Legitimacy Dilemmas in Direct Government Intervention: The Case of Public Land Development, an Example from the Netherlands

IF 3.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Land Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI:10.3390/LAND8070110
A. Woestenburg, E. Krabben, T. Spit
{"title":"Legitimacy Dilemmas in Direct Government Intervention: The Case of Public Land Development, an Example from the Netherlands","authors":"A. Woestenburg, E. Krabben, T. Spit","doi":"10.3390/LAND8070110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current paper examines the legitimacy dilemmas that rise from local governments’ direct policy instruments and market interventions. It takes the case of public land management strategies. The paper argues that current societal challenges—such as energy transition, climate change and inclusive urban innovation—require planning practices to be more effective. Direct government instruments such as direct market interventions have proven to significantly reduce the implementation gap of planning practice. Looking at significant urban challenges, municipalities worldwide could be urged to apply such direct government instruments on a larger scale in the future. However, although direct government intervention in markets can be very effective, it is also controversial in terms of legitimacy. It explicitly and inevitably introduces financial incentives to the organization of government. Balancing these incentives against spatial planning interests unavoidably causes dilemmas. Based on eight Dutch case studies, this paper develops a framework to systematically spell out the legitimacy dilemmas that stem from public market intervention. It facilitates an explicit discussion on varying instrumental rationalities and improving the legitimacy of public action.","PeriodicalId":37702,"journal":{"name":"Land","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3390/LAND8070110","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/LAND8070110","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

The current paper examines the legitimacy dilemmas that rise from local governments’ direct policy instruments and market interventions. It takes the case of public land management strategies. The paper argues that current societal challenges—such as energy transition, climate change and inclusive urban innovation—require planning practices to be more effective. Direct government instruments such as direct market interventions have proven to significantly reduce the implementation gap of planning practice. Looking at significant urban challenges, municipalities worldwide could be urged to apply such direct government instruments on a larger scale in the future. However, although direct government intervention in markets can be very effective, it is also controversial in terms of legitimacy. It explicitly and inevitably introduces financial incentives to the organization of government. Balancing these incentives against spatial planning interests unavoidably causes dilemmas. Based on eight Dutch case studies, this paper develops a framework to systematically spell out the legitimacy dilemmas that stem from public market intervention. It facilitates an explicit discussion on varying instrumental rationalities and improving the legitimacy of public action.
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
政府直接干预的合法性困境——以荷兰公共土地开发为例
本文考察了地方政府直接政策工具和市场干预所带来的合法性困境。它以公共土地管理策略为例。本文认为,当前的社会挑战——如能源转型、气候变化和包容性城市创新——要求规划实践更加有效。事实证明,直接市场干预等直接政府手段可以显著减少规划实践的实施差距。考虑到重大的城市挑战,可以敦促世界各地的城市在未来更大规模地应用这种直接的政府工具。然而,尽管政府对市场的直接干预可能非常有效,但在合法性方面也存在争议。它明确且不可避免地向政府组织引入财政激励。平衡这些激励与空间规划利益不可避免地造成困境。基于八个荷兰案例研究,本文开发了一个框架来系统地阐明源于公共市场干预的合法性困境。它促进了对各种工具理性和提高公共行动合法性的明确讨论。
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
Land
Land ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
23.10%
发文量
1927
期刊介绍: Land is an international and cross-disciplinary, peer-reviewed, open access journal of land system science, landscape, soil–sediment–water systems, urban study, land–climate interactions, water–energy–land–food (WELF) nexus, biodiversity research and health nexus, land modelling and data processing, ecosystem services, and multifunctionality and sustainability etc., published monthly online by MDPI. The International Association for Landscape Ecology (IALE), European Land-use Institute (ELI), and Landscape Institute (LI) are affiliated with Land, and their members receive a discount on the article processing charge.
期刊最新文献
Rice Terrace Experience in Japan: An Ode to the Beauty of Seasonality and Nostalgia Market Access and Agricultural Diversification: An Analysis of Brazilian Municipalities The Role of Vegetation Monitoring in the Conservation of Coastal Habitats N2000: A Case Study of a Wetland Area in Southeast Sicily (Italy) Analysis of Land Suitability for Maize Production under Climate Change and Its Mitigation Potential through Crop Residue Management Public Private Partnership to Brownfield Remediation Projects in China: A Combined Risk Evaluation Approach
×
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:604180095
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