Speaker
Description
In international comparative terms, the EU has excelled in adopting a set of nature-protection policies and directives. However, these have not been enough to restrain urban and infrastructure development that continues to consume agricultural land and open landscapes. Aware of the urgency caused by climate change, the EU has adopted a set of policies that switches the focus from designating protected areas to restraining the "culprits" – urban areas and commuting zones. EU agencies have also proposed a variety of legal and economic instruments that the different member states are encouraged to adopt and apply.
However, the uniform net-zero policy inevitably meets a variety of existing legal contexts and the realities of property rights. Even though these may seem similar to non-expert eyes, the legal contexts differ in many ways that are likely to impede or support the no net land take policy. Because land-related laws in each jurisdiction are anchored in a complex web of several laws, ongoing regulations, and differing financial and socio-economic contexts, the hoped-for adoption of new instruments is likely to meet more difficulties than expected.
The paper will illustrate the impacts of cross-national differences through one selected topic shared by any planning-law framework: Is there a right to compensation payments or other legal remedies when government bodies seek to roll back previous planning decisions, thereby causing a decline in the value of real property? Are governments legally and financially ready to abolish or divert preexisting development rights? To illustrate the impact that such legal differences can have on the success of the no net land take policy, I will draw on my previous comparative research spanning 14 jurisdictions. The findings showed that no two countries have the same legal response to these questions. The paper will present several cross-national examples where existing laws and property rights can differentially promote or inhibit the implementation of the no net land take policy. These questions point to the need for targeted in-depth comparative research on current and anticipated interaction between differences in laws and regulations across EU countries and how they have already impacted the progress of the no net land take policy, and what are projected expectations.
References
Evers, David, 2024. Exploring the implications of ‘no net land take’ policy for spatial planning: the case of the Netherlands. Town Planning Review, May.
Freyfogle, Eric T. The Owning and Taking of Sensitive Lands 43 UCLA L. Rev. 77 (1995-1996)
Lacoere, Peter and Hans Leinfelder, 2023. No net land take for Flanders. Towards a roadmap for the implementation of Europe’s land target. Spatial Research and Planning, 81/6: 620–635
| Keywords | open space preservation; land use regulation; compensation rights; property rights; |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
