IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v151y2025ics0264837725000146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An opinion regarding the grid layout as a goal and parameter

Author

Listed:
  • Lai, Lawrence W.C.
  • Davies, Stephen N.G.
  • Chiu, Hon Chim
  • Ching, Ken S.T.

Abstract

This opinion paper has the goal of offering two opinions as a guide for further and better research on the grid layout motivated by its coming back to planning research and practice. By analytical reasoning referencing relevant researches and real world examples, it gives from a town planner’s perspective an account for both the popularity and resilience of the grid layout. The first opinion is that the grid layout (gridiron (orthogonal/rectangular)) is a default planning option in relation to the town and country layout or pattern of land apportionment. The second and more important, based on two case studies (one from colonial Hong Kong and another from the southern bank of the River Clyde, in Glasgow, Scotland), is that the conversion of an informal and customary layout into a formal grid land pattern and its subsequent modification is, in the word of Libecap et al. (2011), a major “institutional change” that involves high transaction costs measured in terms of time. Seven research issues are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Lai, Lawrence W.C. & Davies, Stephen N.G. & Chiu, Hon Chim & Ching, Ken S.T., 2025. "An opinion regarding the grid layout as a goal and parameter," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:151:y:2025:i:c:s0264837725000146
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107481
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837725000146
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107481?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.

    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:151:y:2025:i:c:s0264837725000146. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.