IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v47y2010i10p2149-2171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Designing Development Planning Charges: Settlement Patterns, Cost Recovery and Public Facilities

Author

Listed:
  • J. Peter Clinch

    (School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Policy, University College Dublin, Planning and Environmental Policy Building, UCD Richview, Clonskeagh, Dublin 14, Ireland, peter.clinch@ucd.ie)

  • Eoin O'Neill

    (School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Policy, University College Dublin, Planning and Environmental Policy Building, UCD Richview, Clonskeagh, Dublin 14, Ireland, eoin.oneill@ucd.ie)

Abstract

There is a large body of literature that discusses the control of settlement patterns using traditional planning instruments. Whilst there is some theoretical literature discussing the use of development charges to influence settlement patterns by addressing market failure, there is limited literature examining how such charging is implemented in practice. This paper presents the theoretical basis for development charging based on the Pigouvian tradition and discusses how these charges can be calibrated. It identifies the potential for second-best approaches, including hypothecation of revenues. This approach is distinguished from infrastructure charging which is a cost-recovery instrument. The Irish system of infrastructure charging is assessed as a means of exploring how current instrument design could be improved to align with policy aspirations using the lessons that theory provides.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Peter Clinch & Eoin O'Neill, 2010. "Designing Development Planning Charges: Settlement Patterns, Cost Recovery and Public Facilities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(10), pages 2149-2171, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:47:y:2010:i:10:p:2149-2171
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098009357968
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098009357968
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098009357968?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yinger, John, 1998. "The Incidence of Development Fees and Special Assessments," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 51(n. 1), pages 23-41, March.
    2. Charles J. Delaney & Marc T. Smith, 1989. "Impact Fees and the Price of New Housing: An Empirical Study," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 17(1), pages 41-54, March.
    3. Ihlanfeldt, Keith R. & Shaughnessy, Timothy M., 2004. "An empirical investigation of the effects of impact fees on housing and land markets," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 639-661, November.
    4. Paul Cheshire & Stephen Sheppard, 2005. "Introducing Price Signals into Land Use Planning Decision-making - a Proposal," ERSA conference papers ersa05p42, European Regional Science Association.
    5. Anderson John E., 1993. "Land Development, Externalities, and Pigouvian Taxes," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-9, January.
    6. Clinch, J. Peter & Dunne, Louise & Dresner, Simon, 2006. "Environmental and wider implications of political impediments to environmental tax reform," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 960-970, May.
    7. Oates, Wallace E & Portney, Paul R & McGartland, Albert M, 1989. "The Net Benefits of Incentive-Based Regulation: A Case Study of Environmental Standard Setting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1233-1242, December.
    8. Peter Gordon & Harry W. Richardson, 2004. "Exit and Voice in U.S. Settlement Change," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 17(2_3), pages 187-202, June.
    9. Clinch, J Peter & Murphy, Anthony, 2001. "Modelling Winners and Losers in Contingent Valuation of Public Goods: Appropriate Welfare Measures and Econometric Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(470), pages 420-443, April.
    10. Olson, Mancur & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1970. "The Efficient Production of External Economies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 512-517, June.
    11. McFarlane, Alastair, 1999. "Taxes, Fees, and Urban Development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 416-436, November.
    12. J. Peter Clinch & Eoin O'Neill, 2009. "Applying Spatial Economics to National Spatial Planning," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 157-178.
    13. Paul Cheshire & Stephen Sheppard, 2005. "The Introduction of Price Signals into Land Use Planning Decision-making: A Proposal," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(4), pages 647-663, April.
    14. Clinch, J. Peter & Healy, John D., 2001. "Cost-benefit analysis of domestic energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 113-124, January.
    15. Jan K. Brueckner, 2000. "Urban Sprawl: Diagnosis and Remedies," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 23(2), pages 160-171, April.
    16. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    17. Randall G. Holcombe, 2004. "The New Urbanism Versus the Market Process," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 17(2_3), pages 285-300, June.
    18. Oates, Wallace E. & Strassmann, Diana L., 1984. "Effluent fees and market structure," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 29-46, June.
    19. R. G. Lipsey & Kelvin Lancaster, 1956. "The General Theory of Second Best," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 24(1), pages 11-32.
    20. John Anderson, 2005. "Taxes and Fees as Forms of Land Use Regulation," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 413-427, December.
    21. Yvonne Rydin, 1998. "Land Use Planning and Environmental Capacity: Reassessing the Use of Regulatory Policy Tools to Achieve Sustainable Development," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(6), pages 749-765.
    22. Brueckner, Jan K., 1997. "Infrastructure financing and urban development:: The economics of impact fees," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 383-407, December.
    23. Yinger, John, 1998. "The Incidence of Development Fees and Special Assessments," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 51(1), pages 23-41, March.
    24. Brueckner, Jan K., 1995. "Strategic control of growth in a system of cities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 393-416, July.
    25. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, January.
    26. Spulber, Daniel F., 1985. "Effluent regulation and long-run optimality," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 103-116, June.
    27. Turnbull, Geoffrey K., 2004. "Urban growth controls: transitional dynamics of development fees and growth boundaries," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 215-237, March.
    28. Brereton, Finbarr & Clinch, J. Peter & Ferreira, Susana, 2008. "Happiness, geography and the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 386-396, April.
    29. Ralph Turvey, 1976. "Analyzing the Marginal Cost of Water Supply," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 52(2), pages 158-168.
    30. Samuel R. Staley, 2004. "Urban Planning, Smart Growth, and Economic Calculation: An Austrian Critique and Extension," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 17(2_3), pages 265-283, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fiorenza Carraro & Andrea Zatti, 2012. "Decentralized environmental taxation: a preliminary assessment," Chapters, in: Larry Kreiser & Ana Yábar Sterling & Pedro Herrera & Janet E. Milne & Hope Ashiabor (ed.), Carbon Pricing, Growth and the Environment, chapter 3, pages 33-49, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Jiang, Yong & Swallow, Stephen K., 2017. "Impact Fees Coupled With Conservation Payments to Sustain Ecosystem Structure: A Conceptual and Numerical Application at the Urban-Rural Fringe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 136-147.
    3. Gorecki, Paul & Hennessy, Hugh & Lyons, Sean, 2011. "How impact fees and local planning regulation can influence deployment of telecoms infrastructure," 22nd European Regional ITS Conference, Budapest 2011: Innovative ICT Applications - Emerging Regulatory, Economic and Policy Issues 52160, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    4. Andrea Zatti & Fiorenza Carraro, 2013. "Environmental taxation and municipal fiscal federalism: remarks and perspectives on the Italian case study," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(2), pages 61-92.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. J. Peter Clinch & Eoin O'Neill, 2010. "Assessing the Relative Merits of Development Charges and Transferable Development Rights in an Uncertain World," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(4), pages 891-911, April.
    2. Burge, Gregory, 2014. "The capitalization effects of school, residential, and commercial impact fees on undeveloped land values," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    4. Helfand, Gloria E. & Berck, Peter & Maull, Tim, 2003. "The theory of pollution policy," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 249-303, Elsevier.
    5. Adam T. Jones, 2015. "Impact Fees and Employment Growth," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 29(4), pages 341-346, November.
    6. Burge, Gregory & Ihlanfeldt, Keith, 2006. "Impact fees and single-family home construction," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 284-306, September.
    7. Randy Bluffstone & Matt Braman & Linda Fernandez & Tom Scott & Pei‐Yi Lee, 2008. "Housing, Sprawl, And The Use Of Development Impact Fees: The Case Of The Inland Empire," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(3), pages 433-447, July.
    8. Changhoon Jung & Chul-Young Roh & Younguck Kang, 2009. "Longitudinal Effects of Impact Fees and Special Assessments on the Level of Capital Spending, Taxes, and Long-Term Debt in American Cities," Public Finance Review, , vol. 37(5), pages 613-636, September.
    9. Jou, Jyh-Bang, 2012. "Efficient growth boundaries in the presence of population externalities and stochastic rents," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 349-357.
    10. Paul C. Cheshire & Christian A. L. Hilber, 2008. "Office Space Supply Restrictions in Britain: The Political Economy of Market Revenge," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(529), pages 185-221, June.
    11. Dieter Schmidtchen & Jenny Helstroffer & Christian Koboldt, 2021. "Regulatory failure and the polluter pays principle: why regulatory impact assessment dominates the polluter pays principle," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(1), pages 109-144, January.
    12. Adam Found, 2021. "Development Charges and Housing Affordability: A False Dichotomy?," IMFG Papers 56, University of Toronto, Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance.
    13. Xiaofang Dong & Shihe Fu & Yufei Yuan, 2013. "Impact Fees and Real Estate Prices: Evidence from 35 Chinese Cities," Frontiers of Economics in China-Selected Publications from Chinese Universities, Higher Education Press, vol. 8(2), pages 207-219, June.
    14. repec:wyi:journl:002181 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Adam Jones, 2015. "Fees and Firms: An Empirical Examination of the Relationship Between Development Impact Fees and Firms," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 43(2), pages 261-269, June.
    16. Burge, Gregory & Ihlanfeldt, Keith, 2009. "Development impact fees and employment," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 54-62, January.
    17. Ehrlich, Maximilian V. & Hilber, Christian A.L. & Schöni, Olivier, 2018. "Institutional settings and urban sprawl: Evidence from Europe," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 4-18.
    18. Hochman, Oded & Rausser, Gordon C., 1999. "Zoning as a control of pollution in a spatial environment," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0qq9849t, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    19. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    20. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    21. Kallbekken, Steffen & Kroll, Stephan & Cherry, Todd L., 2011. "Do you not like Pigou, or do you not understand him? Tax aversion and revenue recycling in the lab," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 53-64, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:47:y:2010:i:10:p:2149-2171. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.