IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jpropr/v22y2005i1p37-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Planning obligations, the market orientation of planning and planning professionalism

Author

Listed:
  • Heather Campbell
  • John Henneberry

Abstract

The paper uses planning obligations as a vehicle for exploring the relations between policy, practice and professionalism in planning. The basic character of the British land use planning system has not changed since 1947. However, the inter‐penetration of private market and public welfare ethos in the policy process is posing an increasing challenge to the strong public service orientation of the planning profession. Practising planners have exercised their autonomy and exploited the discretionary spaces that exist in the planning system to defend the professional culture of planning. Consequently, the planning system has proved resistant to moves by both the ‘New Right’ and ‘New Labour’ to make it less interventionist and more market orientated. Planning obligations represent these circumstances in microcosm. They are probably the most significant element of the planning system where planners are confronted by the need directly to consider (development) economics. Current practice with regard to planning obligations also diverges significantly from central government guidance. Both these circumstances pose dilemmas for planners' professional culture. The principles and practices relating to planning obligations are explored through interviews with planners in selected local authorities and two detailed case studies of planning agreements. The results demonstrate how planners attempt to reconcile conflicts between competing professional and market imperatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Heather Campbell & John Henneberry, 2005. "Planning obligations, the market orientation of planning and planning professionalism," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 37-59, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jpropr:v:22:y:2005:i:1:p:37-59
    DOI: 10.1080/09599910500411036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09599910500411036
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09599910500411036?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Cheshire & Stephen Sheppard, 2004. "The Introduction of Price Signals into Land Use Planning," Urban/Regional 0410002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, December.
    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. Eero Valtonen & Heidi Falkenbach & Kauko Viitanen, 2017. "Development-led planning practices in a plan-led planning system: empirical evidence from Finland," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1053-1075, June.
    2. Purcell, Thomas & Ward, Callum, 2022. "The political economy of land value capture in the UK: rent and viability in Salford’s new municipalist turn," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 116664, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Alexander Woestenburg & Erwin van der Krabben & Tejo Spit, 2019. "Legitimacy Dilemmas in Direct Government Intervention: The Case of Public Land Development, an Example from the Netherlands," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Neil Crosby & Pat McAllister & Peter Wyatt, 2013. "Fit for Planning? An Evaluation of the Application of Development Viability Appraisal Models in the UK Planning System," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(1), pages 3-22, February.
    5. M.G. Lloyd, 2008. "Towards a ‘Pooled Sovereignty‘ in Community Planning in Scotland?," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 23(1), pages 58-68, February.
    6. Shlomit Flint Ashery & Carl Steinitz, 2022. "Issue-Based Complexity: Digitally Supported Negotiation in Geodesign Linking Planning and Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-19, July.

    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. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    2. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    3. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    7. Davies-Colley, Christian & Smith, Willie, 2012. "Implementing environmental technologies in development situations: The example of ecological toilets," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-8.
    8. Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Moulaert & Jan Schreurs & Konrad Miciukiewicz, 2014. "Integrative Spatial Quality: A Relational Epistemology of Space and Transdisciplinarity in Urban Design and Planning," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 393-411, August.
    9. Füg, Franz & Ibert, Oliver, 2020. "Assembling social innovations in emergent professional communities. The case of learning region policies in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28(3), pages 541-562.
    10. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    11. Peter Munthe-Kaas, 2015. "Agonism and co-design of urban spaces," Urban Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 218-237, July.
    12. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    13. Corianne Payton Scally & J. Rosie Tighe, 2015. "Democracy in Action?: NIMBY as Impediment to Equitable Affordable Housing Siting," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 749-769, July.
    14. Derk Jan Stobbelaar, 2020. "Impact of Student Interventions on Urban Greening Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    15. Patricia Molina Costa, 2014. "From plan to reality: Implementing a community vision in Jackson Square, Boston," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 293-310, September.
    16. Ratka ÄŒolić & Ä orÄ‘e Milić & Jasna Petrić & NataÅ¡a ÄŒolić, 2022. "Institutional capacity development within the national urban policy formation process – Participants’ views," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-89, February.
    17. Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    18. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    19. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Maie Kiisel, 2013. "Local Community Participation in the Planning Process: A Case of Bounded Communicative Rationality," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 232-250, February.
    21. Deborah F. Shmueli, 2017. "Community Plan Making in the Face of Ethnic Conflict in Israel: Lessons for Collaborative Planning Processes," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(2), pages 131-144, April.

    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:taf:jpropr:v:22:y:2005:i:1:p:37-59. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJPR20 .

    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.