Ittigen BE – Sparsely populated areas in the periphery have higher infrastructure and mobility costs than centrally located, densely populated ones, a new study shows. It also found that the costs are not fully borne by those who cause them.

Wastewater treatment, roads, water and electricity supply in areas consisting of apartment buildings cost two to three times less per person than the corresponding infrastructure in areas made up of detached houses. These are the findings of a study commissioned by the Federal Office for Spatial Development (ARE).

This is due to the fact that although it is more expensive in absolute terms to install and maintain infrastructure in densely built-up areas, there are more inhabitants distributed across densely populated areas. As more people benefit from the infrastructure, this reduces the per capita costs in contrast to less densely populated areas.

The highest resulting costs are traffic related. The study also calculated the resulting costs of traffic behaviour including the damage to health caused by exhaust gases. Overall, the per capita costs of mobility in rural communities are nearly twice as high as those in large urban centres. When it comes to the resulting costs, it is less important whether a person lives in an apartment building or detached house.  

The study also showed that those using the infrastructure do not always bear the costs, leading to false incentives. For example, residents in detached house settlements tend to fare better when it comes to sewage disposal or water and electricity supply compared to the costs borne by this settlement type. This means that residents of apartment buildings subsidise those in detached houses, even if only to a small extent.

“If we can further restrict urban sprawl yet still promote densely built areas located to close to city centres, this will lead also to reduced infrastructure and mobility costs,” concluded ARE.