Can Urban Growth Management Work in an Era of Political and Economic Change?

Amnon Frenkel and Daniel Orenstein

Journal of the American Planning Association, 2012, vol. 78, issue 1, 16-33

Abstract: Problem: Urban growth management policy employs a range of tools to restrain urban sprawl, promote efficient land use, and preserve open space. Yet the efficacy of such policy is widely debated and challenged, necessitating reliable empirical evidence from case studies assessing the historical success (or failure) of such policy. Purpose: We review Israeli national growth management policy over a 36-year period, recording long-term land development trends in order to assess the efficacy of policy. Methods: We integrate a historical analysis of qualitative policy data and quantitative performance indicators of urban spatial development for a selected region of the country. We use a suite of spatial variables indicating amount, distribution, and configuration of built space along with other sprawl-relevant statistical data. Results and conclusions: In the 1970s and 1980s, open space was preserved largely due to agricultural preservation policy, despite demographic and economic growth. During the 1990s, the initiation of growth management policy coincided with a profound proliferation of development and population movement to low-density suburbs. While statistical indicators from the past several years are equivocal, they suggest that policy is encouraging higher-density development and slowing the loss of open space. Takeaway for practice: Urban growth management policy and its impact must be considered within the historical context in which it was implemented. Changes in land use policy in Israel reflect socioeconomic and political changes; when policy did not adapt to changes in society, the results were undesirable. Today, planning tools (e.g., minimum density limits, population size thresholds, urban growth boundaries, and land use fabrics) strike a balance between top-down planning objectives and bottom-up development pressures. The use of these tools within a statutory, national-level plan helps ensure consistency of implementation across regions.

Date: 2012
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (12)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01944363.2011.643533 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:rjpaxx:v:78:y:2012:i:1:p:16-33

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rjpa20

DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2011.643533

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of the American Planning Association is currently edited by Sandi Rosenbloom

More articles in Journal of the American Planning Association from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().