Land-property markets and planning: A special case

Land Use Policy

Volumn 41, Issue , 2014, Pages 533-540

  Alexander, E R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Land; Markets; Planning; Property; Real estate; Regulation

Indexed keywords

ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK; DEVELOPMENT CONTROL; LAND MARKET; LAND USE PLANNING; LOCATION DECISION; POLICY APPROACH; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; INVESTMENT; LAND MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84907595281     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.04.009     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Adams D., Tiesdell S. Planners as market actors: rethinking state-market relations in land and property. Planning Theory & Practice 2010, 11(2):187-207.
2. Alexander E.R. Governance and transaction costs in planning systems: a conceptual framework for institutional analysis of land-use planning and development control - the case of Israel. Environment and Planning B: Planning & Design 2001, 28(5):755-776.
3. Alexander E.R. A transaction-cost theory of land use planning and development control. Town Planning Review 2001, 72(1):45-76.
4. Private Supply of Public Services: Evaluation of Real-Estate Exactions, Linkage, and Alternative Land Policies 1988, New York University Press, New York. R. Alterman (Ed.).
5. Arrow K.J. The organization of economic activity: issues pertinent to the choice of market versus nonmarket allocation'. Public Expenditures and Policy Analysis 1970, 59-73. Markham Publishing Co, Chicago, IL. J. Margolis, R.H. Haveman (Eds.).
6. Baker D., Sipe N., Gleeson B. Performance-based planning: perspectives from the United States, Australia and New Zealand. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2006, 25(4):396-409.
7. Bator F.M. The anatomy of market failure. Quarterly Journal of Economics 1958, 72(3):351-798.
8. Beaton W.B. The impact of regional land use controls on property values: the case of the New Jersey pinewoods. Land Economics 1991, 67(2):172-194.
9. Booth P. Nationalizing development rights: the feudal origins of the British planning system. Environment & Planning B 2002, 22(1):129-140.
10. Buitelaar E. Zoning, more than just a tool: explaining Houston's regulatory practice. European Planning Studies 2009, 17(7):1049-1065.
11. Buttonwood A special case. The Economist 2010, 396/8695 (14-20/8/2010):157.
12. Carmona N., Sieh L. Performance measure innovation in English planning authorities. Planning Theory & Practice 2005, 6(3):303-333.
13. Coase R.H. The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics 1960, 2(1):1-40.
14. Cullingworth J.B. The Political Culture of Planning: American Land Use Planning in Comparative Perspective 1993, Routledge, London.
15. Evans A.W. The land market and government intervention. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics 1999, 3:1637-1669. (Ch. 42).
16. Gleeson B., Memon A. Reforming planning legislation: a New Zealand perspective. Urban Policy and Research 1994, 12(2):82-90.
17. Han I. Update - the reform in planning. Planning (IAP) 2010, 7(2):12-15. (Hebrew).
18. Hayek F.A. Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics 1967, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
19. Healey P. Structure and agency in land and property development processes: some ideas for research. Urban Studies 1990, 27(1):89-103.
20. Holcombe R.G., Staley S.R. Smarter Growth: Market-Based Strategies for Land-Use Planning in the 21st Century 2001, Greenwood, Westport, CT.
21. Holcombe R.G. Planning and the invisible hand: allies or adversaries?. Planning Theory 2013, 12(2):199-210.
22. Ihlanfeldt K.R. Does comprehensive land use planning improve cities?. Land Economics 2009, 85(1):51-73.
23. Kahana A. The planning reform in progress: update and report. Planning (IAP) 2014, 11(1). (Hebrew).
24. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979, 47(2):263-292.
25. Kahneman D., Slovic P. Judgment Under Uncertainty 1982, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
26. Lerman B.R. Mandatory inclusionary zoning - the answer to the affordable housing problem. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 2006, 33(2). http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/ealr/vol33/iss2/5.
27. Lindblom C.E. The Intelligence of Democracy: Decision Making through Mutual Adjustment 1965, Free Press, New York.
28. Meir-Brodnitz M., Alexander E.R. Editorial: Is the Land-Property Market an Ordinary Market? Mistakes in the Land Reform and How to Fix Them. Planning (IAP) 2011, 8(1):127-136. (Hebrew).
29. Moroni S. Rethinking the theory and practice of land use regulation: towards nomocracy. Planning Theory 2010, 9(2):137-155.
30. Moroni S. Land use planning and the question of unintended consequences. The Spatial Market Process 2012, 265-288. Bingley, Emerald. D.E. Anderson (Ed.).
31. Needham B. Dutch Land Use Planning 2007, SDU Publishers, Den Haag.
32. Portugali J. Learning from paradoxes about prediction and planning in self-organizing cities. Planning Theory 2008, 7(3):248-262.
33. Poulton M.C. Externalities, transaction costs, public choice and the appeal of zoning. Town Planning Review 1997, 68(1):81-92.
34. Siegan B.H. Land-Use Without Zoning 1972, D.C. Heath, Lexington, MA.
35. Siegan B.H. The Benefits of Non-Zoning, Ch.3. Housing America: Building out of a Crisis 2009, Transaction, New Brunswick, NJ. R.G. Holcombe, B. Powell (Eds.).
36. Simon H.A. Models of Man 1957, Wiley, New York.
37. Webster C., Lai L.W.-C. Property Rights, Planning and Markets: Managing spontaneous cities 2003, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
38. Williamson O.E. Public and private bureaucracies: a transaction-cost economics perspective. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 1999, 15:306-342.