File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Public choice, pigouvian and coasian planning theory

TitlePublic choice, pigouvian and coasian planning theory
Authors
KeywordsCoasian planning
Development control
Pigouvian planning
Planning theory
Public choice
Issue Date1998
PublisherSage Publications Ltd.. The Journal's web site is located at http://usj.sagepub.com/
Citation
Urban Studies, 1998, v. 35 n. 1, p. 53-75 How to Cite?
AbstractWith urban planning policy in transition in many parts of the world, the need to understand the theoretical bases for planning and to ground discussion about policy innovations on theory is as important as ever. This essay reviews the relevance of three economic paradigms to the theory of development control. It is written as a technical review with the purpose of explaining, contrasting and contextualising the contributions of these paradigms. Much has been written about the Pigouvian case for regulative planning. The Coasian literature is strong especially in the US but is not so well known elsewhere; and little has been written that draws together the diverse perspectives offered by the public choice school. This essay has been written particularly for academic planners and urban social scientists in the UK, and in other European and Commonwealth countries who are not familiar with the technical arguments underlying the Coase vs Pigou zoning debate. It is also an essay on the public choice theory of planning since it contextualises Coasian planning theory within that wider critique of welfare economics. Among other points, it argues that the relevance of Coasian planning theory is not by any means restricted to US-style zoning, nor is it purely a debate about deregulation. Coasian and other public choice perspectives generate a rich source of theoretical and empirical propositions which should be tested and developed, particularly as frameworks for comparative analysis of planning constitutions and policies. In this spirit, the essay concludes with elements of a research agenda.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/183432
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.934
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.567
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWebster, CJen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-05-27T08:38:05Z-
dc.date.available2013-05-27T08:38:05Z-
dc.date.issued1998en_US
dc.identifier.citationUrban Studies, 1998, v. 35 n. 1, p. 53-75en_US
dc.identifier.issn0042-0980en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/183432-
dc.description.abstractWith urban planning policy in transition in many parts of the world, the need to understand the theoretical bases for planning and to ground discussion about policy innovations on theory is as important as ever. This essay reviews the relevance of three economic paradigms to the theory of development control. It is written as a technical review with the purpose of explaining, contrasting and contextualising the contributions of these paradigms. Much has been written about the Pigouvian case for regulative planning. The Coasian literature is strong especially in the US but is not so well known elsewhere; and little has been written that draws together the diverse perspectives offered by the public choice school. This essay has been written particularly for academic planners and urban social scientists in the UK, and in other European and Commonwealth countries who are not familiar with the technical arguments underlying the Coase vs Pigou zoning debate. It is also an essay on the public choice theory of planning since it contextualises Coasian planning theory within that wider critique of welfare economics. Among other points, it argues that the relevance of Coasian planning theory is not by any means restricted to US-style zoning, nor is it purely a debate about deregulation. Coasian and other public choice perspectives generate a rich source of theoretical and empirical propositions which should be tested and developed, particularly as frameworks for comparative analysis of planning constitutions and policies. In this spirit, the essay concludes with elements of a research agenda.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSage Publications Ltd.. The Journal's web site is located at http://usj.sagepub.com/en_US
dc.relation.ispartofUrban Studiesen_US
dc.subjectCoasian planning-
dc.subjectDevelopment control-
dc.subjectPigouvian planning-
dc.subjectPlanning theory-
dc.subjectPublic choice-
dc.titlePublic choice, pigouvian and coasian planning theoryen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailWebster, CJ: cwebster@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityWebster, CJ=rp01747en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/0042098985078-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0031862050en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0031862050&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume35en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage53en_US
dc.identifier.epage75en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000071787600004-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWebster, CJ=7201838784en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats