首页> 外文期刊>Environment and planning >Plan-led planning systems in development-led practices:an empirical analysis into the (lack of) institutionalisation of planning law
【24h】

Plan-led planning systems in development-led practices:an empirical analysis into the (lack of) institutionalisation of planning law

机译:以发展为主导的实践中以计划为主导的计划系统:对计划法制度化(缺乏)的实证分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Planning laws are usually made with good intentions, but do not always lead to good results-at least not when measured against their own goals. Since July 2008 the Netherlands has had a new planning act which aims for a plan-led system and a stronger role of the land-use plan in providing a framework for building permits-instead of these being granted through exemptions from the land-use plan-and in guiding spatial development. On the basis of quantitative data, we found that the land-use plan has become more important: more land-use plans have been adopted, both in absolute terms and relative to alternative measures. But functionally, these land-use plans are used primarily to follow and facilitate development instead of guiding it. Development control is still (inevitably) driven by development proposals. Although the paper looks at the Dutch case, an analysis into the relationship between planning law and its institutionalisation (or the lack thereof) at the local level is worthwhile for a wider audience. In our quest to understand the effects of changes in the law on the practice of development control, we use theories that look at the process of institutionalisation, especially of centrally designed formal institutions, such as legislation, that seek application at the local level, with its own (potentially conflicting) formal and informal institutions. We conclude the paper by arguing that changes in planning law are unsuccessful if they are not congruent with informal and formal institutions at the 'street-level' and if there is a lack of sufficient incentives to change the behaviour of local actors.
机译:制定计划法律通常是出于善意,但并非总能带来良好的结果-至少在按照自己的目标衡量时并非如此。自2008年7月以来,荷兰通过了一项新的计划法案,旨在建立计划主导的系统,并在提供建筑许可证的框架中发挥更大的土地使用计划作用,而不是通过免除土地使用计划来授予这些许可-并指导空间发展。根据定量数据,我们发现土地利用计划变得越来越重要:无论是从绝对意义上还是相对于替代措施,都采用了更多的土地利用计划。但是从功能上讲,这些土地利用计划主要用于遵循和促进发展,而不是指导发展。开发控制仍然(不可避免地)由开发建议驱动。尽管本文着眼于荷兰的案例,但对于更广泛的受众而言,在地方层面对计划法及其制度化(或缺乏制度化)之间的关系进行分析是值得的。为了了解法律变化对发展控制的影响,我们使用了一些理论,这些理论着眼于制度化的过程,特别是集中设计的正规制度(例如立法),这些制度寻求在地方层面的应用。它自己的(可能有冲突的)正式和非正式机构。我们通过论证得出结论,认为如果规划法律的变更与“街道一级”的非正式和正规机构不相符,并且缺乏足够的动机来改变地方行为者的行为,那么规划法律的变更就不会成功。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Environment and planning》 |2011年第4期|p.928-941|共14页
  • 作者单位

    PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Oranjebuitensingel 6, PO Box 30314,2500 GH The Hague, The Netherlands;

    PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Oranjebuitensingel 6, PO Box 30314,2500 GH The Hague, The Netherlands;

    PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Oranjebuitensingel 6, PO Box 30314,2500 GH The Hague, The Netherlands;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号