Changing spatial planning systems and the role of the regional government level; Comparing the Netherlands, Flanders and England



Figure 1: Typology of scales of spatial planning in EU-countries

Source: (Tewdwr-Jones et al., 2000) in: Janin Rivolin and Faludi (2005)

to the citizen and that constant checks are made as to whether action at Community level is
justified in the light of the possibilities available at national, regional or local level.
Specifically, it is the principle whereby the Union does not take action (except in the areas
which fall within its exclusive competence) unless it is more effective than action taken at
national, regional or local level. It is closely bound up with the principles of proportionality
and necessity, which require that any action by the Union should not go beyond what is
necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaty” (EU, 2005).

The subsidiarity principle also applies to the so-called ‘Nimby’ projects (Not-in-my-
backyard). These are projects with a supralocal level of service involvement, but which a
local government authority would prefer not to have developed within its boundaries.
Examples are prisons, waste-disposal plants or water purification plants. According to the
subsidiarity principle, the decision concerning the location of this sort of facility should be
taken at the supralocal scale level.

Previously, particular attention was paid in the national planning systems to competences and
instruments for the national and local government authorities, and in some systems also for
the regional government. A consistent application of the subsidiarity principle leads to the
stretching of the number of government levels, the shifting of competences between these
levels, and new demands on the functioning of government authorities.

4. Role of regional government in three countries

In the above we have already indicated that, through changes in the governmental and societal
field of force, there is a need for and evidence of a new multi-level governance model. In this
article we concentrate our attention on one of these government levels: the region. We analyse
the recent changes in the spatial planning systems of three West-European countries: the
Netherlands, Great Britain, and Belgium. In Great Britain, we restrict ourselves to England
and in Belgium, to Flanders.



More intriguing information

1. Bridging Micro- and Macro-Analyses of the EU Sugar Program: Methods and Insights
2. ALTERNATIVE TRADE POLICIES
3. The name is absent
4. Informal Labour and Credit Markets: A Survey.
5. Macro-regional evaluation of the Structural Funds using the HERMIN modelling framework
6. New issues in Indian macro policy.
7. EMU's Decentralized System of Fiscal Policy
8. The Role of Evidence in Establishing Trust in Repositories
9. The resources and strategies that 10-11 year old boys use to construct masculinities in the school setting
10. Regulation of the Electricity Industry in Bolivia: Its Impact on Access to the Poor, Prices and Quality
11. THE CO-EVOLUTION OF MATTER AND CONSCIOUSNESS1
12. Telecommuting and environmental policy - lessons from the Ecommute program
13. Dual Track Reforms: With and Without Losers
14. How do investors' expectations drive asset prices?
15. The name is absent
16. Optimal Taxation of Capital Income in Models with Endogenous Fertility
17. Do Decision Makers' Debt-risk Attitudes Affect the Agency Costs of Debt?
18. Inflation Targeting and Nonlinear Policy Rules: The Case of Asymmetric Preferences (new title: The Fed's monetary policy rule and U.S. inflation: The case of asymmetric preferences)
19. Non-farm businesses local economic integration level: the case of six Portuguese small and medium-sized Markettowns• - a sector approach
20. Cross-Country Evidence on the Link between the Level of Infrastructure and Capital Inflows