IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v11y2021i1p2158244021994554.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban and Spatial Planning: Pragmatic Considerations for Plan Implementation Improvements (A Case Study of the City of Bor)

Author

Listed:
  • Dragana S. Nikolić
  • Marijana D. Pantić
  • Vesna T. Jokić

Abstract

The main task of planning documents is to achieve maximal rationality in the use of space, spatial resources, and balanced territorial development. The preparation of plans is regulated by a legislative framework, which embraces multiple phases and stakeholders. In a perfect planning process, it would be expected that all the elements are well coordinated and brought to common understanding, but in reality, obstacles and challenges can occur in any of these steps, especially in the implementation phase. Although a plan is fully prepared to be practiced, its implementation might be omitted. Therefore, this article analyzes the full process of spatial and urban planning from the perspective of plan implementation. The methodology is based on a combination of different data collection methods (interviews, fieldwork, direct observation) with the analysis of plans and the particular mention of those plans that picture the implementation issues the most. Also, legislative acts and semi-annual and annual reports on the achievements of the local government budget are analyzed. The approach indicates that plan implementation depends the most on the willingness of the government to perform changes in the system and to peruse punitive policy comprehensively. Although it is about implementation at the local level, the success primarily depends on clear definitions given in the legislative acts, freedom of the local communities to make their own decisions, and financial decentralization, side by side with the regional and local circumstances, institutional technical and staff capacities, and application of participatory planning that involves actors from various sectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Dragana S. Nikolić & Marijana D. Pantić & Vesna T. Jokić, 2021. "Urban and Spatial Planning: Pragmatic Considerations for Plan Implementation Improvements (A Case Study of the City of Bor)," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440219, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:2158244021994554
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244021994554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244021994554
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244021994554?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. Willem K. Korthals Altes, 2002. "Local Government and the Decentralisation of Urban Regeneration Policies in The Netherlands," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 39(8), pages 1439-1452, July.
    2. Carolyn Loh, 2011. "Assessing and Interpreting Non-conformance in Land-use Planning Implementation," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 271-287.
    3. Lisa Schweitzer, 2014. "Planning and Social Media: A Case Study of Public Transit and Stigma on Twitter," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 80(3), pages 218-238, July.
    4. Nader Afzalan & Brian Muller, 2018. "Online Participatory Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges for Enriching Participatory Planning," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 84(2), pages 162-177, April.
    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. Sarker, Rumana Islam & Kaplan, Sigal & Mailer, Markus & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2019. "Applying affective event theory to explain transit users’ reactions to service disruptions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 593-605.
    2. Claire Daniel & Christopher Pettit, 2022. "Charting the past and possible futures of planning support systems: Results of a citation network analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(7), pages 1875-1892, September.
    3. Meng Wang & Aleksandra Krstikj & Huan Liu, 2022. "Planning Compact City in Rapidly Growing Cities—An Estimation of the Effects of New-Type Urbanization Planning in Hangzhou City," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Griffin, Greg Phillip & Jiao, Junfeng, 2019. "The Geography and Equity of Crowdsourced Public Participation for Active Transportation Planning," SocArXiv 9ghrn, Center for Open Science.
    5. Thériault, Marius & Le Berre, Iwan & Dubé, Jean & Maulpoix, Adeline & Vandersmissen, Marie-Hélène, 2020. "The effects of land use planning on housing spread: A case study in the region of Brest, France," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    6. Alattar, Mohammad Anwar & Cottrill, Caitlin & Beecroft, Mark, 2021. "Public participation geographic information system (PPGIS) as a method for active travel data acquisition," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    7. Luo, Shuli & He, Sylvia Y. & Grant-Muller, Susan & Song, Linqi, 2023. "Influential factors in customer satisfaction of transit services: Using crowdsourced data to capture the heterogeneity across individuals, space and time," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 173-183.
    8. Andrew Mondschein, 2015. "Five-star transportation: using online activity reviews to examine mode choice to non-work destinations," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 707-722, July.
    9. Guan Li & Zhongguo Xu & Cifang Wu & Yuefei Zhuo & Xinhua Tong & Yanfei Wei & Xiaoqiang Shen, 2019. "Inside or Outside? The Impact Factors of Zoning–Land Use Mismatch," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-25, December.
    10. Sophie C Rudolf & Simona R Grădinaru, 2019. "The quality and implementation of local plans: An integrated evaluation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 46(5), pages 880-896, June.
    11. James Charlton & Ian Babelon & Richard Watson & Caitlin Hafferty, 2023. "Phygitally Smarter? A Critically Pragmatic Agenda for Smarter Engagement in British Planning and Beyond," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 17-31.
    12. Shuli Luo & Sylvia Y He, 2021. "Using data mining to explore the spatial and temporal dynamics of perceptions of metro services in China: The case of Shenzhen," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 48(3), pages 449-466, March.
    13. Xin Li & Bingruo Duan, 2018. "Organizational microblogging for event marketing: a new approach to creative placemaking," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 59-79, January.
    14. Geoff Boeing & Michael Batty & Shan Jiang & Lisa Schweitzer, 2022. "Urban analytics: History, trajectory and critique," Chapters, in: Sergio J. Rey & Rachel S. Franklin (ed.), Handbook of Spatial Analysis in the Social Sciences, chapter 30, pages 503-516, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Małgorzata Blaszke & Iwona Foryś & Maciej J. Nowak & Bartosz Mickiewicz, 2022. "Selected Characteristics of Municipalities as Determinants of Enactment in Municipal Spatial Plans for Renewable Energy Sources—The Case of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-16, October.
    16. Karakadzai, Thomas & Bandauko, Elmond & Chaeruka, Joel & Arku, Godwin, 2023. "Examining the conformance of development to local spatial plans amid rapid urbanisation in Harare, Zimbabwe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    17. Li, Bingqing & Wang, Zhanqi & Chai, Ji & Zhang, Di, 2019. "Index system to assess implementation of strategic land use plans in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    18. Dea Lierop & Ahmed El-Geneidy, 2018. "Is having a positive image of public transit associated with travel satisfaction and continued transit usage? An exploratory study of bus transit," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 241-256, August.
    19. Luo, Shuli & He, Sylvia Y., 2021. "Understanding gender difference in perceptions toward transit services across space and time: A social media mining approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 63-73.
    20. Chakrabarti, Sandip, 2017. "How can public transit get people out of their cars? An analysis of transit mode choice for commute trips in Los Angeles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 80-89.

    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:sagope:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:2158244021994554. 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: .

    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.