Pii: S0264-2751(00)00007-X
Table 10 Attitude of government bureaus on sprawl and sprawl control
tải về 149.87 Kb. Chế độ xem pdf
|
Phat trin chan nuoi bn vng
| Table 10
Attitude of government bureaus on sprawl and sprawl control Functions of Government Bureaus Central Government Local Municipality Revenue collection (Internal Revenues, local Seeks more revenue from land tax and land Prefers more land use fees rather than land taxation bureau) leasing charges, therefore supporting the tax. Strongly supports leasing more land, increase of land leasing. Asks local although cannot say so openly. Still pushes government to convert land use fees to land local leaders to acquire more farmland for tax to be shared with the central leasing, and against the central government’s government. Passively follows top-leaders’ control policy. decision on sprawl control. Public spending (budget bureau, public A mixed attitude on sprawl: increasing Supports leasing more land since spending works, transportation bureau, other public revenue for a bigger budget is welcome, but on agricultural-related and food supply services including public health and spending more on agriculture related programs are less a local responsibility, education) expenditures, especially on importing food while land revenue is a main revenue source due to cultivated land losses is more serious. for funding public projects, especially on infrastructure extension. Debate on who should provide infrastructure Capital shortage in infrastructure within a metro area: now it is a local construction due to over-expansion is a real responsibility, but local governments ask for problem, forcing bureau of public works to central subsidy since land tax is shared with reduce the provision of services in new the central government. As in the central areas. Public transportation and public government, these bureaus have to take all schools are the most needed in new areas. consequences of sprawl into consideration, which makes them relatively supportive on sprawl control policy. Land administration/land use management Initiates and supports sprawl control Local planning bureaus do not support strict (planning bureau, land bureau) strategies, concerned about the negative sprawl and enjoy power over land regulation consequences of sprawl. A slight difference after decentralization. Local land bureaus between the planning and the land bureau: face a dilemma of either following local planners intend to solve the sprawl problem decision makers for leasing more land, or from the land use plan approach and argues supporting the central policy of controlling that some expansion is needed in sprawl more strictly. Competition exists on urbanization; land bureau wants to put land land use power between the two bureaus at use permits under its control and supports the local level too. stricter control regulations. 132 are passive in following top leaders’ decisions on sprawl control. Facing increasing budget deficits at both levels in recent years, the voice for generating more revenue from all sources including land tax and land leasing charges is increasingly louder. The only difference between revenue collection departments in the central and local government is over the distri- bution of land related revenues. The central Internal Revenues asks local government to convert all forms of land use fees (a local revenue) to land tax (a national revenue) so that the central government can share in the income. Although several new revenue regulations have been issued, local government is still reluctant to follow the central government’s regu- lations (cf. Davis et al., 1995). There is a difference between attitudes of the cen- tral and local departments in charge of budget and public spending. Because the central government manages the national budget that includes spending on food import programs, it recognizes the impor- tance of farmland preservation. The State Statistical Bureau reported that from 1986 to 1995, China imported 41.2 million tons of grain (Zhao et al., 1998). So, central public expenditure departments in charge of those programs tend to support sprawl con- trol policy. The control policy also receives supports |