As a first statistical study of a planning authority's reasons for rejecting development proposals, this study examines hydraulic and transport engineering reasons adopted by the Town Planning Board for dismissing development applications for ‘small house’ use in Green Belt and Agriculture Zones in Hong Kong to verify the hypothesis that both hydraulic and traffic matters are not zoning-class dependent. The findings, from contingency table analysis of 127 sets of official nonaggregate planning data over a period of more than eight years, appear to affirm the supposition that engineering reasoning has not been swayed by nontechnical planning considerations in either the Green Belt or Agriculture Zones. However, a textual analysis of the objections from all available government records suggests that policy concerns broader than technical considerations were in fact decisive. The study sheds light on the mode of use of technocratic considerations in public policy decision making and articulates with the concept of zone separation based on the Coase theorem.
BoothP, 2002, “From property rights to public control: the quest for the public interest in the control of urban development”Town Planning Review73153–170
3.
BrothertonD I, 1992, “On the quantity and quality of planning applications”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design19337–357
4.
BuchananC, 1963Traffic in Towns: A Study of the Long Term Problems of Traffic in Urban Areas Reports of the Steering Group and Working Group appointed by the Minister of Transport (HMSO, London)
5.
ChauK WLaiL W C, 2004, “Planned conversion of rural land: a case study of planning applications for housing and open storage uses in agriculture zones”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31863–878
6.
EllisG, 2004, “Discourses of objections: towards an understanding of third-party rights in planning”Environment and Planning A361549–1570
7.
EvanB, 1993, “Why we no longer need a town planning profession”Planning Practice and Research89–15
8.
JimC Y, 1996, “Proliferation of non-conforming land use in the agriculture envelope of urban Hong Kong”Environmental Management20461–474
9.
LaiL W C, 2000a, “Housing ‘indigenous villagers’ in a modern society: an examination of the Hong Kong ‘small house’ policy”Third World Planning Review22207–230
10.
LaiL W C, 2000bTown Planning in Hong Kong: A Review of Planning Appeal Decisions (Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong)
11.
LaiL W C, 2003Town Planning in Hong Kong: A Review of Planning Appeal Decisions 1997–2001 (Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong)
12.
LaiL W CFongK, 2000Town Planning Practice: Context, Procedures and Statistics (Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong)
13.
LaiL W CHoD C W, 2009A Study of the Hong Kong Development Approval Process: The Road to Sustainable Development? (Bauhinia Foundation Research Centre, Hong Kong)
14.
LaiL W CHoW K O, 2001a, “Zone separation: a probit analysis of Hong Kong planning application statistics”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28923–932
15.
LaiL W CHoW K O, 2001b, “Small is beautiful: a probit analysis of development control of small houses in Hong Kong”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28611–622
16.
LaiL W CHoW K O, 2001c, “Low-rise residential developments in green belts: a Hong Kong empirical study of planing applications”Planning Practice and Research16321–335
17.
LaiL W CHoW K O, 2002, “Planning for open storage of containers in a major international container trade centre: an analysis of Hong Kong development control statistics using probit modelling”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design29571–587
18.
LaiL W CHungC W Y, 2008, “The inner logic of the Coase Theorem and a Coasian planning research agenda”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design35207–226
19.
LaiL W CYungPLiR Y MHoD C W, 2007, “The private supply of and public demand for planning: compliance with planning conditions in the absence of direct statutory enforcement measures”Planning Policy and Research22535–557
20.
LaiL W CWongS KHoE C KChauK W, 2008, “Time is of the essence? An empirical application of the corollary of the Coase Theorem”Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies2034–51
21.
LevinD, 1983, “Engineering philosophy: the third culture?”Leonardo16127–132
22.
McLoughlinJ B, 1973Urban and Regional Planning: A Systems Approach (Faber and Faber, London)
23.
McLoughlinJ B, 1985, “The systems approach to planning: a critique”, Working Paper, Centre of Urban Studies and Urban Planning, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
24.
MeiksinsP, 1988, “The ‘revolt of the engineers’ reconsidered”Technology and Culture29219–246
25.
MitchamC, 2009, “A historico-ethical perspective on engineering education: from use and convenience to policy engagement”Engineering Studies135–53
26.
MoroniS, 2004, “Towards a reconstruction of the public interest criticism”Planning Theory3151–171
27.
PenningtonM, 2000Planning and the Political Market: Public Choice and the Politics of Government Failure (Athlone Press, London)
28.
PenningtonM, 2008, “Classical liberalism and ecological rationality: the case for polycentric environmental law”Environmental Politics17431–448
29.
PennoniC R, 1983, “Are we assuming the demise of engineering as a profession?”Civil Engineering Magazine5328
30.
PennoniC R, 1992, “Visioning: the future of civil engineering”Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice118221–233
31.
PognerK, 2003, “Writing and interacting in the discourse community of engineering”Journal of Pragmatics35855–867
32.
PoultonM C, 1997, “Externalities, transaction costs, public choice and the appeal of zoning—a response to Lai Wai Chung and Sorenson”Town Planning Review6881–92
33.
PoxonJ, 2001, “Shaping the planning profession of the future: the role of planning education”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28563–580
34.
SchumpeterJ, 1947Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (Allen and Unwin, London)
35.
TangB SChoyL H T, 2000, “Modelling planning control decisions: a logistic regression analysis on office development applications in urban Kowloon, Hong Kong”Cities17219–225
36.
TangB TWongS WLeeA K W, 2005, “Green belt, countryside conservation and local politics: a Hong Kong case study”Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies17230–247
37.
TangB SWongS WLeeA K W, 2007, “Green belt in a compact city: a zone for conservation or transition?”Landscape and Urban Planning79358–373
38.
WatsonN, 2005, “The management of British rivers”, in Rivers and the British Landscape Eds OwenSPooleyCFolkardAParkCClarkGWatsonN (Carnegie Publishing, Lancaster) pp 169–194
39.
WellerPFeldmanAPurdamK, 2001, “Religious discrimination in England and Wales”, Research Study 220, Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, London
40.
WillisK G, 1995, “Judging development control decisions”Urban Studies321065–1079
41.
WoodheadRBallFLiX, 2004, “Silk flowers are just as artificial as plastic ones: value engineering in the university context”European Journal of Engineering Education29333–341
