Search

While the current trends of rapid urbanisation and globalisation have improved the lives of many people worldwide in the last few decades, the negative side effects of such trends are [...]

Land improvement syndicates (LIS) are a land-policy instrument that has been implemented in Switzerland to incorporate land readjustments, zoning changes and infrastructure provisions within a single instrument. These instruments address contentious situations, such as disagreements among landowners, inappropriate property subdivisions, problematic allocations of development rights, and the distribution of infrastructure provision costs. LIS redistribute added land values and costs of land development between landowners in a more equitable manner. While LIS have been in place for several decades, there have been limited studies on institutional aspects of these policy instruments, and particularly their associated transaction costs. In line with the transaction-cost economics theory, this paper considers the activities involved in the formation and execution of LIS as a series of transactions and discusses when and why transaction costs arise throughout the life cycle of the policy instrument. To this end, this paper uses an LIS case study in the commune of Cheseaux, Canton Vaud. The results of this paper show the variance of transaction costs across time, actor and activity. Activities such as preparation of the feasibility study and infrastructure provision are among those that appear to generate particularly considerable transaction costs. In addition to this, there is evidence of lengthy negotiations surrounding the existing and future land values and redistribution of development rights. Keywords: Land improvement syndicates (LIS), transaction costs, institutional arrangements, land readjustment, policy life cycle, Introduction Land development processes entail complexities, particularly when there are multiple landowners involved. Where there is mutual agreement among landowners, the process might be more straightforward as landowners are able [...]

Planning decisions have considerable impacts on both natural and built environments. The impacts of these decisions may remain for many decades and many are irreversible. In order to gain a better understanding of these long-standing impacts, planners require a systematic approach to evaluate the planning policy instruments utilised. The literature on planning evaluation shows that most studies have taken a conformance-based evaluation approach, where the success of a planning policy instrument is based on the degree of conformity between the policy outcomes and its intended objectives. While evaluating such criteria is necessary, it is hardly ever sufficient largely because of unintended effects. This paper proposes an impact-based approach to planning evaluation that incorporates all the impacts, intended and otherwise, that a planning policy instrument may bring about, irrespective of the initial objectives of the policy. Using a number of economic and planning theories, this paper argues that, in addition to conformance and performance, other normative evaluation criteria, such as, efficiency, equity, social and political acceptability, and institutional arrangements, should be included to emphasise the importance of planning decisions and their substantial impacts on quality of life, social justice, and sustainability.