Touching on transparency in city local law making: Experiences from waking up each day in City of Melbourne, Australia

R. Leshinsky
{"title":"Touching on transparency in city local law making: Experiences from waking up each day in City of Melbourne, Australia","authors":"R. Leshinsky","doi":"10.1108/IJLBE-01-2016-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \n \n \n \n \nThe purpose for this paper is to share jurisdictional knowledge on local law-making theory and praxis, an area of law not well represented in the literature despite its involvement in day-to-day life. \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n \nThe paper not only shares knowledge about the local law-making process in Melbourne, Australia, but also explores attitudes to local law-making gathered through semi-structured interviews from a sample of relevant stakeholders. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n \nThe paper reports on findings from a study undertaken in Melbourne, Australia. Stakeholder perceptions and attitudes were canvassed regarding local law-making in the areas of land use planning and waste management. Overall, stakeholders were satisfied that Melbourne is a robust jurisdiction offering a fair and transparent local law-making system, but they see scope for more public participation. \n \n \n \n \nResearch limitations/implications \n \n \n \n \nThe findings suggest that even though the state of Victoria offers a fair and transparent system of local law-making, there is still significant scope for more meaningful involvement from the community, as well as space for more effective enforcement of local laws. The stage is set for greater cross-jurisdictional reciprocal learning about local law-making between cities. \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n \nThis paper offers meaningful and utilitarian insight for policy and law makers, academics and built environment professionals from relevant stakeholders on the operation and transparency of local law-making.","PeriodicalId":158465,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law in The Built Environment","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law in The Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLBE-01-2016-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The purpose for this paper is to share jurisdictional knowledge on local law-making theory and praxis, an area of law not well represented in the literature despite its involvement in day-to-day life. Design/methodology/approach The paper not only shares knowledge about the local law-making process in Melbourne, Australia, but also explores attitudes to local law-making gathered through semi-structured interviews from a sample of relevant stakeholders. Findings The paper reports on findings from a study undertaken in Melbourne, Australia. Stakeholder perceptions and attitudes were canvassed regarding local law-making in the areas of land use planning and waste management. Overall, stakeholders were satisfied that Melbourne is a robust jurisdiction offering a fair and transparent local law-making system, but they see scope for more public participation. Research limitations/implications The findings suggest that even though the state of Victoria offers a fair and transparent system of local law-making, there is still significant scope for more meaningful involvement from the community, as well as space for more effective enforcement of local laws. The stage is set for greater cross-jurisdictional reciprocal learning about local law-making between cities. Originality/value This paper offers meaningful and utilitarian insight for policy and law makers, academics and built environment professionals from relevant stakeholders on the operation and transparency of local law-making.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
论城市地方立法的透明度——从每天在澳大利亚墨尔本市醒来的经验
本文的目的是分享关于地方立法理论和实践的司法知识,这是一个法律领域,尽管它涉及日常生活,但在文献中没有很好地代表。本文不仅分享了关于澳大利亚墨尔本地方立法过程的知识,而且通过对相关利益相关者样本的半结构化访谈,探讨了对地方立法的态度。这篇论文报告了在澳大利亚墨尔本进行的一项研究的结果。就土地使用规划和废物管理领域的地方立法征求了利益攸关方的看法和态度。总体而言,利益相关者对墨尔本是一个强大的司法管辖区感到满意,提供了公平和透明的地方立法体系,但他们认为还有更多公众参与的空间。研究局限/启示研究结果表明,尽管维多利亚州提供了一个公平和透明的地方立法系统,但仍有很大的空间让社区更有意义地参与,以及更有效地执行地方法律的空间。这为跨司法管辖区相互学习城市之间的地方立法奠定了基础。原创性/价值本文为政策制定者、立法者、学者和建筑环境专业人士提供了有关地方立法运作和透明度的有意义和实用的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Measures in curbing poor compliance to building control regulation among renovated terrace houses When enforcement fails: Comparative analysis of the legal and planning responses to non-compliant development in two advanced-economy countries Factors influencing land title registration practice in Osun State, Nigeria Liability in negligence for building defects in Ireland, England and Australia: Where statute speaks, must common law be silent? Deregulating planning control over Britain’s housing stock
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1