No abstract

This paper evaluates the extent to which the introduction of four new regional planning and land policy instruments in the Netherlands improves the delivery of regional planning objectives. On the basis of case-study research, we identify why and to what extent the Dutch regional authorities-the provinces-have adopted these new instruments and assess whether or not the instruments offer opportunities for improving the delivery of regional planning objectives. The study shows that regional policies and plans are often implemented without consideration of their consequences for national or local planning objectives. As a result, the instruments may not address current policy delivery needs, and may even compound local policy failures. We conclude that the use of such instruments should be accompanied by a more thorough discussion of regional planning tasks and objectives, and a debate on the role of regional authorities within the multilevel governance setting.

Attention to self‐organisation and spontaneous order in urban development is growing both in academia and in planning practice. One of the current academic discussions centres around the desirability of self‐organisation. This paper evaluates the case of self‐organisation in Oosterwold Almere in the Netherlands — an atypical case as it is a large‐scale experimental project of organic urban development. We analysed how this case deals with traditional welfare‐economic justifications for urban planning by the government. Several challenges of self‐governing communities in dealing with public goods and negative externalities are identified. The case of Oosterwold highlights the continued importance of collective action, both in the provision and management of public goods and services, and in the prevention of free‐rider behaviour and inefficient use of space. In Oosterwold, collective solutions are being established to deal with challenges concerning institutions, common costs, and the liability of replacing the urban planning by the government.

The implementation of planning objectives in the public interest depends on the land laws and land policies of a state. Public stakeholders are not only enabled or constrained in their actions by these laws and policies, they also (re)formulate these laws and policies to support their actions. The objective of this paper is to understand how different stakeholders in spatial development processes influence land policy dynamics (both the (re)formulation and the implementation of policies) and vice versa. The paper explores the changes in land policies in the Netherlands, in particular how changes have enabled the regional planning level. The Policy Arrangement Approach is used to analyse the strategic behaviour of agencies and their use of structure in spatial development processes. The findings show that the arrangement rapidly changed from the 1980s onwards, due to changes in the underlying political discourses and the effectuation of these discourses via regulation and instruments. With objectives of decentralization and integration, the national government has enabled the regional planning level to become more active in spatial development processes. Although the provinces were enabled by new laws and policies, this did not significantly change their role within the Dutch planning system.

the academic discourse considers the regional scale as an important planning level to provide for spatial objectives that transcend the boundaries of local authorities. nonetheless, the problem-solving capacity of the regional planning level is still questioned by both academics and practitioners. this paper studies the tension between formal and informal regional governance and its practical challenges for two cases of dutch provinces struggling with their position in regional governance networks. these cases entail pan-european development (trans-european transport networks -ten-t) and regional land development (Bloemendalerpolder). it was found that at the metropolitan scale, formal regional planning powers tend to overrule socially produced regional governance arrangements. Simultaneously, regional planning powers lack support of these socially produced arrangements for their interventions. at the same time, at the supra-regional scale, provinces are a logical stakeholder to fulfil a prominent role in regional governance, but often lack the institutional capacity to act as such. We therefore argue that regional planning authorities need to be granted the power and capacity to take up a more centripetal, intermediate role in governance arrangements. this would provide them more capacity to act in disentangling the difficult practical challenges of scalar problems that many regional governance arrangements currently face.