Barriers to Growth Management: Local Challenges Implementing the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
To combat urban sprawl and its negative effects on ecosystem services and human health, regional growth management and containment policies have been used with increased frequency to manage urban growth. Yet, local implementation of regional growth management planning policies across North America has had mixed success, often resulting in a mismatch between growth management planning objectives and the urban development reality. This research explores the reasons for the apparent mismatch by examining how barriers to local implementation are expressed, reinforced and perpetuated to prevent transformative change. \n \nUsing Ontario’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe as a case study, the dissertation examines the barriers to implementation through a review of local contextual information and the perspectives of those tasked with implementing the Plan within three case study regions of the Greater Golden Horseshoe: Waterloo, Simcoe and Peterborough. A relational model of barriers reported in the literature is developed and tested against the barriers described by local planners, developers, the media, planning documents, and locally relevant academic literature and used to frame comparisons across case studies. Variations among the case studies are interpreted in light of the model using a conceptual framework that conceives barriers as institutions embedded within a hierarchical culture of planning. \n \nCase study results reveal that barriers to local implementation vary across regions. This variation can be attributed to particular local contextual pressures and differences in local planning environments that influence how broader, societal barriers are understood, justified, managed and reinforced. Planning environments in the more rural and exurban case studies regions of Simcoe and Peterborough demonstrated similar belief systems, values and planning goals that obstructed local efforts to manage growth. These same regions faced particular growth and economic pressures that reinforced existing value systems and reduced the range of perceived planning solutions and approaches to growth management. In contrast, planning environments in the more urban Waterloo case study region, as well as urban single tier municipalities within the rural case study regions, demonstrated planning environments that were more open to innovative and assertive planning approaches to manage growth. \n \nThis research demonstrates how the interactions between local context and planning environments shape the interpretation and implementation of regional growth management plans. The research findings provide focal points for further research on growth management implementation by highlighting barriers and patterns of reinforcement that are less visible and rarely acknowledged in planning practice. As well, this research highlights the need for planning approaches that recognize the important role of the local planning environments in advancing growth management objectives. Failure to recognize and address the underlying barriers and their interdependencies may result in the development of regional growth management plans that fail to achieve their objectives.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».