IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v49y2017i5p1122-1145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transfer of development rights and urban land markets

Author

Listed:
  • Evangeline R Linkous

Abstract

Transfer of development rights (TDR) is seen as an important tool for land use planning, in large part because it leverages market mechanisms. TDR extends market concepts used primarily in emissions trading programs to the arena of land use. However, with the exception of a handful of success stories, TDR programs generate few transfers. Although researchers generally attribute the weak performance of TDR to program design flaws, this study demonstrates that the unique conditions presented by urban land markets explain, in part, why TDR programs often underperform. I present a case study of a TDR program in Sarasota, Florida, to address two questions. First, what attributes of urban land markets may impact TDR program design and outcomes? Second, is TDR a planning tool that can achieve desired planning goals, given the conditions of land markets? I find that the unique features of land markets—specifically (1) the sensitivity of development to timing; (2) imperfect information, uncertainty, and speculative activity; (3) unique features of land; (4) the limited number of buyers and sellers; and (5) the development orientation of urban political and planning institutions—distort the market for transferable development rights. The Sarasota case demonstrates how local land market characteristics contributed to a set of incremental program design and implementation decisions that, in sum, amounted to significant departures from fundamental program principles and mechanisms. These resulted in imperfect market conditions and rendered the TDR program ineffective.

Suggested Citation

  • Evangeline R Linkous, 2017. "Transfer of development rights and urban land markets," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(5), pages 1122-1145, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:49:y:2017:i:5:p:1122-1145
    DOI: 10.1177/0308518X16686794
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0308518X16686794
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0308518X16686794?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Thorsnes & Gerald P. W. Simons, 1999. "Letting The Market Preserve Land: The Case For A Market‐Driven Transfer Of Development Rights Program," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 17(2), pages 256-266, April.
    2. Katrina Z S Schwartz, 2013. "Panther Politics: Neoliberalizing Nature in Southwest Florida," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(10), pages 2323-2343, October.
    3. Mills, David E., 1980. "Transferable development rights markets," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 63-74, January.
    4. Evangeline R. Linkous & Timothy S. Chapin, 2014. "TDR Program Performance in Florida," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 80(3), pages 253-267, 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. Till Proeger & Lukas Meub & Kilian Bizer, 2018. "Laboratory Experiments of Tradable Development Rights: A Synthesis of Different Treatments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Langer, Sebastian & Korzhenevych, Artem, 2017. "The effect of land consumption on municipal tax revenue: Evidence from Bavaria," CEPIE Working Papers 18/17, Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE).

    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. Yidi Wang & Ying Fan & Zan Yang, 2022. "Challenges, Experience, and Prospects of Urban Renewal in High-Density Cities: A Review for Hong Kong," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Elizabeth Kopits & Virginia McConnell & Margaret Walls, 2008. "Making Markets for Development Rights Work: What Determines Demand?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 1-16.
    3. Walls, Margaret & McConnell, Virginia & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2003. "How Well Can Markets for Development Rights Work? Evaluating a Farmland Preservation Program," RFF Working Paper Series dp-03-08, Resources for the Future.
    4. Walls, Margaret, 2012. "Markets for Development Rights: Lessons Learned from Three Decades of a TDR Program," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-49, Resources for the Future.
    5. Paul Thorsnes, 2002. "The Value of a Suburban Forest Preserve: Estimates from Sales of Vacant Residential Building Lots," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 426-441.
    6. Gregory M. Parkhurst & Jason F. Shogren & Thomas Crocker, 2016. "Tradable Set-Aside Requirements (TSARs): Conserving Spatially Dependent Environmental Amenities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 719-744, April.
    7. Chau, Nancy H. & Qin, Yu & Zhang, Weiwen, 2015. "Networked Leaders in the Shadow of the Market – A Chinese Experiment in Allocating Land Conversion Rights," Working Papers 250022, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    8. Wang, Bo & Li, Fan & Feng, Shuyi & Shen, Tong, 2020. "Transfer of development rights, farmland preservation, and economic growth: a case study of Chongqing’s land quotas trading program," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. McConnell, Virginia & Walls, Margaret & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2006. "Zoning, TDRs and the density of development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 440-457, May.
    10. Somayeh Ahani & Hashem Dadashpoor, 2021. "Urban growth containment policies for the guidance and control of peri-urbanization: a review and proposed framework," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14215-14244, October.
    11. Zhao, Qianyu & Zhang, Zhanlu, 2017. "Does China’s ‘increasing versus decreasing balance’ land-restructuring policy restructure rural life? Evidence from Dongfan Village, Shaanxi Province," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 649-659.
    12. Proeger, Till & Meub, Lukas & Bizer, Kilian, 2017. "The role of communication on an experimental market for tradable development rights," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 614-624.
    13. Philippe Barla & Joseph A. Doucet & Jean-Daniel M. Saphores, 2000. "Protection des habitats d'espèces menacées en terres privée: analyse d'instruments et de la politique canadienne," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 26(1), pages 95-110, March.
    14. Till Proeger & Lukas Meub & Kilian Bizer, 2018. "Laboratory Experiments of Tradable Development Rights: A Synthesis of Different Treatments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    15. De Vos, Jonas & Witlox, Frank, 2013. "Transportation policy as spatial planning tool; reducing urban sprawl by increasing travel costs and clustering infrastructure and public transportation," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 117-125.
    16. J. Peter Clinch & Eoin O'Neill, 2010. "Assessing the Relative Merits of Development Charges and Transferable Development Rights in an Uncertain World," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(4), pages 891-911, April.
    17. Krithika Srinivasan, 2017. "Conservation biopolitics and the sustainability episteme," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(7), pages 1458-1476, July.
    18. Janmaat, John, 2008. "Playing monopoly in the creek: Imperfect competition, development, and in-stream flows," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 455-473, August.
    19. Joshua M. Duke & Lori Lynch, 2006. "Farmland Retention Techniques: Property Rights Implications and Comparative Evaluation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(2), pages 189-213.
    20. Chen, Chun & Yu, Li & Choguill, Charles L., 2020. "“Dipiao”, Chinese approach to transfer of land development rights: The experiences of Chongqing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).

    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:sae:envira:v:49:y:2017:i:5:p:1122-1145. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.