File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Analytical public-choice planning theory: A response to Poulton

TitleAnalytical public-choice planning theory: A response to Poulton
Authors
Webster, C
Issue Date1998
PublisherLiverpool University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.liverpool-unipress.co.uk/journals_2.html
Citation
Town Planning Review, 1998, v. 69 n. 2, p. 191-209 How to Cite?
AbstractThis paper is principally a response to Michael Poulton's (1997) paper in which he argues in favour of a public-choice theory of planning. While Poulton's high view of public-choice theory might be justified, the case he builds is weakened by a somewhat simplistic dismissal of other economic paradigms. Public-choice planning theory uses many of the traditional devices of Pigovian theory as well as borrowing from Coasian, property-rights and transaction-costs economics. The first part of the paper considers this argument and the second illustrates it by considering a selection of public-choice propositions.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/183418
ISSN
0041-0020
2023 Impact Factor: 1.6
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.701
References
References in Scopus

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWebster, Cen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-05-27T08:38:02Z-
dc.date.available2013-05-27T08:38:02Z-
dc.date.issued1998en_US
dc.identifier.citationTown Planning Review, 1998, v. 69 n. 2, p. 191-209en_US
dc.identifier.issn0041-0020en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/183418-
dc.description.abstractThis paper is principally a response to Michael Poulton's (1997) paper in which he argues in favour of a public-choice theory of planning. While Poulton's high view of public-choice theory might be justified, the case he builds is weakened by a somewhat simplistic dismissal of other economic paradigms. Public-choice planning theory uses many of the traditional devices of Pigovian theory as well as borrowing from Coasian, property-rights and transaction-costs economics. The first part of the paper considers this argument and the second illustrates it by considering a selection of public-choice propositions.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherLiverpool University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.liverpool-unipress.co.uk/journals_2.htmlen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTown Planning Reviewen_US
dc.titleAnalytical public-choice planning theory: A response to Poultonen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailWebster, C: cwebster@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityWebster, C=rp01747en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0000645925en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0000645925&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume69en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.spage191en_US
dc.identifier.epage209en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWebster, C=7201838784en_US
dc.identifier.issnl0041-0020-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats

OR

Export to Other Non-XML Formats