Flexibility and Public Accountability in Public Land Development Projects in Progress

Kang, Vitnarae; Altes, W.K. Korthals

doi:10.1080/09654313.2014.941792

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We would rather go with Mäntysalo et al [7] and Pløger [16] in stating that these tensions should be presented as dilemmas to be better understood and discussed in organizational "places" that take care of disagreement and different values. Such a standpoint resonates with ongoing debates on different forms of democratic legitimacy such as those brought forward by Hartmann and Spit [5], Kang and Korthals Altes [17], and lately in more profound terms by Salet [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Legitimacy Dilemmas in Direct Government Intervention: The Case of Public Land Development, an Example from the Netherlands

Woestenburg

Krabben

Spit

2019

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current paper examines the legitimacy dilemmas that rise from local governments’ direct policy instruments and market interventions. It takes the case of public land management strategies. The paper argues that current societal challenges—such as energy transition, climate change and inclusive urban innovation—require planning practices to be more effective. Direct government instruments such as direct market interventions have proven to significantly reduce the implementation gap of planning practice. Looking at significant urban challenges, municipalities worldwide could be urged to apply such direct government instruments on a larger scale in the future. However, although direct government intervention in markets can be very effective, it is also controversial in terms of legitimacy. It explicitly and inevitably introduces financial incentives to the organization of government. Balancing these incentives against spatial planning interests unavoidably causes dilemmas. Based on eight Dutch case studies, this paper develops a framework to systematically spell out the legitimacy dilemmas that stem from public market intervention. It facilitates an explicit discussion on varying instrumental rationalities and improving the legitimacy of public action.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Legitimacy Dilemmas in Direct Government Intervention: The Case of Public Land Development, an Example from the Netherlands

Woestenburg

Krabben

Spit

2019

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our definition follows Bovens's (2007a) understanding of accountability as a relationship, which has been applied in recent empirical studies (see e.g. Kang & Korthals Altes, 2015;Willems & Van Dooren, 2011). Different aspects of accountability mechanisms are listed in the previous scholarly work related to accountability, which will support the operationalization of concepts in the next section.…”

Section: Accountability Mechanisms In Contractual Urban Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Changing public accountability mechanisms in the governance of Dutch urban regeneration

Taşan‐Kok

Hurk

Özogul

et al. 2019

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary urban planning dynamics are based on negotiation and contractual relations, creating fragmented planning processes. On the one hand, they trigger technocratic forms of governance, which require the 'legal instrumentalisation' of planning in a piecemeal approach ensuring legal certainty. On the other hand, these processes require flexibility to enable easy, fast and efficient forms of implementation due to the increasing involvement of private sector actors in urban development. This article unravels the influence of these conflicting dynamics on the fundamentals of urban planning practices by focusing on changing public accountability mechanisms created through contractual relationships between public and private sector agencies. Dutch urban regeneration has demonstrated changing governance principles and dynamics in the last three decades. Representing instrumental and institutional measures, we connect accountability mechanisms to these changes and argue that they 'co-exist' in multiple forms across different contexts. This article embeds this evolution in wider theoretical discussions on the changing relationships between public and private sector actors in urban governance relative to the changing role of the state, and it addresses questions on who can be held accountable, and to what extent, when public sector actors are increasingly retreating from regulatory practices while private sector actors play increasingly prominent roles.

show abstract

“…Land exchanges lead to better projects than those that landowners could develop on their own within the limits of their own plot of land (Alterman, 2007). Public ownership also makes it possible to capture the betterment value resulting from planning (Kang and Korthals Altes, 2015). As an economic actor taking part in the land market, a landowning city defends its position as a neighbor that might be negatively affected by a next-door private development.…”

Section: Shift In the Balance Between Planning And Property Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The strategic use of time-limited property rights in land-use planning: Evidence from Switzerland

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While land-use plans are regularly revised, property rights are extremely stable over time. Yet, the stability of property rights resulting from the current conception of exclusive ownership makes the implementation of land-use plans increasingly complicated, difficult and long. Planners recognized the need for more flexibility in many urban contexts to effectively steer spatial development in the already built environment. Relying on a detailed case study carried out in the municipality of Bienne, Switzerland, this paper examines how a strategic use of long-term ground leases granted on municipal land can allow for increased flexibility in planning. Ground leases are a policy instrument leading to a time-limited division of the bundle of rights between a public landowner and the ground lease holder, who becomes the owner of the facilities on the land for up to one hundred years. The strategic role of ground leases in urban planning remains largely unexplored. This article shows that ground leases are an empirical and practical response of planning authorities to the inflexibility of property rights in given situations where more flexibility would be needed. Public actors can use ground leases to implement an active land policy leading to a better allocation of land to specific projects and to a more precise control of building activity. By analyzing the role of ground leases at the interface between planning and property, this article aims to contribute to a better understanding of the complex relationship between land-use planning and property rights.

show abstract

Flexibility and Public Accountability in Public Land Development Projects in Progress

Cited by 6 publications

References 42 publications

Legitimacy Dilemmas in Direct Government Intervention: The Case of Public Land Development, an Example from the Netherlands

Legitimacy Dilemmas in Direct Government Intervention: The Case of Public Land Development, an Example from the Netherlands

Changing public accountability mechanisms in the governance of Dutch urban regeneration

The strategic use of time-limited property rights in land-use planning: Evidence from Switzerland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About