Speaker
Description
Negotiated developer obligations (NDOs) are a common tool in both discretionary and regulatory planning systems around the world. NDOs have been a popular land value capture method that local authorities with increasingly constrained resources have found useful. They prove to be an interesting tool in the planning profession on the basis that they not only provide parties with a platform to negotiate and reach consensus but also require the actors involved (particularly planners) to duly consider market dynamics. Research studies to date have presented striking findings about the purpose of NDOs, the nature and scope of NDOs, the consequences of the provisions in NDOs as well as the favorable and adverse outcomes of NDOs. NDO negotiations also involve complex interactions between different actors as parties negotiate to deliver benefits to society in exchange for development rights. In this respect, this study adopts a process-oriented perspective rather than a purpose- or output-oriented approach in an effort to reveal the details of the NDO negotiation process as well as the interactions between actors. Especially in countries like Turkey, where negotiated planning agreements are not found in the de jure legislation, adopting a procedural approach to NDOs and examining the actors involved in negotiations as well as the interactions between them offer critical insights about NDOs.
The study focuses on Istanbul in Turkey, where the regulatory de jure planning legislation has acquired a hybrid character due to the market-oriented de facto planning practice. Findings from interviews with 40 respondents who work in Istanbul are presented. Interviews were conducted with actors that represent 6 different groups (urban planners who work in the public sector, developer representatives or consultants, lawyers, bureaucrats, politicians, and academicians) who were/are either directly or indirectly involved in the making of NDOs in Istanbul.
The findings of the study reveal that NDOs in Turkey are made through two different pathways: conditional donations and unconditional donations. During negotiations, senior managers and legal teams have the greatest influence both in the local authority and the real-estate development companies. These actors also greatly interact with each other. Planners who are involved in the process as consultants/facilitators may also have a significant impact. In contrast, other technical staff, departments of the central government and NGOs have limited influence and a low level of interaction. In addition, given that NDOs are one of the key tools for the operation of the de facto hybrid planning system in Turkey, the relationships between the actors during NDO-making shifts back and forth between the ever-shifting boundaries between the formal and informal.
References
Biggar, J., and Friendly, A. (2022) ‘Balancing equity-based goals with market-driven forces in land development: The case of density bonusing in Toronto’, Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 55(6), 1581-1599.
Campbell, H. and Henneberry, J. (2005) ‘Planning obligations, the market orientation of planning and planning professionalism’, Journal of Property Research, 22(1), 37-59.
Campbell, H. and Marshall, R. (2000) ‘Moral obligations, planning, and the public interest: A commentary on current British practice’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 27(2), 297-312.
Ennis, F. (1996) ‘Planning obligations and developers: costs and benefits’, The Town Planning Review, 67(2), 145-160.
Fox-Rogers, L. and Murphy, E. (2014) ‘Informal strategies of power in the local planning system’, Planning Theory, 13(3), 244-268.
Fox-Rogers, L. and Murphy, E. (2016) ‘Self-perceptions of the role of the planner’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(1), 74-92.
Gielen, D.M. and van der Krabben, E. (eds.) (2019) Public infrastructure, private finance: Developer obligations and responsibilities. London: Routledge.
Gumru, F.B. and Turk, S.S. (2024) ‘Navigating in unknown waters: Planners’ involvement in negotiated developer obligations in Turkey’, Urban Research and Practice, 17(5), 697-719.
Wyatt, P. (2017) ‘Experiences of running negotiable and non-negotiable developer contributions side-by-side’ Planning Practice & Research, 32(2), 152-170.
| Keywords | relational dynamics; power relations; negotiated developer obligations; planning practice |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
