IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v77y2018icp829-836.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Active land policy in small municipalities in the Netherlands: “We don’t do it, unless...”

Author

Listed:
  • van Oosten, Thomas
  • Witte, Patrick
  • Hartmann, Thomas

Abstract

Due to their active role in land development, Dutch municipalities have suffered considerably from the economic crisis. The financial and economic effects are particularly striking in small municipalities. We conducted an empirical analysis to highlight the magnitude of the financial effects both pre- and post-crisis and to determine the potential reasons for these differences in small Dutch municipalities. Aside from the main reasons, such as housing demand stagnation and declining land prices, some additional causes are specifically responsible for the struggles of small Dutch municipalities. These causes include a downward adjustment of housing building, optimistic acting of municipalities and political motives. Furthermore, several contextual causes have led to financial disappointments. Dutch land policy is an extreme example of active land policy as municipalities are heavily involved in the development of land, which seems to be partly inspired by reasons related to ideology, the institutional framework and enrichment strategies. The lessons from the Netherlands can be seen as an indicator for other countries who are conducting or experimenting with forms of active land policy.

Suggested Citation

  • van Oosten, Thomas & Witte, Patrick & Hartmann, Thomas, 2018. "Active land policy in small municipalities in the Netherlands: “We don’t do it, unless...”," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 829-836.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:77:y:2018:i:c:p:829-836
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837716305579
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.029?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. Vivien A. Schmidt, 2013. "Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and ‘Throughput’," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(1), pages 2-22, March.
    2. Huub Ploegmakers & Erwin van der Krabben & Edwin Buitelaar, 2013. "Understanding industrial land supply: how Dutch municipalities make decisions about supplying serviced building land," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 324-344, December.
    3. Abu Naser Chowdhury & Po-Han Chen & Robert Tiong, 2011. "Analysing the structure of public-private partnership projects using network theory," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 247-260.
    4. Edwin Buitelaar, 2010. "Window On The Netherlands: Cracks In The Myth: Challenges To Land Policy In The Netherlands," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 101(3), pages 349-356, July.
    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. Jonkman, Arend & Meijer, Rick & Hartmann, Thomas, 2022. "Land for housing: Quantitative targets and qualitative ambitions in Dutch housing development," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    2. Vera Götze & Josje Anna Bouwmeester & Mathias Jehling, 2024. "For whom do we densify? Explaining income variation across densification projects in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(7), pages 1273-1290, May.

    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. Richard Hyman & Rebecca Gumbrell-McCormick, 2020. "(How) can international trade union organisations be democratic?," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 26(3), pages 253-272, August.
    2. Christoph Engel & Luigi Mittone & Azzurra Morreale, 2024. "Outcomes or participation? Experimentally testing competing sources of legitimacy for taxation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 563-583, April.
    3. Alexander Kentikelenis & Erik Voeten, 2021. "Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970–2018," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 721-754, October.
    4. Isuru Koswatte & Chandrika Fernando, 2022. "Policy Development for Crisis Management in the Context of Sri Lanka," Managing Global Transitions, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 20(3 (Fall)), pages 295-327.
    5. John R. Moodie & Viktor Salenius & Michael Kull, 2022. "From impact assessments towards proactive citizen engagement in EU cohesion policy," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 1113-1132, October.
    6. Carina I. Hausladen & Regula Hänggli Fricker & Dirk Helbing & Renato Kunz & Junling Wang & Evangelos Pournaras, 2024. "How voting rules impact legitimacy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Marlous Blankesteijn & Bart Bossink, 2020. "Assessing the Legitimacy of Technological Innovation in the Public Sphere: Recovering Raw Materials from Waste Water," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Nikitas Konstantinidis & Konstantinos Matakos & Hande Mutlu-Eren, 2019. "“Take back control”? The effects of supranational integration on party-system polarization," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 297-333, June.
    9. Hugh Breakey, 2021. "Harnessing Multidimensional Legitimacy for Codes of Ethics: A Staged Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(2), pages 359-373, May.
    10. Andreas Hendricks & Peter Lacoere & Erwin van der Krabben & Cynthia Oorschot, 2021. "Limits of Negotiable Developer Obligations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-20, October.
    11. Lee, Jongpyo & Jung, Sanghoon, 2020. "Industrial land use planning and the growth of knowledge industry: Location pattern of knowledge-intensive services and their determinants in the Seoul metropolitan area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    12. Onna Malou van den Broek, 2024. "How Political Actors Co‐Construct CSR and its Effect on Firms' Political Access: A Discursive Institutionalist View," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 595-626, March.
    13. Antoine Paccoud & Markus Hesse & Tom Becker & Magdalena Górczyńska, 2022. "Land and the housing affordability crisis: landowner and developer strategies in Luxembourg’s facilitative planning context," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(10), pages 1782-1799, October.
    14. Eugenio Salvati, 2024. "Debating Legitimacy and Solidarity in the European Parliament: Patterns of Opposition and Conflict During the Pandemic," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(6), pages 1692-1711, November.
    15. Vincent Caby & Lise Frehen, 2021. "How to Produce and Measure Throughput Legitimacy? Lessons from a Systematic Literature Review," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 226-236.
    16. Bartek Pytlas, 2021. "Hijacking Europe: Counter‐European Strategies and Radical Right Mainstreaming during the Humanitarian Crisis Debate 2015–16," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 335-353, March.
    17. Beetz, Jan Pieter & Rossi, Enzo, 2015. "EU legitimacy in a realist key," Discussion Papers, Center for Global Constitutionalism SP IV 2015-802, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    18. Lechler, Marie, 2019. "Employment shocks and anti-EU sentiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 266-295.
    19. Liyin Shen & Vivian W.Y. Tam & Lin Gan & Kunhui Ye & Zongnan Zhao, 2016. "Improving Sustainability Performance for Public-Private-Partnership (PPP) Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, March.
    20. Gisca, Oxana & Matinmikko-Blue, Marja & Ahokangas, Petri & Gordon, Jillian & Yrjölä, Seppo, 2024. "Legitimacy considerations in regulation for local mobile communication network business in Finland and the UK," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9).

    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:77:y:2018:i:c:p:829-836. 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.