Abstract
The Importance of Including the Value of Soil in Metropolitan Planning Strategies
Highlights
Cities development policies have often focused on goals related to the increase of urban values [1], in terms of quality, and in the economic and real estate component, expressing themselves through a variety of tools and strategies
A possible solution to the political problem of reorganizing metropolitan systems in efficient ways is choosing between multiple policies, each linked to a specific interest and ranging within two opposite approaches, implying a clear and transparent assessment of the financial benefits distribution and the relationship between community and individual values [4, 5]
The issues met by urban and metropolitan planning sciences, in general, in the last two decades needs new tools and applications [15]. The solution to this long-standing problem is to be found, for many authors, in the control of urban rent, above all, using equitable tools to redistribute the economic surplus given by the decision on the ‘ius aedificandi’, by unleashing its distribution from the mere spatial allocation, to adopt innovative answers in the metropolitan planning, considering the interests involved in the relevant decisions
Summary
Cities development policies have often focused on goals related to the increase of urban values [1], in terms of quality (of life and environment), and in the economic and real estate component, expressing themselves through a variety of tools and strategies. The debate has come to several conclusions on this issue in recent years, which infer the need for all components, that enjoy the benefits of urban development, to contribute to the development of cities [12]: this is one of the most innovative, but limiting outcomes, already starting from some of the most recent case studies in 1980s and 1990s In this context, there were several attempts to understand the relationship between land rent and competitive advantage in positional terms, which led to the creation of a sequence of theories to be applied to urban development, without considering political or philosophical positions on the fairness of involving private entities in the public city construction, which is part of a process in which decision-makers can determine the so called ‘ius aedificandi’ and the rebalancing of interests for a long term sustainable development. The solution to this long-standing problem is to be found, for many authors, in the control of urban rent, above all, using equitable tools to redistribute the economic surplus given by the decision on the ‘ius aedificandi’, by unleashing its distribution from the mere spatial allocation, to adopt innovative answers in the metropolitan planning, considering the interests involved in the relevant decisions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
