Planning indicators in England: A top-down evolutionary tale

Built Environment

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 355-374

  Carmona, Matthew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CENTRALIZATION; PLANNING PROCESS; PLANNING SYSTEM; TOP-DOWN APPROACH;

ENGLAND; EURASIA; EUROPE; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 0442312412     PISSN: 02637960     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2148/benv.29.4.355.54288     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Audit Commission (1992a) Building in Quality: A Study of Development Control. Local Government Report No.7. London: Audit Commission.
2. Audit Commission (1992b) Citizens' Charter Indicators - Charting a Course. London: Audit Commission.
3. Audit Commission (1994) Watching Their Figures - A Guide to the Citizens' Charter Indicators. London: Audit Commission.
4. Audit Commission (1995) Have We Got News for You. London: Audit Commission.
5. Cave, M. (1995) The Valuation of Changes in the Public Services. London: HMSO.
6. CBI (Confederation of British Industry) (2001) Planning for Productivity: A Ten Point Plan. London: CBI.
7. CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy) (1991) Councillor's Guide to Local Government Finance. London: CIPFA.
8. Day, J. (1996) Measuring Quality in Development Control. MA Dissertation (unpublished), University of Nottingham, Nottingham.
9. DETR (1999a) Best Value and Audit Commission Performance Indicators for 2000/2001. Volume One: The Performance Indicators. London: The Stationery Office.
10. DETR (1999b) Best Value and Audit Commission Performance Indicators for 2000/2001. Volume Two: Feedback. London: The Stationery Office.
11. DETR (2000) Best Value Performance Indicators for 2001/2002. London: The Stationery Office.
12. DETR, Audit Commission & Home Office (1999) Performance Indicators for 2000/200. A Joint Consultation Document. London: DETR.
13. DETR, I&DeA & LGA (2000) Local Quality of Life Counts - in a Nutshell: A Summary of a Menu of Local Indicators of Sustainable Development. London: DETR.
14. Dewar, D. (2002) Increased funding at a price. Planning, No. 1479, 26 July, p. 8.
15. DTLR (2001a) Planning Creen Paper. Planning: Delivering a Fundamental Change. London: DTLR.
16. DTLR (2001b) Falconer Urges Faster Planning Decisions For All. London: DTLR.
17. DTLR (2002) Best Value Performance Indicators for 2002/2003. London: The Stationery Office.
18. Fyson, A. (1992) Here comes privatisation. The Planner, April 17, p. 3.
19. Grant, A. (1998) Best value, implications for Planning. Scottish Planner, April, pp. 6-7.
20. Houghton, M. (1997) Performance indicators in town planning: much ado about nothing? Local Government Studies, 23(2), pp. 1-13.
21. Likierman, A. (1993) Performance indicators: 20 early lessons from managerial use. Public Money & Management, 13(4), pp. 15-21.
22. Manns, S. (2000) Deciding who decides. Planning, No. 1398, 8 December, p. 13.
23. McCarthy, P. and Harrison, T. (1995) Attitudes to Town and Country Planning. London: HMSO.
24. Morrison, N. and Pearce, B. (2000) Developing indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of the UK land use planning system. Town Planning Review, 71(2), pp. 191-211.
25. ODPM (2002a) Best Value and Audit Commission Performance Indicators 2000/2001: The National Results of the User Satisfaction Surveys. London: ODPM.
26. ODPM (2002b) Planning Applications January-March 2002. London: ODPM.
27. ODPM (2002c) Sustainable Communities - Delivering Through Planning. London: ODPM.
28. ODPM (2003) Best Value Performance Indicators for 2003/2004. London: The Stationery Office.
29. POS (Planning Officer's Society) (2000) A Guide to Best Value and Planning. Barnsley: Barnsley MBC.
30. Pollitt, C. (1994) The Citizens' Charter: A preliminary analysis. Public Money and Management, 14(2), p. 9.
31. Smith, P. (1992) Leagues apart on indicators? Municiple Review & AMA News, No.725, March, p. 250.
32. Welbank M (1992) 'Commissions control report welcomed', The Planner, June 5th, p. 6.
33. Young, Sir George (1992) Sir George doubts Audit Commission conclusions. The Planner, June 19, p. 6.