Speaker
Description
Land Value Capture (LVC) mechanisms, such as Section 106 agreements (S106) and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), are widely regarded as crucial tools for funding urban development by redistributing the value generated through public investments in England. While much of the existing literature has focused on the economic implications of these instruments—particularly their effects on developers and landowners—limited attention has been given to their equity outcomes or their contributions to spatial and social justice within local contexts. This study directly addresses this research gap by examining how S106 and CIL contribute to equitable development across England, with a specific focus on justice and fairness in the distribution of public benefits.
To address this, the paper applies Nancy Fraser’s three-dimensional framework of social justice—redistribution, recognition, and participation—integrated with concepts of spatial justice (Fraser, 2008). This combination allows for a comprehensive analysis of the geographic distribution of benefits, the cultural-status implications of LVC policies, and the decision-making processes shaping their implementation. While S106 agreements focus on site-specific impacts, such as affordable housing and infrastructure provision, CIL operates as a broader, flat-rate tax to fund community-wide infrastructure. However, disparities in policy design, market conditions, and institutional capacity raise concerns about whether these mechanisms are capable of achieving their intended equitable outcomes.
This study adopts a mixed-methods approach, using the Digital Land database, which records 22,786 developer contributions across 62 local authorities in England between 2010 and 2025. The research addresses two core questions: (1) What types of benefits have been funded through S106 and CIL across Local Planning Authorities (LPAs)? (2) How are these benefits distributed spatially within selected LPAs, and what does this reveal about spatial justice? Geospatial analysis will map the distribution of benefits, while qualitative interviews with decision-makers in 20 LPAs will explore the institutional and procedural factors influencing these outcomes.
Existing research indicates significant disparities in how benefits are allocated. Stronger housing markets more effectively leverage S106 contributions, even in conjunction with CIL, while weaker markets struggle to capture similar value (Lord et al., 2022). In such cases, the justice potential of these instruments seem to be conditioned to local contingencies and market dynamics. By linking the variation in public benefits to differences in local market conditions, institutional frameworks, and decision-making processes, this study sheds light on the challenges and opportunities for designing LVC policies that promote more equitable urban development.
Ultimately, this research contributes to the broader understanding of if and how LVC mechanisms can address systemic inequalities and promote justice in urban development. By examining both spatial and social dimensions of equity, it aims to inform the design and implementation of LVC policies that better balance economic objectives with the principles of justice and fairness in England.
References
Fraser, N (2008) From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a postsocialist age. In Seidman,S and Alexander,J.C (eds) The New Social Theory Reader, Routledge: London. Pgs 430 -460.
Lord, A., Cheang, C. -W., & Dunning, R. (2022). Understanding the geography of affordable housing provided through land value capture: Evidence from England. URBAN STUDIES, 59(6), 1219-1237.
| Keywords | social justice; spatial justice; developer contributions; land value capture |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
