Industrial land development and manufacturing deconcentration in Greater Jakarta

Industrial land development has become a key feature of urbanization in Greater Jakarta, one of the largest metropolitan areas in Southeast Asia. Following Suharto’s marketoriented policy measures in the late 1980s, private developers have dominated the land development projects in Greater Jakarta. The article investigates the extent to which these private industrial centers have effectively reduced the domination of Jakarta in shaping the entire metropolitan structure. The analysis indicates that major suburban industrial centers have captured most of the manufacturing employment that has dispersed from Jakarta. The industrial centers have now increasingly specialized and diversified. It is likely that a polycentric metropolitan structure will emerge in the future.

Revisiting the Land Issue

This paper seeks to review the critical role of land in delivering sustainable development, focusing on the supply of affordable homes. It first presents a historical overview of debates on land reform, including nationalisation of development land and betterment, before reviewing the impact of land costs on housing delivery, using London as a case study. It then considers alternative policy approaches to ensuring the most effective use of land resources and development capacity, and sets out a programme embracing planning reform, public land acquisition, disposal and taxation.

A Global Review on Peri-Urban Development and Planning

Urban regions worldwide are increasingly facing the challenge of dealing with highly dynamic metropolitan growth and, at the same time, institutional changes like decentralisation and globalisation. These kinds of changes express themselves most evidently in peri-urban areas, where urban and rural life meets. These peri-urban areas in particular have been the stage for rapid physical, social and economic transformations, both in developed and developing countries. Peri-urbanization takes place here. Based on literature review, this paper presents an effort to identify generic attributes of peri-urbanisation and the way in which development planning tends to reply. Three major attributes are identified: peri-urban space (the spatial expression of peri-urban development), peri-urban life (the functional appearance of land uses, activities and peri-urban innovation), and peri-urban change (a causal and temporal perspective featuring flows and drivers of change). It is also shown that prevalent institutional replies in planning and development generally fail to acknowledge the dynamic and increasingly fragmented attributes of global peri-urbanisation.

Accessibility Instruments In Planning Practice: Bridging The Implementation Gap

Accessibility concepts are increasingly acknowledged as fundamental to understand cities and urban regions. Accordingly, accessibility instruments have been recognised as valuable support tools for land-use and transport planning. However, despite the relatively large number of instruments available in the literature, they are not widely used in planning practice. This paper aims to explore why accessibility instruments are not widely used in planning practice. To this end, we focus our research on perceived user-friendliness and usefulness of accessibility instruments. First, we surveyed some instrument developers, providing an overview of the characteristics of accessibility instruments available and on developers’ perceptions of their user-friendliness in planning practice. Second, we brought together developers and planning practitioners in some local workshops across Europe and Australia, where participants were asked to use insights provided by accessibility instruments for the development of planning strategies. We found that most practitioners are convinced of the usefulness of accessibility instruments in planning practice, as they generate new and relevant insights for planners. Findings suggest that not only user-friendliness problems but mainly organisational barriers and lack of institutionalisation of accessibility instruments, are the main causes of the implementation gap. Thus user-friendliness improvement may provide limited contributions to the successful implementation of accessibility concepts in planning practice. In fact, there seems to be more to gain from the active and continued engagement of instrument developers with planning practitioners and the institutionalisation of accessibility planning.