Critical perspectives, largely in American literature, point to the historical influence of affluent homeowners on planning and argue that because of its role in housing markets, planning can reflect and reinforce patterns of socio-economic difference. Although institutional contexts vary, the article hypothesises that similar patterns may be evident in Victoria, where an important facet of the planning system is that third-party objection and appeal rights (TPOAR) in planning are comparatively strong. The author uses planning application and tribunal data for local governments to model spatial and temporal variations in rates of planning objection and appeal, in relation to measures of housing prices and socio-economic advantage. Objection and appeal is found to be more likely in relation to higher density housing, but much more likely again where existing housing values are higher. There is evidence that communities with greater economic interests in, and resources to engage with, the planning system make disproportionate use of opposition channels.美国有人撰文评述富裕房主对规划的历史性影响,并指出鉴于规划在住房市场中扮 演的角色,它反映和强化了社会经济差异。尽管维多利亚的制度环境异于美国,第 三方拥有较强的反对和上诉权(TPOAR) ,但本文假设在维多利亚也能看到类似的 模式。本文作者利用地方政府规划申请和审理委员会数据,结合对房价和社会经济 优势的衡量,建立了规划反对和上诉的比例在空间和时间中的变化模型。研究发现 密度较大的住房反对和上诉率较高,而现有住房价值较高的地方反对和上诉率更 高。有证据表明在规划体系中经济利益较大、有较多资源参与规划的社区,其反对 渠道的利用远远高于其他社区。 KEY WORDS: Third-party objection and appeal, urban consolidation, exclusionary zoning, Melbourne, locational conflict