Conclusion

Disentangling the Debate
  • Judith Innes de Neufville

Abstract

Regardless of the tasks authors were assigned for this book, their discussions reflect persistent themes and controversies. Sometimes their positions are explicit and sometimes merely implied, but important disagreements divide authors from one another and group them in ways that are unexpected. Attitudes toward such basic issues as land markets, property rights, governmental responsibility, public participation, and social justice differentiate from one another those who share environmental goals and unite those whose focus is economic development with those who care most about ecological systems.

Keywords

Income Assure Stake Monopoly 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

  1. Klosterman, Richard E. “A Public Interest Criterion.” Journal of the American Planning Association 46 (1980): 323–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Judith Innes de Neufville
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of City and Regional PlanningUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations