Sharing the unearned increment: Divergent Outcomes in Toronto and São Paulo |
| |
| Institution: | 1. School of Public Administration and Policy, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, PR China;2. Laboratory for Systems Ecology and Sustainability Science, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, PR China;3. School of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, PR China;4. School of Information Resource Management, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, PR China;5. Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR;6. State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, PR China;7. School of Applied Economics, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, PR China;1. School of Economics, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, PR China;2. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, PR China;3. Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, PR China;4. Department of Science and Technology, Parthenope University of Naples, Centro Direzionale, Isola C4, 80143, Naples, Italy;5. School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, PR China;1. Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education – UiT – the Arctic University of Norway;2. Faculty of Bioscience, Fisheries and Economy, UiT – the Arctic University of Norway, Norway;3. Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education – UiT – the Arctic University of Norway;4. Faculty of Bioscience, Fisheries and Economy, UiT – the Arctic University of Norway, Norway;1. East-West Center, Honolulu, HI, United States;2. Department of Geography, UC Santa Barbara, United States;3. University of Colorado, Population Program and Geography Department, United States;4. University of Florida, Department of Geography and the Emerging Pathogens Institute, United States;1. Department of Economics and Statistics “Cognetti de Martiis”, University of Turin, Italy;2. Department of Agriculture, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, Italy;3. Research Centre for Rural Development of Hilly Areas, University of Turin, Italy |
| |
| Abstract: | Land value capture (LVC) refers to the public sector’s recovery of part or all of the land value increments (‘unearned’ income) generated by actions other than the landowner’s direct investment, including public investments in infrastructure or administrative changes in land use norms and regulations. LVC is increasingly used around the world as a tool to raise funds for urban development. This paper analyzes two LVC tools, one used in Toronto and the other in São Paulo, to show how different approaches produce divergent outcomes in practice. Expert interviews and an analysis of secondary quantitative data show that São Paulo’s formula-led approach is bureaucratized, compared with Toronto’s politicized process and that benefits from Toronto’s Section 37 are primarily located in the central wealthier neighbourhoods, while in São Paulo benefits are more dispersed. The comparison between the two cases highlights different approaches that reflect divergent values, rationales, socio-economic realities and political cultures which ultimately produce varied outcomes. The contrasting tools’ distributional and equity outcomes in Toronto and São Paulo raise questions about how cities can best share the benefits of urbanization to ensure equity and justice for all city residents. |
| |
| Keywords: | Land value capture Development rights Equity Justice |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
