2012
DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2012.662670
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Flexibility versus Certainty: Unsettling the Land-use Planning Shibboleth in Australia

Abstract: Within the planning literature, the distinction between regulatory planning and strategic spatial planning has exposed a recurring dichotomy that exists between the idea of 'conforming' (regulative certainty) and 'performing' (strategic flexibility) plans and planning systems. This paper critically examines the divergent trajectories of land-use policy and regulation in two Australian states, Queensland and New South Wales. This paper concludes by arguing that the flexibility/certainty dilemma is something of … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(18 reference statements)
0
16
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This categorization is simple, strongly justified and insightful and also interestingly coincides with Janin Rivolin's categorization of "conforming" and "performing" planning systems (Janin Rivolin, 2008). However, it ignores some important distinctions between continental European systems by putting them into a single category, while also giving undue importance to the formal legal characteristics of planning compared with its actual practice, where "discretionary systems" have been shown to be rigid in practice and "regulating in advance" zoning approaches applied with some flexibility (Cullingworth & Nadin, 2006;Steel & Ruming, 2012).…”
Section: "Planning Control In Western Europe"mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This categorization is simple, strongly justified and insightful and also interestingly coincides with Janin Rivolin's categorization of "conforming" and "performing" planning systems (Janin Rivolin, 2008). However, it ignores some important distinctions between continental European systems by putting them into a single category, while also giving undue importance to the formal legal characteristics of planning compared with its actual practice, where "discretionary systems" have been shown to be rigid in practice and "regulating in advance" zoning approaches applied with some flexibility (Cullingworth & Nadin, 2006;Steel & Ruming, 2012).…”
Section: "Planning Control In Western Europe"mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The main purpose was to promote economic activity and allow the State to quickly respond to an increasingly competitive global milieu. Red‐tape reductions, streamlining, and “one stop shop” development assessment processes emerged—primarily as a result of private sector criticisms of planning regulatory constraints, which were seen as inefficient, thwarting, and excessive (Ruming et al ., ; Steele & Ruming, ). This reform is consistent with the trend to neoliberalisation in spatial planning noted earlier.…”
Section: Case Study—kurilpa Pointmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following the 2011 state election, which saw the Liberal/National Coalition gain government, a new round of planning reform was initiated. The reform process included both a review of the regulatory and legislative planning frameworks, along with a new metropolitan strategic planning process (Ruming, ; Steele and Ruming, ). ‘Sydney over the next 20 years’ represents the first urban policy vision expressed by the new government and is the foundation of new metropolitan planning processes.…”
Section: Global Sydney and Strategic Planningmentioning
confidence: 99%