Checks and Balances in Centralized and Decentralized Planning Systems: Ontario, British Columbia and Israel

Eran Razin

Planning Theory & Practice, 2020, vol. 21, issue 2, 254-271

Abstract: My study aims to identify checks and balances in planning systems through a detailed examination of three systems, where rapidly growing urban regions are located. Ontario serves as a prime example for vertical checks on decentralized decisions, mainly via an appeal board and binding planning documents. Horizontal checks predominate in decentralized British Columbia (BC), demonstrating the crucial significance of restraint in decision-making within a balanced triangle of mayor/councillors, planning bureaucracy and community. Checks and balances in centralized Israel have been based on a three-level hierarchy of commissions and plans. The two more centralized systems – Israel and Ontario – are more susceptible to pressures for reform, but exhibit the multidirectional nature of reforms and path-dependent constraints on radical transformations.

Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14649357.2020.1751251 (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:rptpxx:v:21:y:2020:i:2:p:254-271

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rptp20

DOI: 10.1080/14649357.2020.1751251

Access Statistics for this article

Planning Theory & Practice is currently edited by Heather Campbell

More articles in Planning Theory & Practice from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().