Ramifications of development projects deemed “state significant”

Purpose, Design/methodology / approach The acknowledgement of state significance in relation to development projects can result in special treatment by regulatory authorities, particularly in terms of environmental compliance and certain economic and other government support measures. However, defining just what constitutes a “significant project”, or a project of “state significance”, varies considerably between Australian states. In terms of establishing threshold levels, in Queensland there is even less clarity. Despite this lack of definition, the implications of “state significance” can nevertheless be considerable. For example, in Queensland if the Coordinator-General declares a project to be a “significant project” under the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971, the environmental impact assessment process may become more streamlined – potentially circumventing certain provisions under The Integrated Planning Act 1997. If the project is not large enough to be so deemed, an extractive resource under the State Planning Policy 2/07 - Protection of Extractive Resources 2007 may be considered to be of State or regional significance and subsequently designated as a “Key Resource Area”. As a consequence, such a project is afforded some measure of resource protection but remains subject to the normal assessment process under the Integrated Development Assessment System, as well as the usual requirements of the vegetation management codes, and other regulations. Findings (Originality/value) & Research limitations / implications This paper explores the various meanings of “state significance” in Queensland and the ramifications for development projects in that state. It argues for a streamlining of the assessment process in order to avoid or minimise constraints acting on the state’s development. In so doing, it questions the existence of a strategic threat to the delivery of an already over-stretched infrastructure program.

Preliminary modelling outcomes : calculation of holding costs in greenfield residential development

Many of the costs associated with greenfield residential development are apparent and tangible. For example, regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others are all relatively easily identified since they represent actual costs incurred at a given point in time. However, identification of holding costs are not always immediately evident since by contrast they characteristically lack visibility. One reason for this is that, for the most part, they are typically assessed over time in an ever-changing environment. In addition, wide variations exist in development pipeline components: they are typically represented from anywhere between a two and over sixteen years time period - even if located within the same geographical region. Determination of the starting and end points, with regards holding cost computation, can also prove problematic. Furthermore, the choice between application of prevailing inflation, or interest rates, or a combination of both over time, adds further complexity. Although research is emerging in these areas, a review of the literature reveals attempts to identify holding cost components are limited. Their quantification (in terms of relative weight or proportionate cost to a development project) is even less apparent; in fact, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely and in some instances completely ignored. In addition, it may be demonstrated that ambiguities exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs and assessment of their relative contribution. Yet their impact on housing affordability is widely acknowledged to be profound, with their quantification potentially maximising the opportunities for delivering affordable housing. This paper seeks to build on earlier investigations into those elements related to holding costs, providing theoretical modelling of the size of their impact - specifically on the end user. At this point the research is reliant upon quantitative data sets, however additional qualitative analysis (not included here) will be relevant to account for certain variations between expectations and actual outcomes achieved by developers. Although this research stops short of cross-referencing with a regional or international comparison study, an improved understanding of the relationship between holding costs, regulatory charges, and housing affordability results.

Australian innovation ecosystem: A critical review of the national innovation support mechanisms

Innovation is understood as the combination of existing ideas or the generation of new ideas into new processes, products and services, and widely viewed as the main driver of growth in contemporary economies. In the age of the knowledge economy, successful economic development is intimately linked to a country’s capacity to generate, acquire, absorb, disseminate, and apply innovation towards advanced technology products and services. This development approach is labelled as knowledge-based economic development and highly associated with a capacity embodied in a country’s national innovation ecosystem. The research reported in this paper aims to critically review the Australian innovation ecosystem in order to provide a better understanding on the potential impacts of policy and support mechanisms on the innovation and knowledge generation capacity. The investigation places Australia’s innovation system and national-level innovation support mechanisms under the microscope. The methodology of the study is twofold. Firstly, it undertakes a critical review of the literature and government policy documents to better understand the innovation policy and support mechanisms in the country. It, then, conducts a survey to capture Australian innovation companies’ perceptions on the role and effectiveness of the existing innovation incentive programs. The paper concludes with a discussion on the key insights and findings and potential policy and support directions of the country to achieve a flourishing knowledge economy.

Leadership and institutional factors in endogenous regional economic development

Literature on the relationship between leadership and entrepreneurship as it applies to endogenous growth in a regional context is reviewed and used to explore a research agenda for work on this topic. A leadership/entrepreneurship analytical approach is developed and applied on a pilot basis to the Greater Washington D.C. region and its sub-parts. The results are assessed and used to further refine the model and to identify some of the more provocative policy implications of this work. The implications for regional planning process are also considered.

Sustainable transport infrastructure : perspectives for sustainable urban and transport development

Many economic, social and environmental sustainability problems associated with typical urban transportation systems have revealed the importance of three domains of action: vehicle, infrastructure and user. These domains need to be carefully reconsidered in search of a sustainable urban development path. Although intelligent transportation systems have contributed substantially to enhancing efficiency, safety and comfort of travel, questions related to users’ behaviours and preferences, which stimulate considerable environmental effects, still needed to be further examined. In this chapter, options for smart urban transportation infrastructure development and the technological means for achieving broader goals of sustainable communities and urban development are explored.

Motivations, expectations and experiences of Australian rural and regional planners

Despite playing an extremely important role in shaping communities, the role and contribution of planners is not widely understood or acknowledged. At the same time, there is a shortage of planners in Australia, especially in non-urban areas. Thus, though an online survey of 185 rural and regional planners, this research explores their motivations, expectations and experiences. Most enjoyed and felt confident in their role, explaining that they valued the relaxed family orientated rural lifestyle and the varied nature of the planning work. Although they sometimes felt isolated, the non-urban location provided quicker progression to senior roles, the ability to engage directly with the community and to see the consequences of their decisions. Only half felt their education had prepared them well for their role, citing gaps in terms of computerised modelling, team leadership and conflict resolution skills. Their feedback centred on providing a more practical course, focussing more on regional planning, and encouraging urban and rural experience placements. As the first study to quantifiably explore rural and regional Australian planners perceptions of their role and challenges, the findings illustrate current experiences, key planning challenges, perceived educational gaps and future priorities.

Governance and regional planning outcomes: Using governance indicators to support a policy implementation approach

Regional planning faces numerous decision making uncertainties related to the complex interdependencies between urban and regional centres. Questions about how to achieve sustainable planning solutions across regions are a key uncertainty and relate to a lack of information about the actual achievement of outcomes as proposed by the objectives of a plan. Regional plan implementation and its impact on environmental, social and economic outcomes have been little explored within Australian urban and regional planning research. Despite a desire to improve the conditions across Australian regions, ambiguity persists regarding the results of regional planning efforts. Of the variables affecting regional planning, scholars argue that governance has a significant impact on achieving outcomes (see Pahl-Wostl 2009). In order to better analyse the impact of governance, we propose a set of governance indicators to examine decisions across regional planning institutions and apply this to governance models across Queensland’s regions. We contend that these governance indicators can support a more rigorous assessment of the impacts of governance models on plan implementation and outcomes. We propose that this is a way to better understand the relationship between planning and outcomes across urban and regional areas.

Euro-Commentary : Scenario Analysis and Regional Economic Development: The Case of Mid Wales

Fuller-Love, Nerys, et al., 'Euro-Commentary : Scenario Analysis and Regional Economic Development: The Case of Mid Wales', European Urban and Regional Studies (2006) 13(2) pp.143-149 RAE2008