IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v145y2024ics0264837724001959.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuation practices in urban land readjustment cases in Norway

Author

Listed:
  • Elvestad, Helén Elisabeth
  • Holsen, Terje

Abstract

Valuation of real property is an essential part of land readjustment, with the purpose to establish the right exchange value of parcels shifting owners. Applied methods should be expedient for the exchange purpose. Based on empirical findings from land readjustment cases in Norway, this article assesses whether and to what extent valuation methods in land readjustment are appropriate. The article is based on document analysis of court records on land readjustment from all the Land Consolidation Courts in Norway, analyzed through institutional theory emphasizing (the lack of) institutional adaptability. The essence of land readjustment is to facilitate implementation of urban transformation. As a peculiarity, Norwegian land readjustment is governed by a special court – the Land Consolidation Court – which historically and still largely is dealing with traditional rural land consolidation. Legal rules on Norwegian land readjustment valuation equate rules for land consolidation. Areas to be exchanged should be valued based on ‘foreseeable use’, usually understood as investment value. However, for buildable plots, market value might be used. The legal rules can be described as institutional norms or strategies, formulated as approximate procedural descriptions. Legal rules on what to value involves a significant element of discretion and should be understood as a norm. The choice of valuation method is more to be considered as a strategy. The study show that courts lack own expertise on urban valuation and, thus, often take the parties' prior valuation for granted. Furthermore, documentation on valuation methods used is sparse, in several cases such information is absent. Few court records reflect on the complexity of valuation in land readjustment. The lack of own expertise and few cases for processing by the courts contribute to land readjustment appearing unpredictable and risky for the parties. It emphasizes the slow acquisition of competence by these courts in land readjustment due to limited institutional adaptive capacity. The findings from this study contribute to the understanding of how path dependence linked to rule design, history and culturally conditioned norms and strategies lead to inertia in institutional adaptability.

Suggested Citation

  • Elvestad, Helén Elisabeth & Holsen, Terje, 2024. "Valuation practices in urban land readjustment cases in Norway," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:145:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724001959
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107242
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837724001959
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107242?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ertunç, Ela & Uyan, Mevlut, 2022. "Land valuation with Best Worst Method in land consolidation projects," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    2. Ela Ertunç & Zlatica Muchová & Hrvoje Tomić & Jaroslaw Janus, 2022. "Legal, Procedural and Social Aspects of Land Valuation in Land Consolidation: A Comparative Study for Selected Central and Eastern Europe Countries and Turkey," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-22, April.
    3. Tezcan, Ahmet & Büyüktaş, Kenan & Akkaya Aslan, Şerife Tülin, 2020. "A multi-criteria model for land valuation in the land consolidation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    4. Oliver E. Williamson, 2000. "The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 595-613, September.
    5. Douglass C. North, 2005. "Introduction to Understanding the Process of Economic Change," Introductory Chapters, in: Understanding the Process of Economic Change, Princeton University Press.
    6. Joana Almeida & José Antunes Ferreira & Beatriz Condessa & Ricardo Tomé, 2018. "Improving land readjustment practice. Application of management models to Portugal," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(7), pages 1431-1449, July.
    7. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    8. Muñoz Gielen, Demetrio & Mualam, Nir, 2019. "A framework for analyzing the effectiveness and efficiency of land readjustment regulations: Comparison of Germany, Spain and Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    9. Elvestad, Helén Elisabeth & Sky, Per Kåre, 2021. "From rural to urban land consolidation– An analysis of recent changes in Norwegian land consolidation," CLTS Working Papers 1/21, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luis Alfonso Dau & Aya S. Chacar & Marjorie A. Lyles & Jiatao Li, 2022. "Informal institutions and international business: Toward an integrative research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 985-1010, August.
    2. Masahiko Aoki, 2013. "Institutions as cognitive media between strategic interactions and individual beliefs," Chapters, in: Comparative Institutional Analysis, chapter 17, pages 298-312, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Aparicio, Sebastian & Urbano, David & Audretsch, David, 2016. "Institutional factors, opportunity entrepreneurship and economic growth: Panel data evidence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 45-61.
    4. Ghulam, Yaseen, 2021. "Institutions and firms’ technological changes and productivity growth," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    5. Coyne, Christopher J. & Mathers, Rachel L., 2011. "Rituals: An economic interpretation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 74-84.
    6. Aparicio, Sebastian & Audretsch, David & Noguera, Maria & Urbano, David, 2022. "Can female entrepreneurs boost social mobility in developing countries? An institutional analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    7. Dak-Adzaklo, Cephas Simon Peter & Wong, Raymond M.K., 2024. "Corporate governance reforms, societal trust, and corporate financial policies," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    8. Ralph Chami & Connel Fullenkamp & Sunil Sharma, 2010. "A framework for financial market development," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 107-135.
    9. Mehdi Khodakarami & Hassan Yazdifar & Alireza Faraji Khaledi & Saeed Bagheri Kheirabadi & Amin Sarlak, 2024. "The Level of Islamic Religiosity of the Local Community and Corporate Environmental Responsibility Disclosure: Evidence from Iran," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(2), pages 483-512, March.
    10. David Urbano & Sebastian Aparicio & Victor Querol, 2016. "Social progress orientation and innovative entrepreneurship: an international analysis," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 1033-1066, December.
    11. Mike W. Peng & Joyce C. Wang & Nishant Kathuria & Jia Shen & Miranda J. Welbourne Eleazar, 2023. "Toward an institution-based paradigm," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 353-382, June.
    12. John H. Dunning & Jeremy Clegg, 2011. "An Enlarged EU, Institutional Challenges and European Competitiveness," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume III, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. John Groenewegen, 2011. "Evolution and Design of Institutions Supporting Liberalization," Chapters, in: Matthias Finger & Rolf W. Künneke (ed.), International Handbook of Network Industries, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Grayna Wolska & Iwona Bak & Maciej Oesterreich & Joanna Hawlena, 2020. "Institutions in the Context of Implementing the CSR Concept and Social Trust," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 131-146.
    15. Wafa Alwakid & Sebastian Aparicio & David Urbano, 2020. "Cultural Antecedents of Green Entrepreneurship in Saudi Arabia: An Institutional Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-20, May.
    16. Christopher J. Coyne & Claudia R. Williamson, 2012. "Purpose – This paper seeks to analyze empirically the net effect of trade openness on “economic culture”, measured by indicators of trust, respect, level of self-determination, and obedience. Openness," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 1(4), pages 22-49, April.
    17. van Hoorn, André, 2014. "Individualism and the cultural roots of management practices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 53-68.
    18. Prévost, Benoît & Rivaud, Audrey, 2018. "The World Bank’s environmental strategies: Assessing the influence of a biased use of New Institutional Economics on legal issues," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 370-380.
    19. Tim G. Andrews & Khongphu Nimanandh & Khin Thi Htun & Orapin Santidhirakul, 2022. "MNC response to superstitious practice in Myanmar IJVs: Understanding contested legitimacy, formal–informal legitimacy thresholds, and institutional disguise," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 1178-1201, August.
    20. Urbano, David & Aparicio, Sebastian & Guerrero, Maribel & Noguera, Maria & Torrent-Sellens, Joan, 2017. "Institutional determinants of student employer entrepreneurs at Catalan universities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 271-282.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:145:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724001959. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.