IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v76y2018icp762-771.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Municipal management of residential collectively owned open space: Exploring the case of Israel

Author

Listed:
  • Loboda Lichtenbaum, Shira
  • Rosen, Gillad

Abstract

Collectively owned open spaces are an integral feature of the urban residential landscape. While scholarly attention tends to focus on the management of shared spaces within buildings, management of collectively owned open spaces, which make up large percentages of the outside residential lot serving as gardens or courtyards, has been limited. The dual nature of these urban environments, considered as hybrid public-private places, might lead to a responsibility vacuum where residents feel these territories are not fully private, and municipalities argue they are not fully public. Although these spaces are considered common, often highly visible and affect many residents; in the case of Israel, the management strategies currently in practice are not adequate in creating useful, safe and aesthetic places. In order to identify the main factors contributing to the neglect of these spaces, our work draws on the study of three major cities in Israel, and applies a number of different methods, including interviews, document analysis and on-site visits. In addition, we explore local governments’ response to the management of these spaces, which consist of various intervention paths including management-based, community-oriented, and planning-focused. The analysis suggests that the case of collectively owned open spaces offers a cautionary tale on the potentially far-reaching effects of insufficiently thought-out planning, and illuminates possible solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Loboda Lichtenbaum, Shira & Rosen, Gillad, 2018. "Municipal management of residential collectively owned open space: Exploring the case of Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 762-771.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:762-771
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.03.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717312577
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.03.004?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. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(5), pages 416-416.
    2. Wade, Robert, 1987. "The Management of Common Property Resources: Collective Action as an Alternative to Privatisation or State Regulation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 11(2), pages 95-106, June.
    3. Matthew Carmona, 2015. "Re-theorising contemporary public space: a new narrative and a new normative," Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 373-405, December.
    4. Amnon Frenkel & Daniel Orenstein, 2012. "Can Urban Growth Management Work in an Era of Political and Economic Change?," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 78(1), pages 16-33.
    5. Evan McKenzie, 2003. "Common‐interest housing in the communities of tomorrow," Housing Policy Debate, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 203-234.
    6. Efrat Eizenberg, 2012. "The Changing Meaning of Community Space: Two Models of NGO Management of Community Gardens in New York City," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 106-120, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jakar, Gidon S. & Razin, Eran & Rosen, Gillad, 2021. "Local government going offside? The gap between planning and implementation of sport development projects," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).

    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. Ravit Hananel & Joseph Berechman & Sagit Azary-Viesel, 2022. "Join the Club: Club Goods, Residential Development, and Transportation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Zoltán Cséfalvay, 2011. "Searching for Economic Rationale behind Gated Communities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(4), pages 749-764, March.
    3. Simon C. Y. Chen, 2011. "Common Interest Development and the Changing Roles of Government and Market in Planning," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(16), pages 3599-3612, December.
    4. Mark Partridge & M. Rose Olfert & Alessandro Alasia, 2007. "Canadian cities as regional engines of growth: agglomeration and amenities," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 39-68, February.
    5. Salih Ozgur SARICA, 2014. "Regional Economic Growth. Socio-Economic Disparities among Counties," Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, Alliance of Central-Eastern European Universities, vol. 3(4), pages 25-36, December.
    6. Chin Lim, 2003. "Public Good Contributions Between Communities," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(3), pages 541-548, July.
    7. Koichi Fukumura & Atsushi Yamagishi, 2020. "Minimum wage competition," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(6), pages 1557-1581, December.
    8. Septimiu-Rares SZABO, 2017. "The Empirical Relationship Between Fiscal Decentralization And Economic Growth: A Review Of Variables, Models And Results," Management Research and Practice, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(2), pages 47-66, June.
    9. Kessing, Sebastian G. & Konrad, Kai A. & Kotsogiannis, Christos, 2006. "Federal tax autonomy and the limits of cooperation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 317-329, March.
    10. Dwight Lee, 1985. "Reverse revenue sharing: A modest proposal," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 279-289, January.
    11. Annie Tubadji & Peter Nijkamp, 2015. "Cultural impact on regional development: application of a PLS-PM model to Greece," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 54(3), pages 687-720, May.
    12. Barrow, Lisa & Rouse, Cecilia Elena, 2004. "Using market valuation to assess public school spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 1747-1769, August.
    13. Sandy Fréret & Denis Maguain, 2017. "The effects of agglomeration on tax competition: evidence from a two-regime spatial panel model on French data," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(6), pages 1100-1140, December.
    14. Pankaj Bajracharya & Selima Sultana, 2022. "Examining the Use of Urban Growth Boundary for Future Urban Expansion of Chattogram, Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, May.
    15. Acocella Nicola & Di Bartolomeo Giovanni, 2013. "Population location, commuting and local public goods: A political economy approach," wp.comunite 0105, Department of Communication, University of Teramo.
    16. Hilber, Christian A.L., 2010. "New housing supply and the dilution of social capital," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 419-437, May.
    17. Natalie Brady, 2002. "Striking a Balance: Centralised and Decentralised Decisions in Government," Treasury Working Paper Series 02/15, New Zealand Treasury.
    18. John D. Donahue, 1997. "Tiebout? Or Not Tiebout? The Market Metaphor and America's Devolution Debate," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 73-81, Fall.
    19. Patrick Bayer & Fernando Ferreira & Robert McMillan, 2007. "A Unified Framework for Measuring Preferences for Schools and Neighborhoods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(4), pages 588-638, August.
    20. Abhilas Pradhan & Rabinarayan Patra, 2013. "Heterogeneity, collective action and management sustainability in common property forest resources: case study from the Indian state Odisha," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 979-997, August.

    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:76:y:2018:i:c:p:762-771. 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.