IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v120y2022ics0264837722002654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating stakeholder influences on the land use application process in South Africa – Results from an analysis of the legal framework

Author

Listed:
  • Siebritz, L.
  • Coetzee, S.

Abstract

The fact that geospatial data is a vital international and national resource is gaining increased acceptance worldwide. However, proper management of fundamental geospatial datasets, like land use, determines how well this resource can serve the goals of sustainable development, e.g. achieving inclusive and sustainable urbanization through informed decisions based on up-to-date land use data. Land use data describes the rights to utilize land in accordance with the legal zoning thereof. Allocation of land use rights must align with and give effect to national, provincial and local spatial plans, which means multiple stakeholders are involved in land use regulation. The purpose of this study was to identify and classify the network of stakeholders involved in the land use application process, which results in allocated land use rights. This was done by analysing the South African legal framework for spatial planning and land use management, and to evaluate their a priori influence on this process and on land use data. The results of the stakeholder network analysis can guide the identification of (a) suitable custodian(s) for this fundamental geospatial dataset in the context of the South African Spatial Data Infrastructure (SASDI). Within the SASDI, custodianship is used to ensure availability of good quality geospatial data to empower governments in their planning and decision-making. The average influence of each stakeholder, and as a result their impact on the land use data, was determined based on a classification of roles and responsibilities in the land use application process. The average influence was computed for each sphere of government. The provincial sphere had the highest influence, even though the local sphere has the mandate to allocate land use rights. The national sphere is mainly responsible for strategic direction and implementation support and thus had a significantly lower influence. Based on the results, shared custodianship of land use data in South Africa is recommended among a legislative custodian, coordinating custodians and data custodians. Further research will involve stakeholder representatives to verify the results and to establish multi-stakeholder custodianship roles and responsibilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Siebritz, L. & Coetzee, S., 2022. "Evaluating stakeholder influences on the land use application process in South Africa – Results from an analysis of the legal framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:120:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722002654
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722002654
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106238?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. Pouloudi, Athanasia & Whitley, Edgar A., 1997. "Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27187, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sibel Hoştut & Seçil Deren het Hof & Hediye Aydoğan & Gülten Adalı, 2023. "Who’s in and who’s out? Reading stakeholders and priority issues from sustainability reports in Turkey," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Dibb, Sally & Ball, Kirstie & Canhoto, Ana & Daniel, Elizabeth M. & Meadows, Maureen & Spiller, Keith, 2014. "Taking responsibility for border security: Commercial interests in the face of e-borders," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 50-61.
    3. repec:dgr:rugsom:06a09 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Wang, Wei & Liu, Wenbin & Mingers, John, 2015. "A systemic method for organisational stakeholder identification and analysis using Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(2), pages 562-574.
    5. Boonstra, Albert, 2006. "Stakeholder Management in IOS projects: Lessons from a case study," Research Report 06A09, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    6. Oluwasola Oni & Anastasia Papazafeiropoulou, 2014. "Diverse views on IT innovation diffusion among SMEs: Influencing factors of broadband adoption," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 729-747, September.
    7. Alan Serrano & Javier Garcia-Guzman & Georgios Xydopoulos & Ali Tarhini, 2020. "Analysis of Barriers to the Deployment of Health Information Systems: a Stakeholder Perspective," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 455-474, April.
    8. Jarmila Zimmermannova & Lukas Pavlik & Ekaterina Chytilova, 2022. "Digitalisation in Hospitals in COVID-19 Times—A Case Study of the Czech Republic," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Barclay, Corlane & Osei-Bryson, Kweku-Muata, 2010. "Project performance development framework: An approach for developing performance criteria & measures for information systems (IS) projects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 272-292, March.
    10. Ward, E. John & Dimitriou, Harry T. & Dean, Marco, 2016. "Theory and background of multi-criteria analysis: Toward a policy-led approach to mega transport infrastructure project appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 21-45.
    11. Guido Noto & Lidia Noto, 2019. "Local Strategic Planning and Stakeholder Analysis: Suggesting a Dynamic Performance Management Approach," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 293-310, September.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:120:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722002654. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.