Private Sector-led Urban Development Projects. Management, Partnerships and Effects in the Netherlands and the UK

Private Sector-led Urban Development Projects. Management, Partnerships and Effects in the Netherlands and the UK

Private Sector-led Urban Development Projects. Management, Partnerships and Effects in the Netherlands and the UK

Central to this research lays the concept of private sector-led urban development projects (Heurkens, 2010). Such projects involve project developers taking a leading role and local authorities adopting a facilitating role, in managing the development of an urban area, based on a clear public-private role division. Such a development strategy is quite common in Anglo-Saxon urban development practices, but is less known in Continental European practices. Nonetheless, since the beginning of the millennium such a development strategy also occurred in the Netherlands in the form of ‘concessions’. However, remarkably little empirical knowledge is available about how public and private actors collaborate on and manage private sector-led urban development projects. Moreover, it remains unclear what the effects of such projects are. This dissertation provides an understanding of the various characteristics of private sector-led urban development projects by conducting empirical case study research in the institutional contexts of the Netherlands and the UK. The research provides an answer to the following research question: What can we learn from private sector-led urban development projects in the Netherlands and UK in terms of the collaborative and managerial roles of public and private actors, and the effects of their (inter)actions? Indications for a market-oriented Dutch urban development practice Urban development practice in the Netherlands has been subject to changes pointing towards more private sector involvement in the built environment in the past decades. Although the current economic recession might indicate otherwise, there are several motives that indicate a continuation of private sector involvement and a private leadership role in Dutch urban development projects in the future. First, a shift towards more market-oriented development practice is the result of an evolutionary process of increased ‘neoliberalization’ and the adoption of Anglo-Saxon principles in Dutch society. Despite its Rhineland roots with a focus on welfare provision, in the Netherlands several neoliberal principles (privatization, decentralization, deregulation) have been adopted by government and incorporated in the management of organizations (Bakker et al., 2005). Hence, market institutionalization on the one hand, and rising civic emancipation on the other, in current Western societies prevents a return towards hierarchical governance. Second, the result of such changes is the emergence of a market-oriented type of planning practice based on the concept of ‘development planning’. Public-Private Partnerships and the ‘forward integration’ of market parties (De Zeeuw, 2007) enforce the role of market actors. In historical perspective, Boelens et al. (2006) argue that Dutch spatial planning always has been characterized by public-private collaborations in which governments facilitated private and civic entrepreneurship. Therefore, post-war public-led spatial planning with necessary government intervention was a ‘temporary hiccup’, an exception to the rule. Third, the European Commission expresses concerns about the hybrid role of public actors in Dutch institutionalized PPP joint ventures. EU legislation opts for formal public-private role divisions in realizing urban projects based on Anglo-Saxon law that comply with the legislative tendering principles of competition, transparency, equality, and public legitimacy. Fourth, experiences with joint ventures in the Netherlands are less positive as often is advocated. Such institutionalized public-private entities have seldom generated the assumed added value, caused by misconceptions about the objectives of both partners grounded in incompatible value systems. This results in contra-productive levels of distrust, time-consuming partnership formations, lack of transparency, and compromising decision-making processes (Teisman & Klijn, 2002), providing a need for other forms of collaboration. Finally, current financial retrenchments in the public sector and debates about the possible abundance of Dutch active land development policies point towards a lean and mean government that moves away from risk-bearing participation and investment in urban projects and leaves this to the market. Importantly, Van der Krabben (2011b) argues that the Dutch active public land development policies can be considered as an international exception, and advocates for facilitating land development policies. In this light, it becomes highly relevant to study private sector-led urban development as a future Dutch urban development strategy. Integrative urban management approach This research is rooted in the research school of Urban Area Development within the Department of Real Estate and Housing at the Faculty of Architecture (Delft University of Technology). It is a relatively young academic domain which views urban development most profoundly as a complex management assignment (Bruil et al., 2004; Franzen et al., 2011). This academic school uses an integrative perspective with a strong practice-orientation and carries out solution-oriented design research. Here, the integration involves bridging various actor interests, spatial functions, spatial scales, academic domains, knowledge and skills, development goals, and links process with content aspects. Such a perspective does justice to complex societal processes. Therefore it provides a fruitful ground for studying urban development aimed at developing conceptual knowledge and product for science and practice. Such integrative perspective and practice-orientation forms the basis of this research and has been applied in the following manner. In order to create an understanding of the roles of public and private actors in private sector-led urban development, this research takes a management perspective based on an integrative management approach. This involves viewing management more broadly as ‘any type of direct influencing’ urban development projects, and therefore aims at bridging often separated management theories (Osborne, 2000a). Hence, an integrative management approach assists in both understanding urban development practices and projects and constructing useful conceptual tools for practitioners and academics. Integrative approaches attempt to combine a number of different elements into a more holistic management approach (Black & Porter, 2000). Importantly, it does not view the management of projects in isolation but in its entire complexity and dynamics. Therefore, our management approach combines two integrative management theories; the open systems theory (De Leeuw, 2002) and contingency theory. The former provides opportunities to study the management of a project in a structured manner. The latter emphasizes that there is no universally effective way of managing and recognizes the importance of contextual circumstances. Hence, an integrative management approach favors incorporating theories from multiple academic domains such as political science, economics, law, business administration, and organizational and management concepts. Hence, it moves away from the classical academic division between planning theory and property theory, and organization and management theories. It positions itself in between such academic domains, and aims at bridging theoretical viewpoints by following the concept of planning ánd markets (Alexander, 2001) rather than concepts such as ‘planning versus markets’, public versus private sector, and organization versus management. Also, such an integrative view values the complexity and dynamics of empirical urban development practices. More specifically, this research studies urban development projects as object, as urban areas are the focus point of spatial intervention and public-private interaction (Daamen, 2010), and thus collaboration and management. Here, public planning processes and private development processes merge with each other. Thus, our research continues to build upon the importance of studying and reflecting on empirical practices and projects (e.g. Healey, 2006). In addition to these authors, this research does so by using meaningful integrative concepts that reflect empirical realities of urban projects. Thereby, this research serves to bridge management sciences with management practices (Van Aken, 2004; Mintzberg, 2010) through iterative processes of reflecting on science and practice. Moreover, the integrative management approach applied in this research assists in filling an academic gap, namely the lack of management knowledge about public-private interaction in urban development projects. Despite the vast amount of literature on the governance of planning practices (e.g. DiGaetano & Strom, 2003), and Public-Private Partnerships (e.g. Osborne, 2000b), remarkable little knowledge exists about what shifting public-private relationships mean for day-to-day management by public and private actors in development projects. Hence, here we follow the main argument made by public administration scholar Klijn (2008) who claims that it is such direct actor influence that brings about the most significant change to the built environment. An integrative urban management model (see Figure 2.3) based on the open systems approach has been constructed which forms a conceptual representation of empirical private sectorled urban development projects. This model serves as an analytical tool to comprehend the complexity of managing such projects. In this research, several theoretical insights about publicprivate relations and roles are used to understand different contextual and organizational factors that affect the management of private sector-led urban development projects. Hence, a project context exists

This paper aims to analyse the possibilities for deploying participative arrangements in French urban projects by focusing on the potential for a shift towards a ‘negotiated project’-type model. Taking the ‘ concertation process’ deployed as part of the City of Paris’ plan to redevelop the Les Halles district between 2002 and 2010, the article sheds light on the two regulatory systems existing side by side, namely, urban project development and consultation. The article discusses a number of explanatory factors: structural aspects linked to how French public bodies are organised, the positions of actors vis-à-vis urban development practices and how these are represented, which is related to the prevalence of a model based on a process of dual delegation of power and know-how. Finally, the paper will demonstrate the key importance of a private partner in the whole decision-making process via ‘institutional consultation’ to the detriment of ‘citizen concertation’. Setting up participative arrangements does not substantially modify planning processes or decision-making systems for French urban development projects. Indeed, changes apparently at work in urban production governance processes raise questions concerning the possibility of incorporating inhabitant participation into public–private partnerships that may minimise public actors’ room for manoeuvre in terms of any dialogue with local residents. With regard to urban design research, this problem suggests a need to rethink the whole urban planning system and to look at all aspects of urban planning organisation, including the interaction between the public, civil society and private actors.

Within planning theory a new paradigm has been introduced: discursive planning. In this paper we want to elaborate how this concept can be applied to urban development projects. A discursive perspective on real estate development implies that there is a continuous debate about the content of specific real estate development projects, its meaning, its resources and its connections with urban policies. Especially the way connections are made between abstract urban policy programmes on the one hand and specific urban development projects on the other hand, is the central focus of our paper. We have selected two case studies in the Netherlands in our empirical data set: the case of 'Brainport Eindhoven' in relation to the 'High Tech Campus' and the case of 'Mainport Rotterdam' in relation to the 'Stadshavens project' (waterfront developments at former port areas). This study focused on the connections and disconnections between the development of strategic urban area development projects (so-called micro-narratives) and the cities' and regions' larger social, cultural and spatial development policies (so-called master narratives). In addition to Minzberg, Ahlstrand & Lampel (1998) we will introduce a model for 'emerging strategy'. Urban development projects are a combination of strategy and emerging developments (even coincidence) as chance events that occur within the context of the project. In the first paragraph of our paper we will introduce our research topic and outline. In the second paragraph we will describe theoretically the shift from traditional planning to deliberative and collaborative planning and we will introduce our ideas about an emerging strategy for urban development and real estate projects. In paragraph three we will explain which cases are selected and why. Based on desk research (vision documents, planning reports, notes of meetings, et cetera) and in-depth interviews with key players, we've collected al lot of empirical data which we will present in paragraph four (Brainport case) and five (Mainport case).In paragraph six we will make a comparison between the two in-depth cases studies and we will show how an emerging strategy model can be implied in the practice of urban development. In the final paragraph seven we will present our conclusions in general for theory building as well as some application for development practices in a highly complex and interdependent world of urban development projects.

Several Western urban development practices witness an increasing role of property developers in initiating, financing, and leading urban development projects. Moreover, local authorities have taken on an entrepreneurial facilitating attitude towards spatial planning. This situation is driven and strengthened by global neoliberalism and subsequent government retrenchments (Hackworth, 2002). Market-oriented planning (Adams & Tiesdell, 2010) and a focus on development projects have become commonly used planning policy implementation strategies in several countries. These forces, amongst others, resulted in the coming into being of private sector-led urban development projects, a concept introduced by Heurkens (2010). This development approach has occurred in the Netherlands since the 2000s, partly based on Anglo-Saxon development traditions in the United Kingdom [UK]. As a result, the relationship between, and roles of, public and private actors are shifting fundamentally. Hence, such new relations have resulted in public-private partnership challenges in the historically public-led Dutch development practice. Despite the vast amount of literature on the governance of Western planning practices (e.g. DiGaetano & Strom, 2003), remarkable little knowledge exists about what the shifted relationship means for the actual day-to-day management by public and private actors of urban development projects. Hence, it is such direct steering that brings about the most significant change to the built environment (Klijn, 2008). Moreover, limited knowledge is available about the project effects (e.g. collaboration effectiveness, process efficiency, product quality) of these partnership arrangements. This paper generates an understanding of the collaborative and managerial mechanisms, and development effects of private sector-led urban development projects. It does so by comparing the Dutch and UK institutional development practices, and by drawing empirical lessons from cross-case study research in both countries. In addition, it provides recommendations for a new perspective for local authorities to safeguard public interests, and for property developers to alternatively finance projects, aligning with the current social-economic context (Parkinson et al., 2009). References Adams, D. &, Tiesdell, S. (2010). Planners as market actors: Rethinking state-market relations in land and property. Planning Theory & Practice, 11(2), 187-207. DiGaetano, A., & Strom, E. (2003). Comparative urban governance: An integrated approach. Urban Affairs Review, 38(3), 356-395. Heurkens, E.W.T.M. (2010). Private sector-led urban development. Real Estate Research Quarterly, 9(2): 29-34. Klijn, E.-H. (2008). Itis the management, stupid!: About the importance of management in complex policy matters (Inaugural address). Den Haag: Lemma. Parkinson, M., Ball, M., Blake, N., & Key, T. (2009). The Credit Crunch and Regeneration: Impact and Implications. London: Department for Communities & Local Government.

Purpose: Just as the natural environment is vital for people to live in, the park and green area, which are indicators for eco-friendly development, are essential when proceeding with urban development projects. Therefore, this study reviewed focusing on the park and green area ratio in the environmental impact assessment for urban development projects. Through this, we intended to provide a comprehen-sive guideline for environmental land use planning and design for urban development or residential land development projects and to guide plans and designs based on this. Method: The analysis was based on the environmental impact assessment, which was investigated for 145 urban development projects for 18 years from 2003 to 2020. We conducted a one -way ANOVA analysis to determine the difference between the green area rate by year, the green area rate by region, the population density by region, and the park area per person by region. Post-hoc analysis was per-formed by the Scheffe test. To conduct the above statistical analysis, we used the Spss Statistics 21 sta-tistics program. Results: The number of consultations on environmental impact assessment for urban development projects by year was the highest in 2006 and 2008, with 14 cases(9.66%). The green area rate by year was as high as 25.09% in 2005, 24.88% in 2007, and 22.73% in 2009. The green area rate by region was the highest in the Gangwon area with 22.63%, followed by 20.47% in the metropolitan area, 19.59% in the Honam area, and 19.51% in the Chungcheong area. The population density by region was the high-est with 2.10(person/m2) in the metropolitan area. Next the Gangwon area was 1.99(person/m2) and the Southeast area was 1.80(person/m2). The park area per person by region was the largest in the Honam area, with 10.93m2. Conclusion: The area of parks and green spaces is seen as the minimum standard stipulated by law. However, the high green area ratio and the difference in population density by region during active ur-ban development projects are to create a pleasant residential environment. Therefore, in a place with high population density, it is necessary to establish a high standard for securing green space to create a comfortable living environment. Also, in the case of parks, the location is essential as well as the area. Since green areas on slopes excluding parks in the green area ratio are difficult to use, we insist that green areas on slopes should be reduced, and park areas should be set high to create a pleasant resi-dential environment.

The corruption perceptions index (CPI) of our country has improved. It is difficult to define in a single word what the concept and range of urban development projects are. The laws related to the return of development profits encompass <the Act on Urban Development>, <the Act on Return of Development Profits>, and <the Housing Act>. Although anti-corruption laws have a criminal law nature in terms of the form. However, since legal ethics are considered important in terms of justice and the rule of law, they belong to the area of the crime prevention law. The main concern is focused on whether they have served as check laws to strengthen publicness for project operators in urban development projects, and whether they will be able to continue this function. This study was intended to review my study conducted about one year ago regarding the return of development profits and reinforcement of publicness in the urban development projects. This study examined the history of the Act on Urban Development Projects and reviewed the content of the return of development profits pursuant to <the Act on Return of Development Profits>. At the same time, this study dealt with the issues related to the Daejangdong development projectas the subtitle of this study as well as the conjoint development. While presenting the outline and progress of the Daejangdong urban development project, this study explained how the Daejangdong urban development project has been implemented in accordance with the Act on Urban Development Projects before the revision. Then, this study discussed the contents of revision of the Act on Urban Development Projects. The project operator claimed that a huge development profit of 550.3 billion KRW was returned through the Daejangdong development project. Therefore, this study reviewed whether this claim was a law enforcement act pursuant to <the Act on Urban Development>. As a result, different from the claim made by the project operator regarding the return of enormous development profits, the development cost is the due cost that must be borne by the principal agent of the development project according to the <Act on Urban Development> and it cannot be regarded as the return of development profits. The method of supplying the developed land by private project operators obeys the Article 26, Clause 2 of <the Act on Urban Development>. However, the competitive bidding under the Article 57, Clause 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act corresponds to a binding rule. The Clause 3 is, in principle, a discretionary rule, but the proviso is the binding rule. The rules that can be supplied through a private contract (at-will contract) follow, in principle, the method of competitive bidding and drawing lots. Exceptionally, it is possible to supply the developed land based on a private contract. Considering that the method of competitive bidding, drawing lots, and private contract is a critical issue in which sharp conflicts of interest collide between the public-private interest and between private-private interests, 11 ways to reduce the room for discretionary intervention by the administrative body were established allowing the private contracts only in exceptional cases. The Daejangdong development project leaves a number of doubts about the legal basis for the private contract for the 5 lots secured by the project operator Hwacheon Daeyu through a private contract. This study dealt with the “Legal review of anti-corruption in the Daejang-dong development project.”As a jurist, I intended to approach matters related to legal principles.

Privatisation of the Production of Public Space

The literature on large-scale urban development projects often primarily addresses drastic failures and their underlying causes. Recently, however, success factors have also received increasing attention. From both perspectives, management approaches, participation logics and political strategies are prominent topics in this context. However, the symbolic dimension of large urban development projects is rarely considered. This is somewhat surprising, as symbolic meaning is considered key to urban development in many contexts. We explore this dimension with two cases of urban entrepreneurial development projects, the Novartis Campus in Basel (Switzerland) and the Siemens Campus in Erlangen (Germany). Our empirical study relies on thematic press analyses. We reflect on the postulate that a “fit” between urban symbolism and societal expectations is a crucial determinant of smooth implementation in large-scale urban development projects in company towns. In both case studies, urban integration, architecture and design are of great relevance. These “soft” factors in planning and implementation suggest that the outcomes are not solely dependent on technical professionalism. Instead, the appropriate symbolism within the urban context and the associated project investment emerge as critical factors.

Contractual agreements are becoming increasingly important for city governments seeking to manage urban development. Contractual governance involves direct relations between the local state and different public and private actors and citizens. Although abundant literature exists on public–private partnerships related to urban development projects, agreements made between citizens, interest organizations and market parties, such as Community Benefits Agreements remain under-explored and under-theorized. While it may seem that the state is absent from contemporary forms of contractual governance, such agreements remain highly intertwined with government policies. The central aim of this paper is to better conceptualize Community Benefits Agreement practices in order to build understanding of how contractual governance caters for direct end-user involvement in urban development, and to yield insights into its potential as to render development processes more inclusive. Based on academic literature in planning and law, expert interviews and several case studies in New York City, this paper conceptualizes end-user involvement in urban development projects and innovates within urban planning and governance theory through the use of two new concepts—project collectivity and the image of a fourth chair.

Rooted in Pestoff’s third-sector organisation and undergirded by extensive empirical research, this paper considers how different public, private and civic actors interact and cogovern urban development projects. Public actors do not necessarily forego on value generation and capture despite public, private and civic partnerships frequently being analysed in terms of a rise in private values at the expense of public values. In fact, the article finds that differences in goals and priorities among public, private and civic actors may lead to differences in ownership and organisational roles without infringing on the public actors’ ability to generate and capture value.

Sustainable urban development is fundamental to future generations as it determines the sustainability of cities and urban infrastructures. The project considers sustainable management of ongoing urban development in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. Urban areas are the future for humanity; therefore, sustainable measures must be taken to deliver such projects. The strategy is a convoluted phenomenon that is dependent on several other intricate developmental approaches like urban renewal and urban regeneration. The strategies are centred on appropriate resource utilisation to benefit critical functional elements of urban infrastructures like transport, housing, health services, water supply, roads and education. The advocacy is that holistic sustainability principles are integrated into designing, planning, executing and managing urban development projects. The approach will significantly reduce the impact of urban decay and unsustainable urban development, which is a common feature across African cities. This research was aimed at developing a sustainability framework for the Greater Port Harcourt City Development project in Rivers State, Nigeria. To achieve this aim; the objectives were to investigate, identify and examine the factors hindering the sustainability of the projects. The research strategy adopted was qualitative; data was derived from ‘semi-structured interviews with 52 stakeholders, non-participant observations of project sites, and document analyses of project reports. Thematic analysis was used to categorise and constructively interpret the data, and they emerged with different themes. The findings of the study revealed 16 themes that comprise of varied multi-level stakeholders’ issues; including lack of communication and stakeholder’s consultation, political instability, lack of continuity in government, lack of standardised project design and initiative, social deprivation and many others. The themes were critically analysed, and it enabled the development of an adaptable model for the urban development project. Successful application of the Sustainable Urban Development Model will ensure the viability of the project, incorporate stakeholders’ perspectives at each phase, and mandate compulsory adoption of project management methodologies in urban development projects. These will foster sustainability in the Greater Port Harcourt City Development, and other similar projects in Africa.

Despite the rapid social and informal-urban growth which causes a lot of problems in urban and rural settlements in Egypt, the lack of both stakeholders’ coordination and genuine public participation cause additional issues. Nowadays, many cities in Egypt, including the capital, suffer from the lack of real public participation in the decision-making of urban projects which results in conflicts among the government, the public and even experts opposing these decisions. All over the world, many participation models have been adopted in urban planning and development projects with different levels and forms of public participation. Where public participation is a requisite, not a choice, the debate is how to develop the participation models using the potentials of ICT's and smartphones to ensure inclusiveness in participation processes. At the Covid-19 pandemic, most of the activities have been shifted to online platforms. This shift has made an urgent demand for complete digital methods of public participation which -in addition- supports the Egyptian government vision for digitalizing services. In this regard, the research opens the door for applying digital public participation in urban development projects that reflects the public’s needs and preferences, taking the advantages of the new technologies and considering the precautionary measures and social distancing in the age of covid-19. The paper explores the state-of-the-art of current online public engagement tools used in Egypt, the potentials and challenges of applying digital public participation and recommends guidelines for implementation based on successful case studies and what fits in the local context

Improving the climate resilience of urban areas critically depends on the integration of climate adaptation measures, i.e. mainstreaming, into regular construction practices. As research has largely focused on public sector adaptation, the mainstreaming of adaptation into private sector projects remains poorly understood. The aims of this study are twofold. First, we examine what drives private developers and investors to mainstream adaptation into large-scale urban development projects. Second, we explore what policy instruments municipalities can employ to stimulate private sector mainstreaming. Our theoretical lens combines insights from the literature on mainstreaming, sustainable building drivers and policy instruments. These concepts are used to guide our analysis of four urban development projects and an interview study in the Netherlands, a densely populated delta country which is rather vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Our results show that private developers and investors seldom explicitly include adaptation measures into their development projects. An important impediment is the perceived absence of direct monetary benefits. If adaptation measures are implemented, they are often realized as a side-effect of creating a high-quality living environment or because private actors expect other professional benefits, such as corporate image enhancement or development of know-how. To stimulate private sector mainstreaming, Dutch municipalities already use a mix of policy instruments that might be a source of inspiration for other countries. Yet, especially the way in which enforcement and incentives are applied is not always effective. Key policy insights Despite the private sector’s growing awareness about the need for and importance of climate change adaptation in the Netherlands, adaptation is still seldom explicitly included in large-scale urban development projects. Municipalities should invest in policy instruments that target consumers. Communication, education and incentives can be used to raise consumer awareness and consequently demand for climate-adaptive properties. Municipalities should collaborate with the private sector to develop clear, uniform and feasible adaptation requirements. Municipalities should actively participate in urban development projects, i.e. co-developing with the private sector. This way, private sector drivers and policy instruments can strengthen each other to pave the way for future-proof and climate-resilient urban environments.