Using Assisted Negotiation to Settle Land Use Disputes: A Guidebook for Public Officials, by Lawrence Susskind and the Consensus Building Institute.
Cambridge, MA: The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 1999. 26 pages. $12.00 (paperback).

Mediating Land Use Disputes: Pros and Cons, by Lawrence Susskind, Mieke van der Wansem, and Armand Cicciarelli.
Cambridge, MA: The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 1999. 40 pages. $14.00 (paperback).

Reviewed by Ric Richardson
Associate Dean
School of Architecture and Planning
University of New Mexico

The companion publications Using Assisted Negotiation to Settle Land Use Disputes: A Guidebook for Public Officials by Lawrence Susskind and the Consensus Building Institute and Mediating Land Use Disputes: Pros and Cons by Lawrence Susskind, Mieke van der Wansem, and Armand Cicciarelli offer insight and advice to distinct audiences concerned with land use controversies in the United States. The reports respond to a growing national interest in developing more effective ways to address land use controversies and explore the degree to which consensus building brings benefits over traditional public decision-making methods. Both publications are based on the results of a national study of the outcomes of using mediation and facilitation to address land use disputes.

Although similar, the guidebooks are aimed at different audiences. The first, Using Assisted Negotiation to Settle Land Use Disputes: A Guidebook for Public Officials, is useful to local land use officials who may be considering the use of a consensus building process that may involve mediation of a land use dispute. The second, Mediating Land Use Disputes: Pros and Cons, is useful for planning professionals, land use practitioners, and educators who are already familiar with consensus building and are interested in learning more about mediating land use disputes.

Both guidebooks provide an overview of consensus building methods and present the analysis of a series of case studies identified through national research. The guidebooks provide evidence that consensual approaches to land use decisions are likely to result in stable, creative outcomes that meet the needs of the stakeholders. From the perspective of participants in the case studies, the research shows that mediation and other assisted negotiation result in more efficient use of resources, build awareness of the underlying political and economic issues, and increase understanding and acceptance of technical and scientific information.

Moreover, the guidebooks assert that consensual approaches raise the level of confidence in local government officials and help to empower disadvantaged groups. The reports also address critics’ arguments that consensus building is neither faster than present administrative processes nor less expensive than litigation. The reports counter arguments that mediation does not overcome fundamental competition among the key actors and that mediated solutions to land use conflicts add marginal value for the participants over the outcomes of the traditional process.

The reports are based on research carried out by the Consensus Building Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and the Institute for Policy Research and Implementation at the Graduate School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado, Denver. Funded by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, the analyses were based on interviews of more than 400 participants in 100 cases scattered across the country. The cases were drawn from a sample of 147 successes and failures identified by 25 of the nation’s leading land use mediation practitioners. Two-thirds of the 100 cases were considered by the participants to be successfully resolved, and one-third unsuccessful. The cases and interviews were stratified to represent all regions of the country as well as type of land use dispute.

Eight in-depth case studies supplemented the research findings. These cases illuminate six types of disputes in different regions of the country. The cases focus on difficulties with comprehensive planning, controversies over development and growth, conflicts about environmental cleanup, disagreements about siting facilities, disputes over transportation and other public infrastructure, and natural resource management disputes.

The guidebook, Using Assisted Negotiation to Settle Land Use Disputes, is useful for public officials seeking an introduction to the methods and outcomes of consensus building processes. While it summarizes the outcomes of the national study, the guidebook offers detailed advice about the benefits of using assisted negotiations and suggests ways to select qualified mediators. The guidebook outlines the preparations required to undertake a consensus building process and identifies the key procedural steps in assessing a conflict. The guide also highlights the typical actions that will take place in three phases of an assisted negotiated process: staging the prenegotiations, the negotiation process, and postnegotiation activities.

An accessible format provides the reader with clear answers to questions about the practical and legal risks in using consensus building, as well as guidance on preparing and implementing a consensus process. Local officials may use the guidebook to help initiate a consensual process and to gain an understanding of the land use mediation processes. Five case studies provide examples of opportunities, obstacles, and problem-solving strategies, and the guidbook lists thirty-five nationwide organizations that provide assistance in dispute resolution.

Mediating Land Use Disputes: Pros and Cons is aimed at planning practitioners, professional land use planners, and land use planning instructors. The report describes the history of transitions in land use planning practice by comparing technocratic and advocacy planning models with the emerging mediation model. In defining land use mediation, the report outlines five essential steps for land use mediation: (1) convening the relevant stakeholders, (2) clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the participants and the mediator, (3) deliberating and negotiating the issues in the dispute, (4) developing and using objective criteria to judge land use decisions, and (5) endorsing and implementing agreements.

The report reviews the logic of consensus building used by proponents including avoiding litigation, instituting ways of encouraging better communication, developing options for mutual gain, building trust, and dispelling cynicism. The report also explores key criticisms, including the assertion that consensus building is neither faster nor more efficient than traditional methods and that the outcomes may result in solutions that seek the lowest common denominator. Critics of consensual processes also maintain that mediation lacks a code of ethics and that many disputes end in litigation despite a mediated process.

Unlike other recent guidebooks about mediation and consensus building, both of these reports provide the research results and insights from a participant’s point of view. Analysis of the case studies centers on the attitudes of the participants in response to twenty-five questions that address satisfaction of the stakeholders, resolution of underlying issues, relationship building, perceptions of the time and financial costs, and the role of the mediator. The report summarizes the in-depth case studies to illuminate success stories as well as describes procedural and substantive obstacles perceived by the participants.

More than 80 percent of the participants (not including mediators) view assisted negotiation positively. Moreover, almost 90 percent said that the process was creative, producing the best possible options and solutions for all parties. Participants also noted that even where there was no agreement, relationships improved with a better understanding of the underlying issues. As stakeholder interests were clarified, the participants gained insight into key issues and motivations of traditional adversaries and opponents. Where agreements had been reached, more than 80 percent of the participants believed that their own interests as well as others’ in the dispute were well served. A surprisingly large number of the participants felt the settlements were cost-efficient and could not have been achieved without the assistance of a mediator. Of the participants, 81 percent believed that the process of arriving at a mediated agreement was less costly than traditional processes, and 85 percent believed that the mediator was crucial or important in achieving the agreements.

Like other process guidebooks, both reports outline the processes used in mediating disputes and building consensus and give guidance to those considering how and when to use mediation. The strength of these guidebooks lies in the clear and accessible way the data, outcomes, and recommendations are provided for the reader. Local officials, as well as practitioners and educators, will find the information understandable and easy to interpret. The research provides powerful insight into the outcomes of mediation and the perceptions of people involved in the disputes. The drawback, especially in Mediating Land Use Disputes: Pros and Cons, is in the relative lack of depth in the cases studies. Researchers and scholars may want more from the rich interview data and analyses of the in-depth cases.

In summary, Using Assisted Negotiation to Settle Land Use Disputes: A Guidebook for Public Officials and Mediating Land Use Disputes: Pros and Cons add to our understanding of the growing practice in consensus building and land use mediation. The guidebooks provide clear guidance for elected officials and substantial insight for planners and land use practitioners. The guidebooks add much needed clarity about alternative ways to make resource allocation decisions and resolve land use disputes in the United States.

Author’s Note: Information from the studies may be found at the following Web sites: The Consensus Building Institute, www.cbi-web.org; the Institute for Policy Research and Implementation, www.cudenver.edu/public/gspa; and the Lincoln Institute for Land Policy, www.lincolninst.edu. Related dispute resolution Web sites listed in the reports include the American Bar Association, section on Dispute Resolution, www.abnet.org/dispute; the International Association for Public Participation, www.pin.org; the Mediation Information and Research Center (MIRC), www.mediate.com; the Policy Consensus Initiative, www.agree.com; the Program on Negotiation, Harvard Law School, www.pon.org; and the Society for Professional in Dispute Resolution, www.spider.org.

A History of Domestic Space: Privacy and the Canadian Home, by Peter Ward.
Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press. 1999. 240 pages. $39.95 (Canadian) (hardback).

Reviewed by Jacqueline Leavitt
Professor
Department of Urban Planning
School of Public Policy
University of California at Los Angeles

The 49th parallel, the Canadian scholar W. H. New (1998) writes, “At once joins and divides two nation states, permits contact, influence, choice, trade (hypothetically in two directions) and difference as well” (p. 6). Crossing from the United States into Canada, the traveler encounters the prevalence of metric units and greater usage of British spelling. Researchers discover that official Canadian federal government reports are published in English and French. More fundamental, as New writes, Canadians see themselves as “ ‘not European’ but also as ‘not American’ ” (p. 43). Interpreting the language of each country’s constitution, New categorizes Canada as more “community-centered,” and the United States as committed to “unfettered individualism”; the former is considered more tolerant of the mosaics of culture, and the latter is characterized as a “melting pot.” Such variations might suggest that the history of domestic spaces is different on either side of the 49th parallel. After all, Canadian housing policy, at least until 1992, was more sympathetic than the United States toward subsidizing cooperative housing (Heskin and Leavitt 1995; Dreier and Hulchanski 1993). Mindful of the distinctions between the two countries, I longed to find out more—but at least in the realm of domestic architecture, Peter Ward’s book does not support a separatist history.

Ward writes that after the turn of the twentieth century, the growing influence on Canadian design came from America. Before that, both countries reflected an overwhelming British and, in some parts, French influence. None of this is surprising, given that the majority of the nonindigenous Canadian population lives in close contact with the United States in a 320 kilometer band along the 8,890 kilometer border. In 1990, 62 percent of all Canadians clustered in the two provinces of Ontario and Quebec (Dreier and Hulchanski 1993; Jenson 1993, 109).

Ward is strongest in highlighting three aspects about the development of domestic design: household size shrank as house size increased; technological changes such as the flush toilet, central heating, and electric lighting directly influenced the concept and usage of personal space; and private and public institutions such as major railroads, the military, and municipal governments were the earliest town planners. Ward’s work might be gainfully read as a companion piece to Merritt Ierley’s (1999) book about housing in the United States. Ierley concludes that the homes of 1800 were not markedly different from the colonial period. A century later, the transformation was such that “it was not uncommon to find central heat, hot and cold running water, kitchen range, icebox, bathtub, water closet (toilet), electric lights, and electric fans” (p. 12). Ward and Ierley both report that wealthier residents living in cities were far more likely to be the first to attain either comfort or privacy.

On privacy and its relation to the evolution of domestic design, Ward’s observations are limited. Of the many dimensions of privacy—collecting and handling personal data; securing mail, telephones, and e-mail; and protecting the individual body—Ward’s book addresses territorial privacy in the house and in settlements. That design elements may influence behavior and reflect changing patterns in society is found in the work of Edward T. Hall, who wrote that “expectations of privacy did not bring about corridors; public corridors made a place for expectations of privacy and brought about a change in domestic architecture” (quoted in Peters 1998). Ward’s and Ireley’s emphasis on technology helps us visualize the liberation of households who no longer had to huddle around a candle or a fireplace for light and heat, who were able to disperse to separate parts of the house. However, Ward does not expand very much on the variations within privacy or the ways in which privacy serves different purposes. For example, Jon Lang (1987) describes dimensions of privacy as solitude, intimacy, anonymity, and/or reserve, while the purposes served may provide for personal autonomy, allow release of emotions, help self-evaluation, and protect communication. Ward’s discussion is about the shift from shared space to personal seclusion and “spaces we can claim for ourselves: my bedroom, my corner, my study.” Similarly, he notes that “our homes stand ever more aloof from outsiders: kin, friends, and strangers alike, even in densely built cities. They, too, are much more private places than Canadian dwellings once were” (p. 154).

Where Ward expands on gender and the relation to public and private space he raises provocative points, partly because of omissions in his observations. Ward describes the evolution of the kitchen—the only room that may have had “an especially important impact on women”—but argues that as the kitchen “shrank and became a more specialized space, the focus of family life moved elsewhere in the home” (p. 77). This process “tended to isolate the housewife from the rest of the household.” In the closing pages, Ward summarizes a few ideas about gender, highlighting differences among those who theorize with a gender lens (p. 157). He states that a consensus does not exist about “who held authority or responsibility in any one part of the dwelling” or whether “superior and inferior zones” reinforce women’s subordinate status. Yet, Ward finds persuasive the argument that “the entire house is generally seen as a woman’s responsibility and thus is her place, even when men are present.” Ward concludes from all this that gender “doesn’t shed much light on the relations between privacy and domesticity,” that other than the “possible exception of the kitchen, there never have been parts of the Canadian dwelling that one sex could claim as its own” (p. 157). He sums up with the concept that Canadian men and women “have always shared all parts of the house, no matter whose space it might seem to be.” These conclusions seem premature.

Privacy within today’s house—on both sides of the 49th parallel—may not be possible for certain classes, regardless of advances in technology. And gender does shed light on this. Pat Armstrong (1998, 137-38), also a Canadian scholar, points out that the reduction of state services means not only a loss of jobs for women but “increasing pressure on women to do the job as unpaid workers in the home. The new technologies and techniques introduced in the market have not eliminated all the necessary labour.“ Armstrong gives one example: “the transfer of health care work” that increases women’s workload with tasks such as cleaning catheters, attaching oxygen masks, and intravenous feeding. State support of “at home” services bring regulations into the home and result in reducing privacy and undermining women’s authority.

Without exploring the issues further, Ward’s book, which reads more like an extended essay, provides some insights but ultimately raises more questions than it answers.

References

Armstrong, Pat. 1998. Missing women: A feminist perspective on The vertical mosaic. In The vertical mosaic revisited, edited by Rick Helmes-Hayes and James Curtis. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

Dreier, Peter, and J. David Hulchanski. 1993. The role of nonprofit housing in Canada and the United States: Some comparisons. Housing Policy Debate 4 (1): 43-80.

Heskin, Allan, and Jacqueline Leavitt. 1995. The hidden history of low-income coopyeratives. Davis: University of California Cooperative Extension.

Ierley, Merritt. 1999. The comforts of home: The American house and the evolution of modern convenience. New York: Clarkson Potter.

Jenson, Jane. 1993. Canada. In The Oxford companion to politics of the world, edited by Joel Krieger, 109-111. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lang, Jon. 1987. Creating architectural theory: The role of the behavioral sciences in environmental design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

New, W. H. 1998. Borderlands: How we talk about Canada. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.

Peters, K. J. 1998. The rhetoric of privacy. The Dalhousie Review 78 (3) [Online]. Available from www.dal.ca/-dalrev/78.3/peters.html

Main Street Renewal: A Handbook, edited by Roger L. Kemp.
Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. 2000. 439 pages. $65.00 (hardback).

Reviewed by Tom Daniels
Professor
Department of Geography and Planning
The University at Albany–State University of New York

Main Street is the traditional focal point of small cities of fewer than 25,000 people. But the past few decades have seen the spread of suburbs deep into the countryside and the rise of big box chain stores on the edge of small cities. Many Main Streets have struggled to retain their function as retail and employment centers and public gathering places.

Main Street Renewal offers a wealth of information about economic development efforts to bring back small-city Main Streets. The book consists of forty-four previously published articles that the editor, Roger L. Kemp, has organized to explain (1) what economic development is, (2) how to organize and manage a Main Street renewal effort, (3) how to use specific financial incentives, and (4) what communities have done in eighteen case studies from around the nation.

The book is intended for economic development practitioners and graduate students in planning and economic development. The short, readable chapters are useful for local officials and students. The book would make a good supplementary text for an economic development course.

There are few books that concentrate on small-city economic development, and particularly on Main Street. The promotional literature of the Main Street Center of the National Trust for Historic Preservation is well worth perusing. The minimal discussion of the successful Main Street Program approach—organization, promotion, design, and economic restructuring—is a serious shortcoming of Main Street Renewal. Cities Back from the Edge by Roberta Gratz and Norman Mintz (1998) contains several good case studies of Main Street revitalization and has been a popular book both among communities and students of economic development. Also, Joel Kotkin’s recent book, The New Geography: How the Digital Revolution Is Reshaping the American Landscape (2000), points out that in the new Information Economy, quality of life is a major economic asset. Companies and workers are more footloose than ever, and it is those places that offer attractive settings that will be strong competitors for economic development.

A number of prominent authors have contributed to Main Street Renewal: Cheryl Farr of the International City Managers Association, Kennedy Smith from the National Trust, Myron Orfield (author of Metropolitics), and planning professors Gerrit J. Knaap, Jerry Knox, John Mullin, and Fritz Wagner. The book has a commonsense tone that puts the reader at ease about the often mystifying subject of economic development. The chapters contain a minimum of jargon and no mind-boggling economic equations. An especially useful aspect of the book is the business perspective in economic development: what attracts a business to a community and what keeps a business in a community. Public-private partnerships are crucial to economic development success, and the book describes these in detail along with financing tools that communities can use, such as tax increment financing, the historic preservation tax credits, and the Community Reinvestment Act. Other important subjects include downtown parking, bringing Wal-Mart and other chains downtown, specialty retail, assessing economic development efforts, public safety, and strengthening existing downtown businesses.

The book has some weaknesses, however. A handbook should be an affordable paperback, not an expensive hardbound book. The forty-four chapters are about one-third too many, and the overlap in subject matter is apparent. Several of the articles and the annotated bibliography are more than ten years old and reflect the thinking of the 1980s rather than responses to the 1990s. For instance, any community that is serious about economic development must have a Web site. Some of the case studies involve communities of more than 25,000 inhabitants and hence really do not belong. There could have been more discussion of the role of design and land use planning in reviving Main Streets. In particular, the book would have benefited from before and after photos of Main Street case studies. Dolores Palma’s excellent essay “Ten Myths About Downtown Revitalization” should have been the book’s first article, not among the last. Otherwise, the reader has to go through several chapters before Main Street redevelopment emerges as a focus.

Despite these shortcomings, the book’s comprehensive treatment of Main Street revitalization makes it a good one-stop source of ideas and advice for practitioners. Students will appreciate the clarity of the articles, and the case studies bring to life the urgency of and the continual need for economic development efforts on Main Street.

References

Gratz, Roberta, and Norman Mintz. 1998. Cities back from the edge. New York: Norton.

Kotkin, Joel. 2000. The new geography: How the digital revolution is reshaping the American landscape. New York: Random House.

Financial and Strategic Management of Nonprofit Organizations: A Comprehensive Reference to Legal, Financial, Management and Operations Rules for Nonprofits (3d ed.), by Herrington J. Bryce.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2000. 816 pages. $49.95 (hardback).

Reviewed by John M. Bryson
Professor
Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs
University of Minnesota

Herrington Bryce has written one of four books that probably should be in every nonprofit organization’s library. The others are all edited books: Robert D. Herman and Associates, Jossey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Management and Leadership (1994), and two books edited by J. Steven Ott, The Nature of the Nonprofit Sector (2001) and Understanding the Nonprofit Sector: Governance, Leadership, and Management (2001). The four books together—but not separately—deliver on the promise in the title and subtitle of Bryce’s book. Specifically, Bryce’s book is strong and worthwhile reading in each of the areas except for strategic management, where it is rather weak. In contrast, Herman and Associates’ and Ott’s books provide better overall guidance on strategic management, a broader and better review of many of the topics included in Bryce’s book, and much better references to the literature. The four books together should serve most nonprofits well.

Bryce argues that there are five fundamental pillars of effective nonprofit management: mission, money, marketing, management, and membership. His book is an attempt to show managers and board members how to succeed in each area and, for the most part, the book is successful. A variety of areas are covered, including nonprofit law, financial management, fundraising, compensation, risk management, board duties, and many more.

The book consists of nineteen chapters organized into five major sections. The first section addresses types of organizations and their operating rules. The chapters focus on the specifics of tax-exempt status, nonprofits as public corporations, private foundations, associations and other forms of organizations, and legal responsibilities of trustees (a particularly good chapter). The second section focuses on financing the organization. The chapters in this section address such topics as gifts and contributions; trusts, wills, annuities, life insurance, and endowments; business revenues and tax-exempt status; organizational and tax consequences of business ventures; and pitfalls in marketing, lobbying, and solicitation. The third section concentrates on controlling organizational costs and risks. Chapters detail important aspects of budgeting, compensation and employee benefits, and managing claims of negligence and harassment. Section four addresses organizational finances. Chapters cover financial statements and evaluating, setting, and implementing financial goals. The final section has chapters on strategic planning; searching for opportunities and alliances; and reorganizations through mergers, divestitures, sale of assets, acquisitions, and conversions. In addition, there are numerous useful appendices covering a variety of legal and financial matters.

Each of the major sections is strong and filled with practical advice, with the exception of the last on strategic planning. Even in the last section, which consists of three chapters, only one is actually weak, and that is the one specifically on strategic planning. (Since strategic planning is my own area of expertise, my views may be rather biased; nonetheless, I think Bryce has offered a rather simplistic treatment of the topic and also seems to have missed the most important literature.)

The great strength of Bryce’s book is the wealth of detail and practical advice he includes on financial and legal matters. It is the sort of advice that one usually gets only from lawyers, insurance specialists, accountants, and wise board members, rather than from books. For example, the chapter on legal responsibilities of trustees should be required reading before anyone agrees to serve on a board. It is also the kind of chapter I can imagine a board wishing to consult in any number of difficult situations. For instance, the chapter contains a list of forty areas where boards might be held liable for claims! Because Bryce has expertise in all of the major areas covered by the book and also serves as Life of Virginia Professor of Business at the College of William and Mary, he has that unique combination of content knowledge and presentation skills that makes this book so valuable.

There are two major weaknesses to the book. The first has already been mentioned; namely, it does not deliver as well as it might in the area of strategic management of nonprofits. Second, references to the literature are rather thin. By way of example, the Herman and Associates book is nowhere referenced, nor is any of Jeffrey Brudney’s work on voluntarism and volunteer management or Susan Oster’s work on nonprofit strategic management.

Nonetheless, the book’s strengths outweigh its weaknesses. There is a real wealth of detailed and practical material in this book. The only substantive area where it is decidedly weak is in strategic planning. I would go so far as to say that the books by Bryce, Herman and Associates, and Ott should be the starting points for any nonprofit organization’s library.

References

Herman, Robert D., and Associates. 1994. Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit management and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ott, J. Steven, ed. 2001. The nature of the nonprofit sector. Boulder, CO: Westview.

¾¾¾. 2001. Understanding the nonprofit sector: Governance, leadership, and management. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Red Tape and Housing Costs: How Regulation Affects New Residential Development, by Michael I. Luger and Kenneth Temkin.
New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research. 2000. 175 pages. $24.95 (hardback).

Reviewed by Kirk McClure
Associate Professor
Graduate Program in Urban Planning
University of Kansas

Red Tape and Housing Costs seeks to answer three questions: How much does excessive regulation add to the price of a home? Who pays the price increase (the homebuyer, the landowner, or the developer)? and What are the consequences of these costs to the performance of the housing market?

As with any piece of detailed research, what begins as a simple set of questions becomes very complex after a thorough analysis of the problem. To the extent that a simple answer has been found, the authors suggest that excessive regulation adds about 8 percent to the cost of a home, in the long run the homebuyer pays this increase, and the supply of new housing is constrained in the process.

The authors examine the cost of building a typical New Jersey home. This home costs about $236,000. The gross cost of regulation is about 16 percent of this price, or about $38,000. Of the gross cost of regulation, about $19,500 is deemed to be excessive. In the short run, this excessive cost can be passed forward to homebuyers, passed backward to landowners, or not realized at all when a developer moves to a location without these excessive costs. However, in the long run consumers bear the costs in the form of higher prices. This skews the behavior of the market. In New Jersey, the effect has been a shakeout on the supply side. During the 1980s, an era of heavy regulatory oversight, a fall in starts was experienced and prices pushed up. The shakeout has killed off many small developers, leaving only the large suppliers standing.

A more controversial argument raised in the book will be the claim that developers pass regulatory costs forward with a multiplier. This suggests that for each dollar that regulation adds to the cost of land, the developer will add more than one dollar to the ultimate price of the home. The authors suggest that the multiplier is about 4.0, or each dollar of regulatory cost on land development raises house price by about four dollars. This idea follows from the concept that builder behavior is more sensitive to land costs than to other costs. The less elastic the demand, the more a developer is able to pass regulatory costs forward. With its rapid growth, New Jersey appears to have inelastic demand for housing, permitting this rather high regulatory multiplier.

The authors admit that they start with the predilection that regulation adds to the cost of housing. Of particular concern is a distinction that they make between excessive costs and necessary costs. They view regulation as a balancing of power between the stakeholders and their interests in the development process. The stakeholders are the developers, the landowners, the neighbors, and the community at large. Few would argue for a completely unregulated market. However, the authors are searching for the extent to which regulation reaches beyond the boundaries of necessary and essential constraints. In this, the authors are looking for regulations that generate duplicative reviews, unwarranted delays, or fees greater than necessary.

The book compares development costs in New Jersey, with its highly regimented and restrictive development review process, to development costs in North Carolina, with its minimally regulated development process. These survey data are supplemented by case studies and interviews in a few cities within each state. The authors often state that the selection of New Jersey and North Carolina was not to make the research generalizable to other markets. Thus, in the narrowest sense this book is for a New Jersey audience. However, it can be of value to other readers as it provides some meaningful insight into how developers believe their industry is affected by regulations.

The raw data for the book are based on a relatively small number of survey respondents. The research analyzes panels of surveys completed by developers and planners. Case studies of four localities in New Jersey and five in North Carolina augment these surveys. Finally, regression analysis was performed on building permit counts across many municipalities within New Jersey.

The survey mechanism interviewed various panels of developers and asked them what they would be willing to pay for land on which to build homes at various price points. The developers were asked how much more or less they would be willing pay for land, given differences in whether the site was already zoned for the development and whether the site was already approved for development. The differences in the hypothetical bid prices were used to estimate the costs associated with surmounting different levels of zoning and development review.

Note that these data are composed of survey responses only; no actual market transaction data were a part of the analysis. It is plausible that the developers have answered the survey with estimates that correlate well with the actual impact of excessive regulation on home price. However, it is also possible that the developers are biased against regulation and may overestimate the costs associated with regulation. This calls into question much of the analysis provided in this book.

The regression analysis addresses a related but different issue. Does the level of regulation in a community affect the level of housing construction? The authors fit a model that explains the number of new units built in a community as a function whether the community has restrictive regulations controlling for the location, age, taxes, income, and vacancy rates. Examining seventy communities, the model finds that an inverse relationship exists between restrictive levels of regulation and building activity, although the relationship is only significant at the .07 level. It is unclear whether this relationship describes market behavior or the intention of local government to exclude lower priced homes. The authors include an income variable as a control for exclusivity, but it does not enter the model as significant. In addition, the authors have no measure of price appreciation, which could drive exclusion efforts. Thus, the regression analysis adds little to our understanding of the cost effects of housing market regulation.

This book excels in its careful analysis of types of costs that are associated with regulation. It examines in detail the impact of regulations on the hard costs and soft costs of developing housing. It analyzes the costs of delays in development due to unnecessarily long reviews. It defines various forms of opportunity costs resulting from changes in regulations. All of this will be helpful to planners who may not have hands-on experience with the development process. The book does suffer from weaknesses due to the type of data employed in the analysis. The use of survey rather than hard market data lessens the impact of the results. Given that the numbers are developers’ estimates and that developers may be a biased source of information, it is hard to know if the estimates are correct. There is a lack of substantiation with hard market data.

Even with these limitations on the empirical findings, this book will help readers understand the distinction between total costs of regulation and excessive costs of regulation and the many mechanisms through which regulations act to increase housing prices.