Planners’ Perception on Factors that affects Plan Implementation in Iskandar Malaysia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/ijbes.v2.n1.51Abstract
Evaluating the plan implementation is essential not only to ensure the legitimacy of planning effort but also to increase stakeholder’s confidence in the plans that are constantly being formulated. Compared to other aspects of planning, the relationship between planning and implementation has been less studied mostly because of the complex processes and methodological difficulties. Nonetheless, most literatures recognized 19 criteria grouped under three key factors of plan implementation namely stakeholder characteristics, plan characteristics and implementation system characteristics. This study investigates the significant factors that contribute to a successful plan of implementation in Iskandar Malaysia (IM). The development of IM has been structured since 2006 by the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP). The CDP is a developmental roadmap that provides a strategic framework of visions, principles, development strategies, goals and key directions for a region that is livable for its people. This study employed a semi-structured questionnaire which was administered to senior planning officers in five local authorities within IM. The survey was organized around two themes. The response to the utilization of implementation criteria was structured using Likert Scale. The Friedman test was used to indicate the level of the success of CDP implementation and to compare which factors most contribute to effective implementation. The study revealed that plan implementation is mainly driven by stakeholder’s characteristics, rather than the plan characteristic and implementation system characteristics.References
Albert, K.H., Gunton, T.I., Day, J.C., (2004). Achieving effective implementation: an evaluation of a collaborative land use planning process. Environments 31 (3), 51-68.
Alexander, Ernest R. (1985) From idea to action: Notes for a contingent theory of the policy-implementation process. Administration & Society 16,4:403-26
Alexander, Ernest. R., & Faludi, A. (1989). planning and plan implementation - notes on evaluation criteria.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 12,2:127-40.
Alterman, Rachelle & Morris Hill. (1978) Implementation of Urban land use plans. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 33, 3: 274-85.
Alfasi, N., Almagor, J., & Benenson, I. (2012). The actual impact of comprehensive land-use plans: Insights from high resolution observations. Land Use Policy, 29(4), 862-877. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.01.003
Barrett, S., Fudge, C., (1981) Examining the Policy-action Relationship. Methuen: London
Baer, W. C. (1997). General Plan Evaluation Criteria: An approach to making better plans. Journal of the American Planning Association, 3(February 2013), 329-344.
Berke, P., Backhurst, M., Laurian, L., Day, M., Ericksen, N., Crawford, J., & Dixon, J. (2006). What makes plan implementation successful? An evaluation of local plans and implementation practices in New Zealand. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 33(4), 581-600. doi:10.1068/b31166
Berke, P., & Godschalk, D. (2009). Searching for the Good Plan: A Meta-Analysis of Plan Quality Studies. Journal of Planning Literature, 23(3), 227-240. doi:10.1177/0885412208327014
Burby, R. J. (2003). Making plans that Matter:Citizen Involvement and goverment action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(June 2013), 33-49.
Butler, K.F., Koontz, T.M., (2005). Theory into practice: implementing ecosystem management objectives in the USDA forest service. Environmental Management Published on-line 14 March 2005.
Booth, P., Poxon, J., Stephenson, R., (2001). The implementation of strategic land use policy: lessons from the Lyon conurbation. Regional Studies 35 (5), 479-485.
Calbick, K. S., Day, J. C., & Gunton, T. I. (2003). Land Use Planning Implementation A Best Practice Assessment. Environment, 31(3).
Carr, D., Selin, S., & Schuett, M. (1998). Managing Public Forests: Understanding the Role of Collaborative Planning. Environmental Management, 22(5), 767-76. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9680544
Chris Joseph, Thomas I. Gunton, J.C. Day (2006). Implementation of resource management plans: Identifying key to success. Journal of Environmental Management 88:594-606.
Dalton, L., & Burby, R. (1994). Mandates, plans and planners: Building local commitment to development management. Journal of the American Planning Association, 60(4), 444-461.
Dalton (1989). The limits of regulation: Evidence from Local Plan Implementation in California. Journal of the American Planning Association 55, 2:151-68
Frame, T. M., Gunton, T., & Day, J. C. (2004). The role of collaboration in environmental management: an evaluation of land and resource planning in British Columbia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47(1), 59-82. doi:10.1080/0964056042000189808
Gunton, T. I., Day, J., & Williams, P. W. (2003). Collaborative Planning and Sustainable Resource Management: The North American Experience. Environment, 31(2).
Hall, T. E., & O’Toole Jr, L. J. (2000). Structures for Policy Implementation An Analysis of National Legislation , 1965-1966 and 1993-1994. Administration & Society, 31(6), 667-686.
Joseph, C. (2004). Evaluation of the b.c. strategic land-use plan implementation framework.
Joseph, C., Gunton, T. I., & Day, J. C. (2008). Implementation of resource management plans: identifying keys to success. Journal of Environmental Management, 88(4), 594-606. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.028
Jackson, T., Curry, J., (2002). Regional development and land use planning in rural British Columbia: peace in the woods? Regional Studies 36 (4), 439–443
Knaap, G. J., Ding, C., & Hopkins, L. D. (2001). Do Plans Matter?: The Effects of Light Rail Plans on Land Values in Station Areas. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21(1), 32–39. doi:10.1177/0739456X0102100103
Knopman, D. S., Susman, M. M., & Landy, M. K. (1999). Civic Environmentalism: Tackling Tough Land-Use Problems with Innovative Governance. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 41(10), 24–32. doi:10.1080/00139159909605543
Laurian, L., Day, M., Backhurst, M., Berke, P., Ericksen, N., Crawford, J., … Chapman, S. (2004). What drives plan implementation? Plans, planning agencies
and developers. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47(4), 555-577. doi:10.1080/0964056042000243230
Laurian, L., Day, M., Berke, P., Ericksen, N., Backhurst, M., & Crawford, J. (2004). Evaluating Plan Implementation. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol 70 No (February 2012), 471-480.
Margerum, R. D. (2002). Evaluating Collaborative Planning: Implications from an Empirical Analysis of Growth Management. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(2), 179-193. doi:10.1080/01944360208976264
Margerum, R.D., (1999a). Getting past yes: from capital creation to action. American Planning Association Journal 56 (2), 181-191.
Margerum, R.D., (1999b). Implementing integrated planning and management. Australian Planner 36 (3), 155-161.
Omar, D., & Leh, O. L. H. (2007). Effectiveness of Public Participation Programme: A Feedback from Participants (Sabak Bernam District Local Plan and Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan). Planning Malaysia, 5, 1-16.
Pressman, Jeffrey L., & Aaron B. Wildavsky (1973).Implementation.Berkeley;University of California Press.
Rizzo, A., & Glasson, J. (2012). Iskandar Malaysia. Cities, 29(6), 417-427. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2011.03.003
Rizzo, A., & Khan, S. (2013). Johor Bahru’s response to transnational and national influences in the emerging Straits Mega-City Region. Habitat International, 40, 154-162. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.03.003
Sabatier, P.A., Mazmanian, D.A., (1983). Can Regulation Work? The Implementation of the 1972 California Coastal Initiative. Plenum, New York
Stevens, M. R., Lyles, W., & Berke, P. R. (2014). Measuring and reporting intercoder realiability in plan quality evaluation research. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 1–17. doi:10.1177/0739456X13513614
Susskind, L., van der Wansem, M., Ciccarelli, A., (2000). Mediating Land Use Disputes: Pros and Cons. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA.
Talen, E. (1996). After the plans: Methods to evaluate the implementation success of plans. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 16(2), 79-91.
Talen, E. (1997). Do Plans Get Implemented? A Review of Evaluation in Planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 10(3), 248-259. doi:10.1177/088541229601000302
Tian, L & Shen, T (2011) Evaluation of plan implementation in the transtional China: A case of Guangzhou city master plan, Cities 28;11-27
Van Meter and Van Horn (1975) The Policy Implementation Process: A Conceptual Framework Administration & Society 6: 445-488
Vedung, E., (1997). Public Policy and Program Evaluation. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ.
Victor, D.G., Skolnikoff, E.B., (1999). Translating Intent Into Action. Environment 41, 16-20, 39-44.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of articles that appear in International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions or any other reproductions of similar nature.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- This Journal applies Creative Commons Licenses of CC-BY-NC-SA
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
