从程序公平角度分析土地强制征用过程——来自苏格兰的证据

IF 2.1 Q2 URBAN STUDIES Journal of Property Research Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI:10.1080/09599916.2020.1713859
Jyoti M. Rao, N. Hutchison, P. Tiwari
{"title":"从程序公平角度分析土地强制征用过程——来自苏格兰的证据","authors":"Jyoti M. Rao, N. Hutchison, P. Tiwari","doi":"10.1080/09599916.2020.1713859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Compulsory acquisition of land is contested bitterly by affected landowners for various reasons including fairness in the compensation that is offered to landowners and fairness in the process that is followed in land acquisition by acquiring authorities. While there is a volume of research that has focussed on compensation, there is a paucity of literature analysing fairness in the process of land acquisition. This paper examines fairness in land acquisition using the case of Scotland, which is currently in the process of reforming laws and policies governing the compulsory acquisition of land. A primary survey was undertaken with stakeholders involved in a road project and information was analysed using ‘qualitative content analysis’. This research identifies the gaps in the existing process of compulsory acquisition using the theoretical lens of ‘procedural justice’ with a strong focus on the social psychology dimension and argues for the incorporation of basic principles of ‘procedural justice’. Fifteen major procedural gaps were identified, which include weak decision-making power of the members of the public in the identification and design of public projects; inadequate representation of objectors due to the high personal cost associated with representation in a public inquiry; time delays; information asymmetries and inefficient grievance management.","PeriodicalId":45726,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09599916.2020.1713859","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysing the process of compulsory acquisition of land through the lens of procedural fairness: evidence from Scotland\",\"authors\":\"Jyoti M. Rao, N. Hutchison, P. Tiwari\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09599916.2020.1713859\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Compulsory acquisition of land is contested bitterly by affected landowners for various reasons including fairness in the compensation that is offered to landowners and fairness in the process that is followed in land acquisition by acquiring authorities. While there is a volume of research that has focussed on compensation, there is a paucity of literature analysing fairness in the process of land acquisition. This paper examines fairness in land acquisition using the case of Scotland, which is currently in the process of reforming laws and policies governing the compulsory acquisition of land. A primary survey was undertaken with stakeholders involved in a road project and information was analysed using ‘qualitative content analysis’. This research identifies the gaps in the existing process of compulsory acquisition using the theoretical lens of ‘procedural justice’ with a strong focus on the social psychology dimension and argues for the incorporation of basic principles of ‘procedural justice’. Fifteen major procedural gaps were identified, which include weak decision-making power of the members of the public in the identification and design of public projects; inadequate representation of objectors due to the high personal cost associated with representation in a public inquiry; time delays; information asymmetries and inefficient grievance management.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45726,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Property Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09599916.2020.1713859\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Property Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09599916.2020.1713859\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"URBAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Property Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09599916.2020.1713859","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

摘要受影响的土地所有者对土地的强制征用提出了激烈的质疑,原因多种多样,包括向土地所有者提供的补偿的公平性和征用当局在土地征用过程中遵循的程序的公平性。虽然有大量研究集中在补偿方面,但分析土地征用过程中公平性的文献却很少。本文以苏格兰为例考察了土地征用的公平性。苏格兰目前正在改革有关强制征用土地的法律和政策。对参与道路项目的利益相关者进行了初步调查,并使用“定性内容分析”对信息进行了分析。本研究使用“程序正义”的理论视角,重点关注社会心理学维度,确定了现有强制获取过程中的差距,并主张纳入“程序正义“的基本原则。查明了15个主要的程序漏洞,其中包括公众在确定和设计公共项目方面决策权薄弱;由于在公开调查中的代表费用高昂,反对者的代表不足;时间延误;信息不对称和申诉管理效率低下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Analysing the process of compulsory acquisition of land through the lens of procedural fairness: evidence from Scotland
ABSTRACT Compulsory acquisition of land is contested bitterly by affected landowners for various reasons including fairness in the compensation that is offered to landowners and fairness in the process that is followed in land acquisition by acquiring authorities. While there is a volume of research that has focussed on compensation, there is a paucity of literature analysing fairness in the process of land acquisition. This paper examines fairness in land acquisition using the case of Scotland, which is currently in the process of reforming laws and policies governing the compulsory acquisition of land. A primary survey was undertaken with stakeholders involved in a road project and information was analysed using ‘qualitative content analysis’. This research identifies the gaps in the existing process of compulsory acquisition using the theoretical lens of ‘procedural justice’ with a strong focus on the social psychology dimension and argues for the incorporation of basic principles of ‘procedural justice’. Fifteen major procedural gaps were identified, which include weak decision-making power of the members of the public in the identification and design of public projects; inadequate representation of objectors due to the high personal cost associated with representation in a public inquiry; time delays; information asymmetries and inefficient grievance management.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The Journal of Property Research is an international journal. The title reflects the expansion of research, particularly applied research, into property investment and development. The Journal of Property Research publishes papers in any area of real estate investment and development. These may be theoretical, empirical, case studies or critical literature surveys.
期刊最新文献
Digitalisation and valuations: an empirical analysis of valuers’ supplemental skills requirements From agriculture to new town: land conversion towards new-build gentrification in the southwest of Jakarta, Indonesia The impact of corporate governance and corporate social responsibility on SA REITs’ performance Do private rental tenants pay for energy efficiency?: The dynamics of green premiums and brown discounts Changes in risk appreciation, and short memory of house buyers when the market is hot, a case study of Christchurch, New Zealand
×
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