Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
solid waste management 5 (A large number of goals can underlie the…
solid waste management 5
-
-
State level regulation and intervention is largely a consequence of local level government failures. Local zoning practices are often accused of artificially generating higher housing prices.
On the other hand, state actions on growth management issues are resisted by local authorities and local interests on grounds that these actions reduce their autonomy and choice in dealing with growth and forces developers to build in certain areas (Schiffman, 1989)
Environmental concerns, slow growth in fast growing areas, control of urban sprawl, traffic congestion, pollution, increased crime, and decreased quality of life became some of the stated or unstated goals of growth management policy.
The
This shift in state- local relationships was characterized by expanded goals in growth management. Besides environmental protection, growth management legislation addressed economic development, infrastructure, and quality of life goals (Bollens, 1992).
The growth management plans resulting from this second wave can be classified in two groups: conjoint planning and cooperative planning
cooperative planning is a form of bottom-up decision-making and
implementation. Consistency with state goals and standards is stimulated by incentives to local governments such as state funding, technical assistance, and the concession of local discretionary powers (Bollens, 1992).
The social class hypothesis argues that individuals with higher income and educational attainment are more likely to support growth controls
jurisdictions with higher per capita personal income and educational attainment levels are more likely to commit to land use control policies
The first set includes developers, land speculators, builders, and mortgage financiers who generally oppose growth control/management policies8
I expect race to be an important predictor of the presence of growth controls based on two alternative hypotheses. States and localities with larger percentage of minorities may have less growth controls in place because minorities are more likely to voice their concerns against exclusion through zoning or population caps. In addition, growth controls pose difficulties in terms of affordable housing by artificially imposing constraints on the supply side which are a burden upon minorities more than upon whites.
At the state level, I expect a positive relationship between minority population and state growth management legislation.
Because growth management legislation requires commitments of time and agenda space
as well as technical expertise, I expect that more professional legislatures will adopt this type of growth management laws more than less professional ones.
leading us to expect that states with more judicial decisions concerning growth management are also more likely to have comprehensive growth management legislation.
state growth management spending and the presence of growth management legislation are likely positively correlated.
-