{"title":"一个政治上争议较少、经济上更可计算的城市未来:台湾的密度技术和土地商品化程度的提高","authors":"Mi Shih, Y. Chiang","doi":"10.1177/0308518x221128588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines and makes explicit the co-constitutive relationship between density techniques, their depoliticization effects, and heightened land commodification in Taiwan's acceleration to a real estate–oriented economy. TDR (transfer of development rights) and density bonusing are two almost omnipresent practices in urban land development in Taiwan. We ask how their technocratic approach—using predetermined formulas to bracket density use while almost entirely foreclosing community negotiation—has played a formative role in accelerating land commodification. Using mixed research methods, the case study of Central North in New Taipei City helps lay bare how formulaic density rules enable planners to embed their epistemic assumptions about what constitutes a good city within intensified property development. Mimicking the calculative practices performed by the real estate sector, we use residual valuation methods to estimate the maximum price-lifting effects of 18 real estate development projects. We show that formulaic rules allow density to enter cost–benefit analysis spreadsheets as a profit booster in advance of actual granting of extra density, emboldening aggressive land brokering, buying, and selling, which churn up land prices. We argue that the technical depoliticization generated by TDR and density bonusing has become the most effective catalyst in creating a politically less contested and financially more calculable urban world in which capital's acquisitive appetite for land's monetary value is intensified. We conclude by discussing the implications for how to move density from a domain of technical rules and real estate finance to a politics of land.","PeriodicalId":48432,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A politically less contested and financially more calculable urban future: Density techniques and heightened land commodification in Taiwan\",\"authors\":\"Mi Shih, Y. Chiang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0308518x221128588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines and makes explicit the co-constitutive relationship between density techniques, their depoliticization effects, and heightened land commodification in Taiwan's acceleration to a real estate–oriented economy. TDR (transfer of development rights) and density bonusing are two almost omnipresent practices in urban land development in Taiwan. We ask how their technocratic approach—using predetermined formulas to bracket density use while almost entirely foreclosing community negotiation—has played a formative role in accelerating land commodification. Using mixed research methods, the case study of Central North in New Taipei City helps lay bare how formulaic density rules enable planners to embed their epistemic assumptions about what constitutes a good city within intensified property development. Mimicking the calculative practices performed by the real estate sector, we use residual valuation methods to estimate the maximum price-lifting effects of 18 real estate development projects. We show that formulaic rules allow density to enter cost–benefit analysis spreadsheets as a profit booster in advance of actual granting of extra density, emboldening aggressive land brokering, buying, and selling, which churn up land prices. We argue that the technical depoliticization generated by TDR and density bonusing has become the most effective catalyst in creating a politically less contested and financially more calculable urban world in which capital's acquisitive appetite for land's monetary value is intensified. We conclude by discussing the implications for how to move density from a domain of technical rules and real estate finance to a politics of land.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518x221128588\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning A-Economy and Space","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518x221128588","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
A politically less contested and financially more calculable urban future: Density techniques and heightened land commodification in Taiwan
This article examines and makes explicit the co-constitutive relationship between density techniques, their depoliticization effects, and heightened land commodification in Taiwan's acceleration to a real estate–oriented economy. TDR (transfer of development rights) and density bonusing are two almost omnipresent practices in urban land development in Taiwan. We ask how their technocratic approach—using predetermined formulas to bracket density use while almost entirely foreclosing community negotiation—has played a formative role in accelerating land commodification. Using mixed research methods, the case study of Central North in New Taipei City helps lay bare how formulaic density rules enable planners to embed their epistemic assumptions about what constitutes a good city within intensified property development. Mimicking the calculative practices performed by the real estate sector, we use residual valuation methods to estimate the maximum price-lifting effects of 18 real estate development projects. We show that formulaic rules allow density to enter cost–benefit analysis spreadsheets as a profit booster in advance of actual granting of extra density, emboldening aggressive land brokering, buying, and selling, which churn up land prices. We argue that the technical depoliticization generated by TDR and density bonusing has become the most effective catalyst in creating a politically less contested and financially more calculable urban world in which capital's acquisitive appetite for land's monetary value is intensified. We conclude by discussing the implications for how to move density from a domain of technical rules and real estate finance to a politics of land.
期刊介绍:
Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space is a pluralist and heterodox journal of economic research, principally concerned with questions of urban and regional restructuring, globalization, inequality, and uneven development. International in outlook and interdisciplinary in spirit, the journal is positioned at the forefront of theoretical and methodological innovation, welcoming substantive and empirical contributions that probe and problematize significant issues of economic, social, and political concern, especially where these advance new approaches. The horizons of Economy and Space are wide, but themes of recurrent concern for the journal include: global production and consumption networks; urban policy and politics; race, gender, and class; economies of technology, information and knowledge; money, banking, and finance; migration and mobility; resource production and distribution; and land, housing, labor, and commodity markets. To these ends, Economy and Space values a diverse array of theories, methods, and approaches, especially where these engage with research traditions, evolving debates, and new directions in urban and regional studies, in human geography, and in allied fields such as socioeconomics and the various traditions of political economy.