aspect of 
the  survey.  The  complete  series  of  Technical 
Reference Documents is available on the CIRCA 
Web site

 of the Commission. 

3

3.1. A two-stage area frame systematic 

sampling design 

Systematic area frame sampling has been chosen 
as  sampling  design  method,  since  LUCAS  is 
designed  to  provide  multi-purpose  information 
and  therefore  needs  to  cover  not  only  the 
agriculture  area,  but  all  the  territory  of  EU 
Member  States  (DELINCÉ  2000,  AVIKAINEN 
& al. 2001). 

4

. 

the  first 

The  above  described  sampling  design  enables  the 
production  of  area  estimates  for  land  cover/land 
use  categories  at  the  European  level;  nevertheless 
interested  countries  can  acquire  results  at  national 
or  regional  level  by  increasing  the  number  of 
sampled points
The  LUCAS  phase  I  survey  adopts  a  two-stage 
sampling  design:  at 
level,  Primary 
Sampling  Units  (PSUs)  are  defined  as  cells  of  a 
regular  grid  with  a  size  of  18  ×  18  km,  while  the 
Secondary  Sampling  Units  (SSUs)  are  10  points 
regularly  distributed  (in  a  rectangular  of  1500  × 
600 m side length
) around the centre of each PSU 
(Figure 1). 
The  sampling  results  in  approximately  10.000 
PSUs  over  all  the  EU  territory.  The  number  of 
PSUs was chosen to optimise the cost structure and 
the precision at European level (Table 1). 

5

Country 

Austria 

Belgium 

Germany 

Denmark 

Spain 

Finland 

France 

Greece 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

AT 

BE 

DE 

DK 

ES 

FI 

FR 

GR 

IE 

IT 

LU 

The Netherlands  NL 

Portugal 

Sweden 

PT 

SE 

Number 
of PSU 

Number 
of SSU 

255 

100 

2.528 

989 

Area 
(KM²) 

83860 

30520 

Area 
in % 

2.59 

0.94 

1.105 

10.981 

356970 

11.02 

147 

1.268 

1.073 

1.702 

419 

218 

941 

8 

117 

277 

1.373 

12.670 

10.410 

16.916 

4.051 

2.163 

9.275 

80 

1.154 

2.731 

43090 

504790 

338150 

549090 

131960 

70290 

301280 

2570 

41570 

91910 

1.33 

15.58 

10.44 

16.95 

4.07 

2.17 

9.30 

0.08 

1.28 

2.84 

1.407 

13.808 

449960 

13.89 

United Kingdom  UK 

775 

7.499 

244150 

7.54 

3240160  100.00 
EU15 
Table  1:  Number  of  observed  PSUs  and  SSUs  per 
Member State, and surface per country 

96.633 

9.812 

The observation unit of the LUCAS phase I survey 
is  the  point,  defined  as  a  circle  of  3  m.  diameter 
(Figure 2). Data on land cover, land use as well as 
environmental  features  are  collected  in  the  field 
the 
connected  with 
heterogeneity  of 
in  some 
land  cover 
particular cases an enlargement of the observation 

these  SSUs.  Considering 

types, 

Figure 1: The LUCAS 2-stage sampling  

3http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/dsis/landstat/library?l=/lucas&vm=
detailed&sb=Title 

4 

4 In 2002 this was done in Hungary, in the framework of the 
LUCAS Phare 2000 programme. 
5  With  the  exceptions  of  Spain  and  Italy,  in  which  the 
LUCAS  sampling  plan  was  slightly  adapted  to  comply  with 
already established area frame systems. 

 
 
 
 
 
                   
 
 
 
 
 
 
. 

window  up  to  a  circle  with  20  m.  radius  is 
6
foreseen
Data are collected as well along the straight line 
that  connects  the  observation  points  located  in 
the first row (the transects) (Figure 2). 

water  and  bare  soil  areas)  and  land  use  categories 
(residential,  industrial,  commercial,  recreational, 
environmental-related 
etc.);  moreover, 
information is collected. 

some 

Point
(r=1.5m)

Extended Observation
Window (r=20m)

3.2.1.  Land cover and land use 

information 

eurostat

Transect
(300m)

Figure 2: The Point and the Transect 

The phase II survey, carried out in autumn, deals 
with  the  collection  of  environmental  related 
information  and  farming  practices.  The  sample 
for  LUCAS  phase  II  is  a  sub-sample  of  about 
5750 SSUs (including 15% of reserve) classified 
in  arable  land  during  phase  I.  The  advantage  of 
adopting  an  area  frame  sampling  strategy  relies 
on the fact that such a kind of sampling does not 
require  an  up-to-date  and  complete  list  of  farms 
for  the  sampling.  In  fact,  the  location  of  the 
selected  SSU  determines  a  plot  of  arable  land 
belonging  to  a  farm,  which  is  then  selected  and 
whose  manager  needs  to  be  identified.  Best 
practice  for  the  identification  of  the  managing 
farmer is to do it during the phase I survey (ask 
people  met, 
community 
neighbours, 
administrations). 
Observation  units  of  the  phase  II  survey  are  the 
agricultural holding itself, and the plot in which 
the sampled SSU is located. 

or 

3.2. A multi-purpose information 

system 

According  to  the  objectives,  the  survey  targets 
not  only  the  observation  of  the  agricultural 
domain, but a much wider range of possible land 
cover  types  (i.e.  built-up  areas,  forests  and 
wooded  lands,  bushes  and  grassland,  wetland, 

6

  The  extended  window  of  observation  is  applied  in  the 
following  situations:  heterogeneous  areas  where  land 
features  alternate  with  distances  of  around  20-25  m.; 
alternation  of  permanent  crops  and  bare  soils  and/or 
grassland or another crop; crops under cover; wooded and 
semi-natural  areas.  The  existence  of  certain  features  (e.g. 
isolated  trees,  soil  erosion)  is  also  observed  in  this 
extended observation window. 

and 

cover 

classifications, 

The LUCAS classification system was established 
by  applying  best  practise  for  the  construction  of 
land 
as 
use 
recommended in Eurostat "Manual of Concepts on 
land use/cover" (Eurostat 2000). 
Land  Cover  is  the  observed  physical  cover  of  the 
earth’s surface, and the Land Use is the description 
of the same areas in terms of their socio-economic 
function.  The  LUCAS  concept  of  "LAND"  is 
extended  to  inland  water  areas  (lakes,  rivers, 
coastal areas), and it does not embrace uses below 
the  earth’s  surface  (mine  deposits,  subways, 
mushroom beds, ground levels of buildings). 
The  land  cover  classification  is  defined  in  3 
hierarchical  levels  of  detail  with  57  classes  at  the 
rd
3
  level,  and  the  land  use  nomenclature  is 
distinguished  in  14  classes  at  the  3rd  level.  The 
complete nomenclature scheme is annexed. 

3.2.2.  Environmental information 

information  on 

Qualitative 
the  existence  of 
infrastructure for irrigation and drainage, as well as 
data on presence of isolated trees is collected in the 
field  (LUCAS  phase  I)  within  an  extended 
observation  window  of  a  20  m.  circle  around  the 
observation point. Soil erosion and accumulation is 
also noted when observed in an extended window 
of  observation  around  SSUs  in  arable  land  (land 
cover  classes  B1-B6).  Traces  of  Natural  Hazards 
are recorded as well. 
Along  the  transect,  the  change  of  land  cover  and 
7
the occurrence of linear features
Photographs of the landscape are taken at SSU13; 
these  pictures  create  a  photo  sample  of  European 
landscapes. 
The farmers interviews (LUCAS phase II) provides 
information regarding agricultural techniques (e.g. 
crop 
rotation,  sowing  method,  quantities  of 
fertilisers  per  type,  treatment  with  weed  killers, 
etc.), data on size of areas/plots, yield of crops. 

 is registered. 

7 Hedge and tree rows, stonewalls and dykes, water channels, 
tracks and roads, railways, electric lines. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                   
 
 
 
 
 
document 
(AVIKAINEN & BERTIN 2001). 

n.° 

9: 

"Estimation  methods" 

3.5. Quality assurance 

To guarantee the value of results, quality assurance 
and  control  procedures  were  defined  (LUCAS 
technical 
reference  document  n°7:  "Quality 
Assurance and Control procedures", ORESNIK et. 
al.  2001). 
In  addition,  Eurostat  guarantees 
continuous  assistance  by  means  of  electronic 
communication to help the partners that carried out 
the survey in each country. 
Supporting  the  above  quality  assurance  measures, 
additional internal quality checks are carried out by 
the survey-managing organisations during the field 
work,  in  order  to  detect  and  correct  eventual 
misinterpretations  or  systematic  errors.  A  double-
blind  control  survey  is  carried  out  on  5%  of  the 
phase  I  sample  to  assess  the  accuracy  of  the 
observations. 
Eurostat’s  follow-up  of  the  survey  includes  the 
organisation  of  plenary  co-ordination  meetings;  in 
addition,  bilateral  follow-up  meetings  are  planned 
in each country.  

eurostat

3.3. Technical implementation of the 

surveys 

The  phase  I  field  observation  is  carried  out  on 
the  exact  geographic  location  of  the  sampled 
SSU,  therefore  surveyors  need  to  locate  very 
precisely  the  points  to  be  visited.  To  this 
purpose,  a  set  of  documents  and  material  were 
produced and provided them: topographic maps, 
the  most  recent  and  available  orthophotos  at 
scales  1:10.000  -  1:2.000,  compasses  and  GPS. 
8
A  survey  form
  to  be  filled  out  in  the  field  was 
drafted,  and  adapted 
specific 
to  country 
conditions. 
The  qualification  of  surveyors  is  of  crucial 
importance  for 
the  results. 
Surveyors need skills not only in agriculture and 
more  specifically  in  crop  recognition,  but  in 
addition they have to be familiar with the use of 
supporting  tools  (maps,  orthophotos,  compass, 
GPS).  Specific  training  is  organised  to  this 
purpose. 

the  quality  of 

As  far  as  phase  II  survey  is  concerned,  once 
identified,  farmers  are  contacted  by  means  of  a 
face-to-face,  telephone  or  mail  interview.  In  all 
the  cases, 
they  receive  documentation  and 
instructions before the interview. 

3.4. Data treatment and estimates 

The  codification  of  the  collected  data  was 
defined  together  with  rules  to  check  data  entry 
and  the  coherence  with  the  previously  recorded 
information.  Data  consistency 
is  controlled 
during  data  entry  at  country  level;  additional 
integrity  controls  are  carried  out  centrally  by 
Eurostat.  
For the area estimates, LUCAS observations are 
the 
extrapolated 
characteristics  of  the  2-stage  sampling.  The 
estimates are computed at the level of each item 
of  the  classification,  multiplying  the  observed 
frequency  by  the  total  area  of  the  geographical 
level considered. 
Detailed  information  on  the  algorithms  used  to 
calculate  the  estimates  and  the  variances  is 
available  in  the  LUCAS  technical  reference 

account 

taking 

into 

8 See annex 8.8 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                   
 
 
4.  Realisation of the survey 

4.1. Quality of observations  

the 

The  technical  conditions  under  which  sampling 
the  ground  are 
points  were  observed  on 
fundamental  to  ensure  high  quality  of  results, 
that depend primarily on two parameters. Firstly, 
the  point  location  on  the  ground  has  to  be  as 
precise  as  possible  in  order  to  respect  the 
systematic  character  of  the  sampling  plan,  and  
to  detect  correctly  the  changes  that  occur  in  the 
ground  once 
is  carried  out 
periodically.  In  fact  a  shift  in  the  exact  location 
of a surveyed point can induce the detection of a 
change  between  two  consecutive  surveys  which 
has not actually occurred.  
Secondly, once the point is correctly located the 
recognition  and  classification  of  the  ground 
observations  needs 
to  be  assessed  without 
ambiguity.  This  task  fall  mainly  on  surveyors, 
whose  profile  and  training  have  to  be  adapted 
consequently. 

survey 

4.1.1.  Precision of the location   

Location of the points on the ground 
Three different tools are used to locate the points 
on the ground:  
(cid:1) aerial (orthorectified) photographs;  
(cid:1) topographic maps; 
(cid:1) compasses and eventually GPS. 
These  instruments  are  used  in  a  combined  way. 
The  topographic  maps  (from  1/100  000  to  1/50 
000  scale)  are  used  to  define  the  best  route  to 
reach PSUs. At the level of SSUs, it is primarily 
the aerial photographs that are used for a precise 
location,  with  the  additional  support  of  GPS, 
compasses, and of large scale topographic maps 
(1/25  000  to  1/5  000).  In  order  to  be  correctly 
located  on  the  ground,  the  sampling  points  are 
preliminary printed on aerial photographs and on 
large  scale  topographic  maps.  Therefore  the 
quality  of  the  aerial  photographs  is  decisive  for 
the  orientation  of  surveyors  in  the  field,  and  in 
order  to  ensure  the  correct  location  of  the 
surveyed SSUs.  
The survey equipment as described above allow 
the  best  transcription  of  ground  reality,  once  it 
has a good degree of accuracy. 
The  quality  of  aerial  photographs  is  related  to 
two  different  parameters:  its  resolution  and  its 
positional  accuracy.  The  date  of  the  snapshot  is 

eurostat

very  important  as  well,  in  particular  in  the  areas 
where changes are rapid (i.e. boundaries  of urban 
areas):  the  landscape  grasped  on  the  photograph 
has  to  correspond  as  much  as  possible  to  that 
observed at the time of the survey. 
The resolution of a photograph is the area that one 
image pixel represents on the ground. An object on 
the  ground 
in  general  recognisable  on  a 
photograph when its size is 2 to 3 times higher than 
the  ground  resolution  of  the  image.  This  rule  is 
important  in  particular  when  the  land  cover  is 
heterogeneous. 

is 

Countr
y 

Resolutio
n/ 
scale 

Year of 
acquisitio
n 

Type 

Use 
of 
GPS 

AT 
BE 

DE 

DK 

ES 

FI 

FR 

GR 
IE 
IT 
LU 
NL 
PT 
SE 
UK 

0,5 m 

1990/2000 

Orthophoto  yes 

1 m 

1995/2000 

0,25 - 
0,8 m 

>1995 

Orthophoto  yes 
Orthophoto  
& aerial 
photo 

yes + 
DGPS 

0,4m 

1999 

Orthophoto  yes 

0,75 - 2 
m 

1985/2000 

Orthophoto  
& aerial 
photo 

no 

1 m 

1996 

Orthophoto  yes 

0,5 - 1 m 

>1995 

Orthophoto  
& aerial 
photo 

no 

Orthophoto  yes 
Orthophoto  yes 
Orthophoto  yes 
Topogr. map  yes 
Orthophoto  DGPS 
Orthophoto  yes 

1990/1998 
1995 
n.a. 
1997 
>1995 
2000 

>1995 

Orthophoto  yes 

1988/2001 

Orthophoto  yes 

1 m 
1m 
1 m 
1/5000  
1m 
1 m 

1 m 

1m 

Table 2 -  Characteristics  of  aerial  photographs  used  in 

the 2001 survey 

the  orthophotos  used  can 

Since  the  size  of  the  LUCAS  observation  unit  is 
equal  to  3  metres,  the  resolution  does  not  have  to 
exceed 1 meter in order for the surface type to be 
easily recognisable on a photograph (figure 3). The 
photographs  used  for  the  2001  survey  had  a 
resolution  equal  to  1  m  in  the  majority  of  cases 
(table 2); the overall quality in terms of resolution 
therefore  be 
of 
considered satisfactory. 
Concerning  the  positional  accuracy  of  the  photos, 
it depends on the geometrical corrections they have 
undergone,  that  defines  the  precision  of  the 
geographical co-ordinates of an image pixel. In the 
majority  of  cases,  orthophotos  were  used  for  the 
LUCAS  survey 
(table  2).  Orthophotos  are 
for  which 
georeferenced  aerial  photographs 
corrections  were  applied  in  order  to  take  into 
account distortions due to relief (figure 4). 

7 

 
 
 
eurostat

Point location

Image resolution

3 m 

1 m 

0.5 / 2.5 m 
Positional accuracy 

1 m 

5 m 
10 m 

Observation unit

DGPS

Orthophoto

Map: 1/25 000

GPS

Figure 3 - Precision of the topographical instruments 

The  positional  accuracy  of  orthophotos  depends 
on  the  precision  of  the  digital  elevation  model 
used  to  correct  the  effects  due  to  relief,  and  on 
the  location  precision  of  the  control  points  used 
to  georeference  the  image.  On  the  average,  this 
precision varies between 0.5 and 2.5 m. 
In a minority of cases, simple aerial photographs 
(georeferenced but not orthorectified) were used 
in  the  2001  survey;  their  geometrical  quality  is 
lower  than  the  one  of  orthophotos,  since  they 
remain  sullied  of  the  errors  due  to  relief 
distortion
is 
acceptable 
is  not 
accentuated (e.g. plain, plateau).  

.  The  use  of  simple  photos 

in  areas  where 

relief 

9

Projection Center

Image

Orthophoto

Map 1 - UTM zone of the Member States 

In  order  to  print  the  LUCAS  points  on  aerial 
photographs  and/or  topographic  maps,  SSUs  are 
projected in the same national geographical system 
in  which  topographical  documents  are  referred.  A 
different reference system is used for each country, 
that consists in a specific ellipsoid (i.e. Datum) and 
projection  system  (e.g.  Lambert,  Mercator).  The 
change  of  projection  system  from  one  country  to 
another, easily operable with map-making software 
few 
available  on 
geometrical distortions (lower than 1 m). 

induce  only 

the  market, 

Terrain

4.1.2.  Surveyors  

The  quality  of  the  observations  carried  out  on  the 
ground  is  essentially  the  result  of  surveyors 
expertise. Surveyors need to be trained in order to 
develop  adequate  capacities  to  use  the  various 
topographical instruments, and in order to orientate 
themselves  correctly  on  the  ground.  Moreover, 
they  require  good  capabilities  to  classify  correctly 
the 
collected 
the  variables 
classifications developed.  

according 

to 

The surveyors profile in the 2001 survey 
Table  3  synthesises  the  profile  of  surveyors  that 
carried out the 2001 survey. 

Figure 4 - Scheme of the ortho-rectification process  

Map

Rectification

Location of the points on the photographs  
The  LUCAS  points  are  referred  on  the  WGS84 
ellipsoid,  and  projected  in  the  UTM  system.  To 
limit  distortions, 
sampling  plan  was 
generated  in  the  UTM  zone  of  each  country 
(Map 1). 

the 

9  It  is  however  possible  to  project  the  geographical  co-
ordinates  of  a  SSU  on  a  photo  not  orthorectified.  This 
method allows to use an unprocessed image which has the 
advantage to better represent the relief. But its costs would 
have been prohibitive under the LUCAS project. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                   
 
 
 
 
eurostat

the  classification 

Training and surveyors' supervision  
Surveyors  followed  training  courses  based  on  the 
technical  documentation  provided  by  Eurostat, 
concerning  mainly 
system 
adopted  and  the  instructions  to  surveyors.  Each 
surveyor followed at least a one-day training on the 
ground to tackle practical problems.  
In  Spain,  surveyors  did  not  follow  any  practical 
training,  due  to  the  fact  that  they  were  already 
familiar and experienced with area frame surveys. 
However, all the questionnaires they filled in were 
afterwards checked centrally, comparing the results 
of  the  field  visit  with  the  ones  obtained  by  the 
orthophotos analysis. 
In  France,  training  was  ensured  at  departmental 
level  by  decentralised  national  services;  each 
surveyor  was  accompanied  by  the  departmental 
supervisor for the first 2 or 3 surveyed PSUs. 
As a rule, the companies in charge of the project in 
each Member State were required to survey twice a 
percentage  between  5  and  10%  of  the  SSUs 
already visited. This double survey was carried out 
at the beginning of the campaign, in order to check 
and correct eventual deviations in the interpretation 
of survey instructions. 

4.2. Metadata concerning the 2001 data 
collection  

4.2.1. Period and observation time  

th

 of June 2001. 

On  the  average,  the  survey  began  in  May  and 
lasted from 2 to 3 months. In the United Kingdom 
and  Ireland,  the  data  collection  of  2001  had  to  be 
deferred  to  2002  due  to  the  foot-and-mouth 
epidemic.  For  similar  reasons  the  survey  in  the 
Netherlands started only the 18
An  average  of  2  hours  was  required  to  visit  each 
PSU; this including just the time necessary to walk 
for  at  least  3  km  (i.e.  10  x  300  m  between  each 
SSU)  (table  4).  The  configuration  of  the  terrain 
influenced  SSUs  accessibility,  and  consequently 
the  time  spent  for  the  ground  visits  varied  a  lot: 
from  less  than  two  hours  in  plain  areas,  to  more 
than  10  hours  in  steeply  sloping  ground  and/or 
occupied by a vegetation not easily penetrable.  

Country Geogr.
Envir.

Engineer 
agronomist
forester

Other

Total 
number of
surveyors

Total 
number of
supervisors

Technician 
agronomist 
or in agricultural 
survey
1

3

18

2
2

220

4
1
1

6
1
6

AT
10
BE-LU
5
DE
9
DK
3
ES
220
FI
18
FR
292
GR
6
IE
4
IT
60
NL
3
PT
5
SE
27
UK
12
EU15
674
Table 3 - Surveyors profile in the 2001 survey 

3
16
12
585

23
3
2
2

292
5

35

37

36

17

9

1

1

4

1
1
2
1
12
2
90
2
1
3
2
1
6
4
128

in 

in 

They can be classified mainly in 5 profiles: 
(cid:1) geographers/consultants 

and/or 

environment: 
students  or  personnel  with  a  diploma  in 
in 
geography 
specialisation 
in  general  good 
environment,  having 
knowledge 
data 
geographical 
the 
processing  field  and  the  manipulation  of 
topographical instruments (GIS, GPS, photo-
interpretation, etc.); 

agricultural 

(cid:1) agricultural  or  forestry  engineers:  specialists 
sector, 
and/or 
in 
previously  employed  in  agricultural  surveys. 
This personnel is experienced because it has 
been  working  as  permanent  staff  of  the 
company for several years; 

forestry 

with 

personnel 

(cid:1) technicians  in  agronomy  or  in  agricultural 
surveys: 
various 
qualifications  in  the  field  of  agriculture.  On 
the  average  they  have  experience  in  the 
agricultural  field,  particularly  in  the  control 
of the CAP subsidies (IACS), in the field of 
and 
geographical 
manipulation  of  topographical  instruments 
(GPS,  orthophoto,  etc.).  This  category  of 
personnel  has  been  working  as  permanent 
staff  of  the  company  for  several  years  as 
well; 

processing 

data 

(cid:1) regular  surveyors:  personnel  used  regularly 
by  agricultural  statistical  offices  involved  in 
LUCAS-similar surveys (e.g. France, Spain). 
These  surveyors  are  experienced  in  the 
agricultural  survey  domain  (observation  on 
the ground, surveying of farmers); 

(cid:1) other  surveyors:  personnel  with  different 
teachers, 

profiles:  biologists,  geologists, 
drivers.  

Mainly  specialised  personnel  was  employed  in 
the LUCAS 2001 survey (table 3).  

9 

 
 
 
eurostat

MS

Surveyors

PSU

AT
BE
DE
DK
ES
FI
FR
GR
IE
IT
LU
NL
PT
SE
UK
EU15
Table 4 – 2001 survey's performance 

255
100
1105
147
1267
1073
1702
422
218
941
8
117
277
1407
775
9814

10
3
9
3
220
18
292
6
4
60
2
3
5
27
12
674

PSU/
surveyor
26
33
123
49
6
60
6
70
55
16
4
39
55
52
65
15

Minutes/
PSU
142
90
64
110
133
93
180
99
136
93
125
94
145
117
138
117

Month of
work
1
1
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
1
1
3
3
3
2,3

Year

2001
2001
2001
2001
2001
2001
2001
2001
2002
2001
2001
2001
2001
2001
2002

According  to  the  specifications  of  the  survey, 
SSUs  located  at  more  than  2000  m.  of  altitude 
were photo-interpreted rather than visited on the 
ground. It was the case for very isolated points as 
well,  such  as  those  located  in  the  middle  of  the 
Scandinavian forest or on islands not served by a 
regular transport service.  

4.2.2. Observation distance  

The  data  collected  by  photo-interpretation 
total  amount  of 
concerned  12%  of 
investigated SSUs (figure 5).  

the 

Photo 
interp.
12%

>100 m
11%

50-100m
7%

3-50 m
17%

At the 
point
53%

Figure 5 - Distance of observation of the points 

88%  of  the  SSU  were  observed  on  the  ground. 
According  to  their  accessibility/visibility,  it  was 
possible to observe them either directly or within 
short distance: 70% of the observed points were 
observed at a distance ranging from 0 to 50 m. 
More than 80% of the points located in artificial 
areas  had  to  be  approached  closely  in  order  to 
identify the type of cover correctly (figure 6). On 
the  other  hand,  the  land  cover  of  the  points 
located in shrubland was more easily identifiable 
remotely. 

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Photo-interp.
>100m
50-100m
3-50m
at the point

Arificial

Cropland

Wooded
P. Grassland

Shrubland

Bareland
Water/Wetland

Figure 6 - Observation distance by land cover  

The  definition  of  the  land  cover  of  the  SSUs 
located on bare land, on inland water bodies or in 
the  wetlands  was  largely  carried  out  by  photo 
interpretation. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.  Main results of phase I survey at 

EU 15 level 

eurostat

In  the  following  chapter  the  main  results  of 
phase  I  survey  are  presented.  In  particular,  land 
use,  land  cover  and  their  cross  distribution  are 
analysed; the presence of linear features, the risk 
of natural hazards and the perception of noise are 
reported  as  examples  of  the  environmental 
variables collected. 
The  tables  of  results  hereafter  reported  include 

the coefficient of variation (

CV

=

), which 

σ
area

indicates in percentage the achieved precision of 
each estimate. The specifications of the LUCAS 
pilot project stipulated to reach a precision of 2% 
concerning the main land cover classes. 

5.1. Land cover 

2

Woodland  covers  almost  1,2  million  km
,  or 
35%  of  the  total  area  of  the  15  EU  countries 
concerned  by  the  survey.  This  makes  it  the 
leading type of land cover in 2001. Areas under 
crops  account  for  26%  of  the  territory,  and 
grassland for 16%.  

Land Cover

Woodland

Cropland

Permanent grassland

Shrubland

Water and Wetland 

Artificial land

Bare land

²
KM

1.134.606

837.536

509.573

268.693

236.111

153.912

99.729

Total
Table 5 - Land cover estimates 

3.240.160

%

35,0

25,8

15,7

8,3

7,3

4,8

3,1

100,0

CV

1,0

1,3

1,4

2,9

3,0

2,7

5,3

Map 2 - Main Land Cover per PSU10  

The  intensive  agricultural  zones  are  located  in 
Denmark,  eastern  part  of  England,  north-western 
half of France, Po river plain and Adriatic coast in 
Italy, south of Portugal and Spain. 
Shrublands 
in 
Mediterranean  countries,  but  their  presence  is 
noticeable in the north-west border of Sweden and 
in the highlands in Scotland as well. 

are  mainly 

concentrated 

At  EU  15  level  (table  5),  the  main  type  of  land 
cover  consists  of  areas  that  are  entirely  or  more 
or  less  in  their  natural  state.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  artificial  areas  represent  only  5%  of  EU 
surface (154.000 km
The concentration of wooded areas and of inland 
water  (lakes  and  wetlands)  in  the  Scandinavian 
countries is very high, especially when compared 
to the rest of EU territory (map 2).  

). 

2

10 Warning: maps report the most represented class for each 
PSU. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat
eurostat

5.2. Land Use 

includes 

land  used  directly 

Agriculture  accounts  for  more  than  41%  of  the 
territory,  making  it  the  leading  type  of  land  use 
in  the  15  countries  investigated  (table  6).  This 
for 
category 
production  as  well  as  land  used  generally  for 
farming  purposes  (buildings,  farmyards,  etc.). 
Apart  from  the  extreme  situations  of  the  Nordic 
countries and Austria, on the average around half 
of the territory or more is used for farming. 
Forestry  comes  second,  with  a  percentage  of 
30%.  If  this  criterion  is  used,  the  order  of 
countries  is  the  reverse  of  farming.  In  Sweden 
and  Finland,  forestry  accounts  for  over  half  of 
the  territory;  in  the  remaining  countries  more 
than  20%  of  the  territory  is  used  for  forest 
purposes  (apart  from  The  Netherlands  and 
Denmark). 
Almost 19% of the territory of the 15 countries is 
classified  as  being  without  apparent  use.  The 
to  geographical 
differences  are  attributable 
conditions  (altitude 
type  of 
in  Portugal  and 
predominant  cover  (heath 
Greece, inland waters in Finland).  

in  Austria)  or 

Map 3 - Main Land Use per PSU

10

three  headings  (agriculture,  forestry, 
These 
unused)  account  for  90%  of  the  territory  of  the 
EU15. Of the remaining types of use, only three 
exceed 1% - (i) recreation, leisure and sport, (ii) 
and 
(iii) 
and 
residential 
communications.  

transport 

Agricultural  and  forestry  activities  occupy  the 
majority of the EU territory (map 3). The location 
of the other activities need to be put in relation to 
the  location  of  artificial  areas,  with  the  exception 
of  leisure  and  sport  activities,  that  are  connected 
with a higher number of land covers (see following 
paragraph). 

Land Use

Agriculture

Forestry

Unused

Recreation, leisure, sport

Residential

Transport, communication, 
storage, protective works

Community services

Fishing

Industry, manufacturing

Commerce, finance, business

Mining, quarrying

Construction

Water, waste treatment

Energy production

KM²

1.343.180

972.952

603.630

131.805

74.584

65.644

11.745

9.743

6.861

6.458

6.137

2.668

2.566

2.187

%

41,5

30,0

18,6

4,1

2,3

2,0

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,2

0,2

0,1

0,1

0,1

CV

0,9

1,2

1,6

4,7

4,4

3,6

16,6

17,5

16,1

16,3

22,4

23,7

21,4

31,8

Total
Table 6 - Land Use estimates 

3.240.160

100,0

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.3.  Mixed land use-land cover 

Artificial surfaces show a great diversity of use, 
two  thirds  of  such  areas  being  accounted  for  by 
settlements,  transport  and  communications.  At 
over 10%, agriculture is the third largest user of 
this type of cover (table 7). 
Some  82%  of  areas  under  grass  are  used  for 
agricultural purposes, 9% are unused, residential, 
leisure  and  recreation  areas  account  for  8%  and 
the  remaining  1%  for  transport,  storage  and 
protective  works.  The  use  of  areas  under  grass 
varies  greatly.  In  Spain,  France,  Greece  and 
Germany, over 80% of this type of land is used 
for agriculture. "Other uses" increase from South 
to North, the trend being for grassland to be used 
for  dwellings  (lawns)  or  recreational  purposes 
(sports grounds). The extreme is Finland, where 
just  4%  of  the  area  under  grass  is  devoted  to 
agriculture  and  almost  60%  to  dwellings  (map 
4). 

Map 4: Main Use of permanent grassland

10

is  not  generally  used 

(65%). 
Shrubland 
Agriculture  accounts  for  19%  of  such  type  of 
area,  and  is  the  second  largest  user.  Generally 
speaking, 
land  has  a  greater 
utilisation rate in the southern countries (between 
20 and 30%). Spain is a special case, as use for 
forestry exceeds agricultural use. 

type  of 

this 

eurostat

Total

41,5
30,0

Use

Agriculture
Forestry
Transport, 
Communication,
Storage, 
Protective 
works

Recreation, 
leisure,
Sport
Residential
Others

No apparent
use

Cover

Artificial 
Land

Crop
land

W ood
land

Shrub
land

Perm. 
Grass
land

Bare
land

W ater 
and 
W oodland

0,5
0,1

25,7
0,0

0,7
29,2

1,5
0,7

12,9
0,0

0,1
0,0

0,2
0,0

1,7

0,0

0,0

0,0

0,1

0,0

0,2

2,0

0,2

1,4
0,6

0,1

0,1

0,9

0,7

0,7

0,2

0,0
0,0

0,2
0,1

0,0
0,0

0,6
0,1

0,0
0,1

0,0

4,0

5,2

1,4

2,5

1,2

0,0
0,5

5,4

7,3

4,1

2,3
1,4

18,6

100,0

Total

4,8

25,8

35,0

8,3

15,7

3,1

Table 7: Uses of the main covers (%) 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat

5.4. Environmental variables 

One of the objectives of the LUCAS pilot project 
is to widen the purpose of the survey in the field 
of  environment.  The  main  results  concerning 
three  environmental  variables  are  presented 
hereafter as an example. 

5.4.1.  Visible traces of Natural Hazards 

Globally,  it  appears  that  natural  disasters  affect 
2,7%  of  the  territory  of  the  European  Union 
(table  8).  Among  them,  gales  (36,4%)  and  fires 
(32,9%)  cause  most  of  damages.  The  right 
column  of  the  table  8  shows  the  percentage  of 
each hazard in the total of damaged areas.  

Natural Hazard

Avalanche

Land slide

Flooded area

Burned area

Gales

no hazard

Total

km²

1.099

9.635

16.756

29.778

30.519

%

0,0

0,3

0,5

0,9

0,9

3.152.373

97,3

3.240.160

100,0

Damaged
areas (%)

  1,4

10,1

19,2

32,9

36,4

100,0

In France, effects of gales are still visible eighteen 
months  after  the  two  storms  of  December  1999 
(map 5). 
Table  9  reports  the  distribution  of  the  natural 
hazards recorded within each land cover class; the 
last column of the table reports the contribution of 
each land cover class in the total of damaged areas. 
Most  of  the  disasters  affects  forests  (51,4%), 
(18,4%)  and  permanent  grassland 
shrubland 
(10,8%).  Most  forest  damages  are  the  result  of 
gales, accounting for 65,0%, compared with 20,8% 
for  fire  damage.  Conversely,  81,2%  of  natural 
disasters  on  shrubland  are  caused  by  fire  while 
damaged  croplands  are  due  for  59,8%  to  floods 
(table 9). 

Land Cover

Woodland

Shrubland

P. grassland

Cropland

Water/Wetlan
d
Bare land

Artificial

5,6
4,5

Gales Burned Flooded Land
slide
7,8
8,5
39,7 18,3
59,8 13,8
1,2
88,0
17,0 30,2
7,7
30,8

20,8
81,2
29,8
25,3
3,6
39,6
23,1

65,0
3,6
11,5
1,1
6,0
3,8
38,5

Ava-
lanche

0,8 100
2,2 100
0,8 100
0,0 100
1,2 100
9,4 100
0,0 100

All
Hazards
51,4
18,4
10,8
7,2
6,8
4,4
1,1
100,0

Table 9: Type of natural hazard by land cover (%) 

Table 8: Surface of areas affected by natural hazards 

The southern countries are affected most, France 
included,  the  main  cause  being  fires  and  gales, 
accounting both for two thirds of all damages.  

Focusing on damages caused by gales, the analysis 
of the covers shows that they involve mainly forest 
areas,  for  more  than  90%  (table  10).  Coniferous 
trees  are  mostly  affected  by  gales,  representing 
47% of all damaged land covers. 

Gales

Coniferous forest
Broadleaved forest
Mixed forest
Permanent grassland
Shrubland
Poplar, Eucalyptus
Other Covers

%
47,3
23,8
18,8
3,4
1,8
1,4
3,6
100,0

Table 10: Land covers affected by wind gales (%) 

Map 5: Visible traces of Natural Hazards

10

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.4.2.  The perception of noise 

of  the  linear  elements  recorded,  according  to  the 
. 
Buffon’s needle theory

11

eurostat

Noise  is  one  of  the  variables  used  to  assess  the 
environmental  quality  of  daily  life.  During  their 
observations,  surveyors  noted  the  existence  of 
noise during their stay at the SSU, and classified 
it according to typology, intensity and origin.  
It  turns  out  that  according  to  this  subjective 
observation  over  20%  of  the  territory  of  the  15 
countries is considered noise-free, two-thirds has 
an  acceptable  level  of  noise  and  10%  is  classed 
as  having  a  level  of  noise  that  is  considered  a 
nuisance.  
Noise  perception  depends  on  human  activity.  In 
countries  with  a  high  concentration  of  human 
activities (such as the Netherlands and Belgium), 
the  portion  of  the  territory  deemed  noise-free  is 
virtually non-existent. By contrast, almost three-
quarters of Finland is deemed noise-free. 
When noise is classified as intensive, road traffic 
is  the  main  source  of  disturb,  followed  by 
agriculture,  forestry  and  lawn  moving  (16,4%) 
and  natural  noises  (wind  in  the  forest,  wild 
animals,  running  water,  etc)  in  third  position, 
accounting for 10,3% of the sources (table 11).  

Noise source

Road traffic
Agriculture, forestry,lawn mowing
Wild noise
Air traffic
Industry
Rail traffic
Others
Human voices
Total
Table 11: Intensive noise by source (%) 

%
58,2
16,4
10,3
5,2
3,7
3,1
2,2
0,8
100,0

5.4.3.  Linear features 

the  framework  of 

Linear  features  are  important  elements  of  a 
landscape  due  to  their  ecological  function  as 
habitats  and  influence  on  the  human  perception 
(appearance). 
In 
the  LUCAS  project, 
surveyors have to register linear features crossed 
while  walking  along 
that 
connects the first five SSUs of each PSU, the so-
called  transects  (Image  1).  The  number  of 
intersections counted along the transects makes it 
possible  to  estimate  by  extrapolation  the  length 

the  straight 

line 

SSU 11

SSU 15

Image 1 - Accounting linear elements along a transect 

Figure 7 shows the frequency of the different linear 
features  recorded  within  the  transects.  Roads  are 
the  most  common  feature  encountered:  more  than 
50% of all transect are dissected by roads, whereby 
in  30%  of  all  transects  more  than  one  road  is 
present. Narrow and large green linear features are 
important  as  well,  and  they  constitute  quite  a 
distinctive 
the  European 
landscape.  The  so-called  "cultural  linear  features" 
(see  codification  annexed)  and  railways  are  quite 
rare,  found  in  a  percentage  between  2  and  4%  of 
all the crossed transects.  

characteristic 

of 

1 0 0 %

8 0 %

6 0 %

4 0 %

y
c
n
e
u
q
e
r
F

> 5

5

4

3

2

1

0

R oad
narrow

R oad
large

W ater
narrow

G reen
narrow

G reen
large

W ater
large

C ult.
narrow

R ailw ay

C ult.
large

O ther

Figure 7: Frequency of the number of linear features per 
transect (from 0 to more than 5) 

11 Additional information of the Buffon’s Needle Problem 
can be found at: http://www.cut-the-knot.com/fta/Buffon/buffon9.shtml 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat

5.5. Landscape photos 

/ 

In  addition  to  LUCAS  data  collection  on  land 
cover 
land  use  and  some  environmental 
features, it was decided to add photographing of 
landscape  from  a  systematic  observation  point 
for  each  PSU  (SSU  n.  13).  Surveyors  took  one 
photo in each of the four directions North, East, 
South  and  West  (Image  2);  each  photo  is 
referenced to the number of the PSU, to preserve 
its location in space. 

West 

North 

East 

South 

Image  2  –  Example  of  four  landscape  photos  taken  in 
France 

analysis, 

landscape 

20.000  photos  approximately  were  taken  in  the 
2001  data  collection.  These  photos  constitute  a 
unique  archive  of  European  landscapes,  to  be 
exploited with the aim to open new perspectives 
of 
in 
combination  with  other  sources  of  information 
such as aerial photos or satellite images. 
The  LUCAS  pilot  project  gives  therefore  a 
unique opportunity to collect a broad, systematic 
landscape  image  material,  which  will  create  a 
base for a new kind and a long term monitoring 
of landscape changes. 

in  particular 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Conclusion 

(cid:127) 

The  experience  acquired  with  the  LUCAS  pilot 
survey have made it possible to validate the area-
frame  methodology  applied,  and  the  survey  has 
proved  its  reliability  in  providing  for  the  first 
time  harmonised  and  comparable  data  at  EU 
level.  
The summary results reported in this publication 
show  the  richness  of  the  data  collected  up  to 
now.  However,  the  information  provided  by  the 
survey is far from being fully exploited: LUCAS 
would impose all its potential once the survey is 
carried out on a regular and periodic basis, since 
in this way it would be possible to assess and to 
locate  temporal  changes  occurring  in  the  EU 
territory.  
Due to its flexible design, LUCAS can be seen as 
a  platform  for  many  kind  of  applications, 
to  environmental 
related 
especially 
assessments. 
the  Commission 
Following 
communication  2000  (20)  stressing  the  need  to 
develop agri-environmental indicators to support 
the further integration of environmental concerns 
into the CAP, Eurostat is studying how to exploit 
LUCAS data to monitor and evaluate changes in 
land cover and land use, and their impact on the 
structure and the diversity of landscapes. 

those 

Even  if  LUCAS  results  prove  to  be  very 
promising, the survey has still to demonstrate its 
strength for gathering relevant data. In particular, 
additional efforts have to be made to improve the 
precision  of  results  and  the  relevance  of  the 
observation method adopted. 
One of the possibilities to improve the precision 
of results consists in increasing the density of the 
sampling  plan;  additional  investigations  will  be 
carried  out  to  optimise  the  sampling  design  and 
to  find  a  good  balance  between  the  expected 
estimates precision and its related costs. 
The capacity to capture correctly information on 
land  use  and  on  the  environment  specific  of  the 
applied observation method is for some variables 
still questionable: 
(cid:127) 

land use is difficult to observe on the ground 
because  it  is  often  multi-temporal:  the  same 
area  could  be  used  for  various  purposes  in 
different period of the year. Thus, evidences 
to  certify  the  presence  of  a  use  may  require 
additional information; 

eurostat

the  correct  classification  of  the  land  use  is 
sometimes possible only if specific actions are 
met,  while  not  evident  at  all  in  standard 
conditions 
fishing 
purposes); 

lakes  used 

(e.g. 

for 

(cid:127)  moreover,  another  crucial  question  concerns 
the  appropriateness  of  LUCAS  for  being  the 
correct 
collect  data  on 
to 
environment such as noise and erosion. 

framework 

All  these  issues  need  to  be  analysed  in  detail 
together  with 
the  relevant 
the  experts  from 
institutions,  in  Member  States  and  at  international 
level.  This  is  part  of  the  work  program  of  the 
LUCAS pilot project in the next years. 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat

6.  References 

Eurostat  (2000):  Manual  of  Concepts  on  Land  Cover  and  land  Use  Information  Systems.  Theme  5: 
Agriculture and Fisheries: Methods and Nomenclatures. Office for official Publications of the European 
Communities, Luxembourg, 2000, 110 pp. 

LUCAS Technical Reference Documentation

12

:  

Delincé,  J.,  Avikainen,  J.,  Croi,  W.,  Kayadjanian,  M.  (2001):  LUCAS  Technical  Document  No.1:  The 
Sampling Design.- Luxembourg 

Duhamel, C., Eiden, G. (2001): LUCAS Technical Document No. 2: The Nomenclature.- Luxembourg 

Konecny, G. (2001): LUCAS Technical Document No. 3: The Geometric Requirements.- Luxembourg 

Bertin,  M.,  Avikainen,  J.,  Bruyas,  P.,  Croi,  W.,  Delincé,  J.,  Duhamel,  C.,  Eiden,  G.,  Kayadjanian,  M. 
(2001): LUCAS Technical Document No. 4: Instructions for Surveyors.- Luxembourg 

Bruyas,  P.,  Croi,  W.  (2001):  LUCAS  Technical  Document  No.  5:  Phase  2  The  Farmers  Interview.- 
Luxembourg 

Kayadjanian,  M.  (2001):  LUCAS  Technical  Document  No.  6:  Data  transfer  and  control  procedures.- 
Luxembourg 

Oresnik,  I,  Bertin,  M.,  Croi,  W.,  Delincé,  J.  (2001):  LUCAS  Technical  Document  No.  7:  Quality 
Assurance and Control procedures.- Luxembourg 

Croi, W. (2001): LUCAS Technical Document No. 8: Guidelines for Reporting.- Luxembourg 

Avikainen, J., Bertin, M. (2001): LUCAS Technical Document No. 9: Estimation methods.- Luxembourg 

12

 Available at: http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/dsis/landstat/library?l=/lucas&vm=detailed&sb=Title 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                   
 
ANNEXES 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat

7.  Annex 1: Nomenclature and codification of variables 

7.1. Land cover nomenclature 

Level 1  Description 
ARTIFICIAL 
A 
LAND 

Level 2  Description 
A1 

BUILT-UP AREAS 

Level 3  Description 
A11 

Buildings with 1 to 3 floors 

A2 

B 

CROPLAND 

B1 

B2 

B3 

B4 

B5 

B6 
B7 

B8 

C 

WOODLAND 

C1 

C2 

C3 

D 

E 

F 
G 

SHRUBLAND 

PERMANENT 
GRASSLAND  
BARE LAND 
WATER AND  
WETLAND 

ROOT CROPS 

ARTIFICIAL  
NON BUILT-UP AREAS 
CEREALS 

A12 
A13 
A21 
A22 
B11 
B12 
B13 
B14 
B15 
B16 
B17 
B18 
B21 
B22 
B23 
B31 
B32 
B33 
B34 
B35 
B36 
B37 
DRY PULSES, VEGETABLES   B41 
B42 
AND FLOWERS 
B43 
B44 
B50 

NON PERMANENT 
INDUSTRIAL CROPS 

TEMPORARY, ARTIFICIAL 
PASTURES  
FALLOW LAND 
PERMANENT CROPS:  
FRUIT TREES, BERRIES 

B60 
B71 
B72 
B73 
B74 
B75 
B76 
B77 
OTHER PERMANENT CROPS  B81 
B82 
B83 
B84 
C11 
C12 
C13 
C21 
C22 
C23 
C30 
D01 
D02 
E01 
E02 
F00 
G01 
G02 
G03 
G04 
G05 

POPLARS, EUCALYPTUS 

OTHER WOODED AREA 

FOREST AREA 

Buildings with more than 3 floors 
Greenhouses 
Non built-up area features 
Non built-up linear features 
Common wheat 
Durum Wheat 
Barley 
Rye  
Oats 
Maize 
Rice 
Other cereals 
Potatoes 
Sugar beet 
Other root crops 
Sunflower  
Rape seeds 
Soya  
Cotton  
Other fibre and oleaginous crops 
Tobacco 
Other non permanent industrial crops 
Dry pulses 
Tomatoes 
Other fresh vegetables 
Floriculture and ornamental plants 
Temporary, artificial pastures  

Fallow land 
Apple fruit 
Pear fruit 
Cherry fruit 
Nuts trees 
Other fruit trees and berries 
Oranges 
Other citrus fruit 
Olive groves 
Vineyards 
Nurseries 
Permanent industrial crops 
Broad-leaved forest 
Coniferous forest 
Mixed forest 
Other broad-leaved wooded area 
Other coniferous wooded area 
Other mixed wooded area 
Poplars, eucalyptus 
Shrubland with sparse tree cover 
Shrubland without tree cover 
Permanent grassland with sparse tree/shrub cover 
Permanent grassland without tree/shrub cover 
Bare land 
Inland water bodies 
Inland running water 
Coastal water bodies 
Wetland 
Glaciers, permanent snow 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.2. Land use nomenclature 

eurostat

Level 1  Level 2  Description 
U1 

AGRICULTURE 
FORESTRY 
FISHING 

U11 
U12 
U13 
U14  MINING, QUARRYING 
U21 
U22 
U31 

ENERGY PRODUCTION 
INDUSTRY, MANUFACTURING 
TRANSPORT, COMMUNICATION, 
STORAGE, PROTECTIVE WORKS 

U4 

U2 

U3 

Level 1   Level 2  Description 
U3 

U32  WATER, WASTE TREATMENT 
U33 
U34 
U35 
U36 
U37 
U40 

CONSTRUCTION 
COMMERCE, FINANCE, BUSINESS 
COMMUNITY SERVICES 
RECREATION, LEISURE, SPORT 
RESIDENTIAL 
UNUSED 

7.3. Codification of the variable: "Erosion" 

7.3.1.  Linear Erosion 

Code 

Category 

-9  No information 
0  No linear erosion existing 
1   ≤ 5 rills or gullies 
2 
3 

6 – 10 rills or gullies 
> 10 rills or gullies 

7.3.2.  Accumulation 

Code 

Category 

-9  No information 
0  No accumulation visible 
1  Accumulation visible  
2  Accumulation significant  

Point not accessible 

Description 

Rills > 5 cm depth, Gullies > 30cm depth 

Description 

2

< 100 m
2
> 100 m

7.4.  Codification of the variable "Natural hazards" 

Category 

Code 
-9 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 

No information 
Burned area 
Flooded area 
Area affected by land slide 
Area affected by avalanches 
Area affected by gales (wind fall) 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
eurostat

7.5.  Codification of the variable "Noise" 

Code 

Source of noise 

-9  No information 
No noise 
0 
Road traffic 
1 
Air traffic 
2 
Rail traffic 
3 
Industry 
4 
5 
Agriculture, Forestry,  
6  Wild noise (wind, cattle, birds, running water) 
7 
8 

Human voice (schoolyard, sport activities,..) 
Others 

  Level of noise 
  1 
  2 

Quiet 
Noisy 

Type of noise 

1  Continuous 
2  Sporadic 

7.6.  Codification of the variable "linear features" (Transect) 

Code 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 

Linear Features 

Description 

Green 1m - 3m 
Green > 3m 
Cultural 1m - 3m 
Cultural > 3m 
River 1m -3m 
River > 3m 
Electric line 
Road 1m - 3m 
Road > 3m 
Railway-track 
Other linear features 

Hedges, rows of trees, baulks 

Terrace boundaries, dykes; Walls:  
Stonewalls are to be considered irrespective of their size!  

Rivers, drainage/irrigation channels or ditches, gullies 

Low/high voltage lines, telephone lines 

Roads and tracks including the road sides 

e.g. pipelines (water, gas, oil etc.) 

7.7.  Codification of the variable "land cover transition"( Transect) 

LAND COVER 

Code 
A 
Ba 
Bp 
C 
D 
E 
F 
G 

Artificial 
Arable Land (B1-B6) 
Permanent crops (B7-B8) 
Woodland 
Shrubland 
Permanent grass 
Bareland 
Water and wetland 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8. Annex 2: 

Field form for phase I survey 

(row)/(column)

Country Code:

Surveyor ID:

Surveyor Name:

SURVEY

CONTROL

11

12

13

14

15

Accepted values

0=the point is observed 
1=out of the territory
2=forbidden zone
3=marine Sea

a

0= none
1= <=5
2= 6 - 10
3= >10

PSU n° 
Date:

Start Time

End Time

SSU

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

Land 
Cover

Land 
Use

observed/not observed

Distance of observation

Radius of observation

Direction of observation

a

b

c

d

LC1

LC2

LU1

LU2

Photos

Snapshot distance

North
(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)
East
(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)
South
(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)
West

Irrigation

Erosion
(within 20 m 
radius)

8= not cropland
9= no information

Linear 
erosion

Rills  
(depth>5cm)

Gullies
(depth>30cm)

Accumulation

Isolated trees  (max. 3 trees)

Natural Hazards
0= no noise
9= no information

Noise

Type

1=continuous
2=sporadic

Source
1=quiet
2=noisy

Level

Farmer ( Phase 2)

TRANSECT 
(r,s)

From 11 to 12

e
f

g

i

j

k

l

o

q

From 12 to 13

From 13 to 14

From 14 to 15

Remarks:

eurostat

i

j

k

l

o

q

b

c

d

e

f

g

0=at the point
1=distance 3-50m
2=distance 50-100m
3=distance >100m
4= photointerpreted

1=1.5 m (normal)
2=20 m (extended)

0=on the point
1=north
2=east

0=at the point
1=distance 3-50m
2=distance 50-100m
3=distance >100m

1=taken
2=not taken: too dark
3=not taken: no open
    view

0=none
1=exists
8=not cropland
9=no information

r

LINEAR FEATURES:
1=green (1m< <3m) *
2=green (>3m) *
3=cultural (1m< <3m) **
4=cultural (>3m) **
5=water flow (1m< <3m) ***
6=water flow (>3m)***
7=electric line
8=road & track (1m< <3m)
9=road & track (>3m)
10=railway
11= Other linear features

0=no accumulation 
1=accum. <100m2
2=accum. >100m2

0=abscence
1=presence

9=no information
0=no hazard
1=Burned area
2=Flooded area
3=Land slide
4=Avalanche
5=gales (windfall)

1=Road traffic
2=Air traffic
3=Rail traffic
4=Industry
5=Agriculture, forestry,
    lawn mowing
6=Wild noise
7=Human voices
8=Others

8=not arable land
0=not identified
1=identified in field
2=identified admin. 
source

LAND COVER transition:
A=artificial
Ba=arable land (B1 to B6)
Bp=perm. crops  (B7 + B8)
C=woodland
D=shrubland
E=permanent grass
F=bareland
G=water & wetland

s

* hedges, rows of trees, baunks.
** stonewalls, terrace boundaries, dykes.
*** rivers, drainage/irrigation channels, ditches, gullies.

Page 1/2

23 

 
 
 
 
eurostat

PSU n° 

(row)/(column)

SSU

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O
Land 
Cover

Land 
Use

observed/not observed

Distance of observation

Radius of observation

Direction of observation

LC1

LC2

LU1

LU2

Farmer ( Phase 2)

Farmer Identification
SSU 11

Firstname

a

b

c

d

e

q

21

22

23

24

25

Accepted values

0=the point is observed
1=out of the territory
2=forbidden zone
3=marine Sea

0=at the point
1= distance 3-50m
2=distance 50-100m
3=distance >100m
4= photointerpreted

1=1.5 m (normal)
2=20 m (extended)

0=on the point
1=north
2=east

see nomenclature

a

b

c

d

e

Lastname

Telephone

Address

Commune

Postal Code

SSU 15

Firstname

Lastname

Telephone

Address

Commune

Postal Code

SSU 23

Firstname

Lastname

Telephone

Address

Commune

Postal Code

Remarks (cont.):

Page 2/2

24