Planning, Law, and Property Rights: A US–European Cross-national Contemplation

References

• Alexander, G. S. 2003. Property as a Fundamental Constitutional Right? The German Example, Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers, Paper 4. http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clsops_papers/4.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, G. S. 2009. “The Social-Obligation Norm in American Property Law.” Cornell Law Review 94 (4): 745–820.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alterman, R. 2010. Takings International: A Comparative Perspective on Land Use Regulation and Compensation Rights. Chicago: American Bar Association.
   Google Scholar
• Armstrong, S. J., and R. G. Botzler. 1993. Environmental Ethics: Divergence and Convergence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Babbitt, B. 2005. Cities in the Wilderness: A New Vision of Land Use in America. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beatley, T. 1994. Ethical Land Use. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beckerman, W. 1996. Through Green-Colored Glasses. Washington, DC: CATO Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Bellah, R. N., R. Madsen, W. M. Sullivan, A. Swidler, and S. M. Tipton. 1986. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. New York: Harper and Row.
   Google Scholar
• Berlin, I. 1969. Four Essays on Liberty, 118–172. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bieri, S. 1979. Fiscal Federalism in Switzerland. Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Research on Federal Financial Relations.
   Google Scholar
• Briffault, R. 1990. “Our Localism: Part I — The Structure of Local Government Law.” Columbia Law Review 90 (1): 1–115. doi: 10.2307/1122837
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burby, R. J., and P. J. May. 1997. Making Governments Plan: State Experiments in Managing Land Use. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Caldwell, L. K., and K. S. Shrader-Frechette. 1993. Policy for Land: Law and Ethics. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Davy, B. 2012. Land Policy: Planning and the Spatial Consequences of Property. Farnham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• DesJardins, J. 1999. Environmental Ethics: Concepts, Policy, Theory. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
   Google Scholar
• DiMento, J. F. 1980. The Consistency Doctrine and the Limits of Planning. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
   Google Scholar
• Dühr, S., C. Colomb, and V. Nadin. 2010. European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ely, J. H. 1996. On Constitutional Ground. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ely, J. H. 1998. The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, R. A. 1985. Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Faludi, A. 2006. “From European Spatial Development to Territorial Cohesion Policy.” Regional Studies 40 (6): 667–678. doi: 10.1080/00343400600868937
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faludi, A. 2007. “Territorial Cohesion Policy and the European Model of Society.” European Planning Studies 15 (4): 567–583. doi: 10.1080/09654310701232079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fellman, D. 1948. “Federalism and the Commerce Clause, 1937–1947.” The Journal of Politics 10 (1): 155–167. doi: 10.2307/2125822
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franco, P. 2007. “Hegel and Liberalism.” Review of Politics 59 (4): 831–860. doi: 10.1017/S0034670500028345
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, B. 1789. “Queries and Remarks Respecting Alterations in the Constitution of Pennsylvania.” In The Writings of Benjamin Franklin (1905), edited by A. H. Smyth, Vol. 1, 375–376. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Freyfogle, E. T. 2003. The Land We Share: Private Property and the Common Good. Washington, DC: Island Press/Shearwater Books.
   Google Scholar
• Freyfogle, E. T. 2007. On Private Property: Finding Common Ground on the Ownership of Land. Boston: Beacon.
   Google Scholar
• Germino, D. 1972. Machiavelli to Marx: Modern Western Political Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glendon, M. A. 1991. Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, J. M. 2002. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: A Contemporary Approach. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Hirt, S. 2007. “The Devil Is in the Definitions: Contrasting American and German Approaches to Zoning.” Journal of the American Planning Association 73 (4): 436–450. doi: 10.1080/01944360708978524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirt, S. 2012. “Mixed Use by Default: How the Europeans (Don't) Zone.” Journal of Planning Literature 27 (4): 375–393. doi: 10.1177/0885412212451029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, H. M. 2006a. “Social Conflict over Property Rights.” Lincoln Land Lines 19 (2): 14–19.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, H. M. 2006b. Takings of Europe: Globalizing the American Ideal of Private Property? Working Paper, Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, H. M. 2008. “The Future of the Regulatory Takings Issue in the United States and Europe: Divergence or convergence.” Urban Lawyer 40 (1): 51–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, H. M. 2009. “An Alternative Perspective on United States-European Property Rights and Land Use Planning: Differences Without any Substance.” Planning & Environmental Law 61 (3): 3–12. doi: 10.1080/15480750902809992
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, H. M., and K. Paulsen. 2009. “Property Rights: The Neglected Theme of 20th-Century American Planning.” Journal of the American Planning Association 75 (2): 134–143. doi: 10.1080/01944360802619721
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joch, A. 2014. “Must Our Cities Remain Ugly? America's Urban Crisis and the European City: Transatlantic Perspectives on Urban Development, 1945–1970.” Planning Perspectives 29 (2):165–187.
   Google Scholar
• Juergensmeyer, J. C., and T. E. Roberts. 2007. Land Use Planning and Development Regulation Law. 2nd ed. St. Paul, MN: Thompson West.
   Google Scholar
• Kalliomäki, H. 2012. “Towards Comprehensive Spatial Development in Europe: A Critical View from Finland.” Planning Theory and Practice 13 (4): 569–589. doi: 10.1080/14649357.2012.728004
   Google Scholar
• Kayden, J. S. 2009. “The Myth and Reality of Eminent Domain for Economic Development.” In Property Rights and Land Policies, edited by G. K. Ingram and Y. H. Hong, 206–215. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Knox, T. M., ed. 1967. Hegel's Philosophy of the Right. London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kommers, D. P. 1997. The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuklin, B., and J. W. Stempel. 1994. Foundations of the Law: An Interdisciplinary and Jurisprudential Primer. St. Paul, MN: West.
   Google Scholar
• Kushner, J. A. 2003. Comparative Urban Planning Law. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Light, M. A. 1999. “Different Ideas of the City: Origins of Metropolitan Land-Use Regimes in the United States, Germany, and Switzerland.” Yale Journal of International Law 24 (2): 577–611.
   Google Scholar
• Linklater, A. 2013. Owning the Earth: The Transforming History of Land Ownership. New York: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Locke, J. [1698] 1963. “Chapter V: Of Property.” In Two Treatises of Government, edited by P. Laslett, 327–344. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lubens, R. 2006. The Social Obligation of Property Ownership: A Comparison of German and U.S. Law (bepress Legal Series, Working Paper 1607).
   Google Scholar
• Mandelker, D. R. 2005. Land Use Law. 5th ed. Charlottesville, VA: Lexis Law.
   Google Scholar
• McCloskey, H., and J. Zaller. 1984. The American Ethos: Public Attitudes Toward Capitalism and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Merriam, D. H., and R. M. Frank. 1999. The Takings Issue: Constitutional Limits on Land-Use Control and Environmental Regulation. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mill, J. S. [1859] 1947. On Liberty, edited by A. Castell, 38th reprint. Arlington Heights, IL: AHM.
   Google Scholar
• Morag-Levine, N. 2007. “Common Law, Civil Law, and the Administrative State: From Coke to Lochner.” Constitutional Commentary 24 (3): 601–662.
   Google Scholar
• Nedelsky, J. 1990. Private Property and the Limits of American Constitutionalism: The Madisonian Framework and Its Legacy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, P., and A. Thornley. 1996. Urban Planning in Europe: Institutional Competition, National Systems and Planning Projects. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Nivola, P. S. 1999. Laws of the Landscape: How Policies Shape Cities in Europe and America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Norton, R. K. 2011. “Who Decides, How and Why? Planning for the Judicial Review of Local Legislative Zoning Decisions.” The Urban Lawyer 43 (4): 1085–1105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton, R. K. 2014. “Agenda 21 and Its Discontents: Is Sustainable Development a Global Imperative or a Globalizing Conspiracy?” The Urban Lawyer 46 (2): 325–360.
   Google Scholar
• Nowak, J. E., and R. D. Rotunda. 1995. Constitutional Law. 5th ed. St. Paul, MN: West.
   Google Scholar
• Platt, R. H. 2004. Land Use and Society: Geography, Law, and Public Policy. Rev. ed. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, D. R. 2008. Managing Growth in America's Communities. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Presser, S. B., and J. S. Zainaldin. 1995. Law and Jurisprudence in American History: Cases and Materials. 3rd ed. St. Paul, MN: West.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J.Jr. 2011. “Dillon's Rule Is from Mars, Home Rule Is from Venus: Local Government Autonomy and the Rules of Statutory Construction.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 41 (4): 662–685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodden, J. A. 2006. Hamilton's Paradox: The Promise and Peril of Fiscal Federalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rueben, K., and C. Rosenberg. 2008. “State and Local Revenues.” Tax Notes, April 7. Washington, DC: Tax Policy Center.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, A. 1984. Property and Political Theory. New York: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Sandel, M. J. 1982. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sandel, M. J. 1996. Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, S., and R. Buehler. 2007. “The Planning Process in the US and Germany: A Comparative Analysis.” International Planning Studies 12 (1): 55–75. doi: 10.1080/13563470701346592
   Google Scholar
• Shah, A., ed. 2007. The Practice of Fiscal Federalism: Comparative Perspectives. Montreal: McGill University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shrader-Frechette, K. S. 1993. “Locke and Limits on Land Ownership.” In Policy for Land: Law and Ethics, edited by L. K. Caldwell and K. S. Shrader-Frechette, 65–84. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Shutkin, W. 2000. The Land That Could Be: Environmentalism and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Siegan, B. H. 1997. Property and Freedom: The Constitution, the Courts, and Land-Use Regulation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
   Google Scholar
• Steinemann, A. C., W. C. Apgar, and H. J. Brown. 2005. Microeconomics for Public Decisions. Mason, OH: Thompson/South-Western.
   Google Scholar
• Tarlock, A. D. 2014. “Zoned Not Planned.” Planning Theory 13 (1): 99–112. doi: 10.1177/1473095212469942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tushnet, M. 2004. “Social Welfare Rights and the Forms of Judicial Review.” Texas Law Review 82: 1895–1920.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Udall, S. L. 1963. The Quiet Crisis. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• VanDeVeer, D., and C. Pierce. 2003. The Environmental Ethics and Policy Book. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar