The Deregulation of Building Controls: A Comparison of Dutch and other European Systems

F Meijer and H Visscher

Environment and Planning B, 1998, vol. 25, issue 4, 617-629

Abstract: The systems of building control vary widely between European countries. Some countries have an elaborate and detailed set of requirements and procedures with a dominant (control) role for government bodies. In other European countries private parties are more dominant regarding the quality control of buildings. In this paper we focus on themes such as the scale of building control, the necessity of a differentiation of categories of buildings, the contents of building-permit procedures, and public versus private responsibility. Based on experience in the Netherlands and various other European countries we will discuss the possibilities for a further deregulation of the system of building control. In the first section, the Dutch system of public building control is described. In 1992 the Dutch system of building control was changed and deregulated. Building requirements and regulations had to be simplified and standardized. In the early 1980s the Dutch government came up with proposals to simplify and reduce building regulations and permit procedures. It intended to achieve several objectives: to reduce the number of rules and make them more transparent; to centralize regulation and make it more uniform; to reinforce the legal rights of all parties and to expedite the procedures (reducing the workload and the expenditure on administration). All these desires were translated into new regulations. Three categories of construction work were introduced. A new centralized and standardized system of technical building control was established. Checking procedures for notifiable construction work were simplified and absolute deadlines were introduced. We evaluate here the changes in the Dutch system and question their effectiveness. Research shows that the intended reduction in the administrative burden on the municipalities has not come to pass. As a consequence, the time pressure on activities such as actual control on compliance of the design with the technical requirements and site inspection is increased. This has led to the question how can deregulation be continued and improved. A working group set up by the Dutch government has suggested proposals for further deregulation. As part of this project, we compared the systems of building control in other West European countries. Technical requirements are set on a national level in nearly all countries. Product requirements are developed on a European level. Building regulations differ significantly between the European countries. In most countries deregulation is driven by similar aims as in the Netherlands. In countries that until recently had a similar system as the Netherlands (Norway, Sweden, Germany), where local authorities carry the responsibility for the actual technical building control, we have recently seen an increase in participation of private parties. We elaborate on the organization of the technical building control that depends highly on responsibilities of parties in the building process. Finally, we point out the direction for further deregulation of the system of building control for the Netherlands as well as for other European countries. We think it would be possible to introduce a system of self-control—such as the systems in Norway, Sweden, and Germany—in Europe. The national legislation in the various countries should allow a recognition of the control by performing parties on compliance with the national technical requirements. This could be done on the basis of certification to European standards.

Date: 1998
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/b250617 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:envirb:v:25:y:1998:i:4:p:617-629

DOI: 10.1068/b250617

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning B
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().