Bodenpolitik und Landmanagement: Eine internationale Perspektive

Magel, Holger; Thiel, Fabian; Espinoza, J. Luis

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-46900-2_84-1

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kötter, Berend, Drees et al (2015: 136) describe it as an "action-oriented component of spatial development and land policy, including all planning and development processes as well as evaluation and regulatory measures for the use of land structural facilities". Magel, Thiel and Espinoza (2016) emphasize the holistic nature of land management, from organizing commitment to changing spatial relations on to executing through all levels of government. De Vries and Chigbu (2017: 66) add that land management can be characterized as a combination of interventions in governance, law, socio-spatial relations, economic opportunities, perceptions and behaviour.…”

Section: Positioning Of Land Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Versus Social Values in Land and Property Management: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Vries¹,

Voß²

2018

RuR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews and analyses how and why land-management practice draws on two contrasting value systems: economic and social. Land managers are at the crossroads of different value systems, which both overlap and contrast. The aim of this article is to provide an understanding of which aspects are crucial in each of the value systems, and to provide a basis for how and where the value systems can be connected and where they are contradictory. This is undertaken using an exploratory qualitative and descriptive comparison, which contrasts the epistemic logics of the value systems, the manner in which each system makes use of different scales, and the way in which decisions are made with each value system. Such an understanding is crucial to improve coherence in designing and predicting the future effects of land-management interventions. Currently, practitioners tend to design interventions based on single value systems, rather than on combining or integrating value systems. The discursive comparison provides the initial steps towards a more coherent understanding of the common ground and the missing links in value logics applied in land management. These results are relevant to provide better descriptions and predictions of the effects of land-use interventions and develop improved transdisciplinary models to predict changes and development in the utilization of land or property.

show abstract

Section: Positioning Of Land Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Versus Social Values in Land and Property Management: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Vries¹,

Voß²

2018

RuR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Along these lines, spatial justice consists of the spatial aspect of social justice within any geographical space, which is the product of social relations and interactions among various actors (including the local community) who make decisions about who can access and use its resources [5,14]. Generally, spatial justice is envisioned as the application of effective rules and processes related to the management of geographical space with the aim to achieve just outcomes, such as equality in access and use of its resources for all people towards improving their living conditions [15]. Various urban management approaches exist to curb spatial injustices, which are manifested in inequalities in access to basic resources and neighbourhood segregation [14,16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can In-Kind Compensation for Expropriated Real Property Promote Spatial Justice? A Case Study Analysis of Resettlement in Kigali City, Rwanda

Uwayezu

Vries

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kigali city authorities have recently adopted an in-kind compensation option to mitigate some patterns of spatial injustices, reflected in the displacement of expropriated real property owners towards urban outskirts, where they can afford new properties using the in-cash compensation they receive. This study assesses whether this form of compensation promotes a spatially just and inclusive urban (re)development. It applies an evaluative framework comprising a series of indicators connected to three dimensions (rules, processes, and outcomes) of spatial justice and its four forms consisting of procedural, recognitional, redistributive, and intra-generational justice. It relies on data collected through field surveys and a review of literature on expropriation and urban (re)development processes in Kigali city. The findings reveal that the adopted in-kind compensation exhibits some aspects of spatial justice connected with the access to decent houses, basic urban amenities, and increased tenure security. However, these findings unveil deficiencies in procedural, recognitional, redistributive, and intra-generational justice, portrayed in the lack of negotiation on the compensation option, non-participation of expropriated property owners in their resettlement process, overcrowding conditions of the new houses, and loss of the main sources of incomes. Some options for a better implementation of the in-kind compensation are suggested. Two strands of procedural and recognitional justice, namely negotiation and community participation, are central to their successful implementation.

show abstract

Bodenpolitik und Landmanagement: Eine internationale Perspektive

Cited by 2 publications

References 4 publications

Economic Versus Social Values in Land and Property Management: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Economic Versus Social Values in Land and Property Management: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Can In-Kind Compensation for Expropriated Real Property Promote Spatial Justice? A Case Study Analysis of Resettlement in Kigali City, Rwanda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About