HOW DOES URBAN SPATIAL POLICY DEAL WITH STATUS OF STAY?

DOI Web Site Web Site 1 Citations 2 References Open Access
  • KUBOTA Aya
    Dept. of Urban Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, The University of Tokyo

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 都市空間政策は「在居」をどのように扱っているか？
  • 都市空間政策は「在居」をどのように扱っているか? : 在居に関連する法制度と事業の基礎的研究
  • トシ クウカン セイサク ワ 「 ザイキョ 」 オ ドノ ヨウ ニ アツカッテ イル カ? : ザイキョ ニ カンレン スル ホウセイド ト ジギョウ ノ キソテキ ケンキュウ
  • Fundamental investigation on the legal system and projects on status of stay
  • 在居に関連する法制度と事業の基礎的研究

Search this article

Abstract

<p> The status of stay -i.e., the state in which an individual exists - is essential. However, when land is expropriated for public welfare under urban spatial policy, this state is often lost. The process of land expropriation requires rationality of planning and just compensation. From a public-welfare perspective on spatial policy, the principle of utilizing all the land available is considered more important than the current situation of each individual. As a result, the spatial policy tends to treat the relationship between individuals and land lightly, even though individuals protect their existence through space. This is an inevitable consequence of the fact that spaces are not independent, but have collective characteristics, and that spatial planning is performed under administrative management. Especially following the earthquakes, wars, and other disasters during the mid-twentieth century, the most important factor of urban planning has been to determinate how quickly broad areas can be made ready for new developments. That is the reason why the strong leadership of administrations are required. Although there were various criticisms against this concept at that time, such an idea of space policy under the exceptional state was inherited as the foundation for ordinary urban planning. It was suitable for the period of Japan's "economic miracle".</p><p> Times have changed; more lands with unknown ownership have become available in urban areas, allowing neighbors and community to manage them. Lands and buildings can absolutely be owned as property, but the various qualities of the relationship between an individual and a place should be considered in urban spatial policy. Moreover, since lands and buildings have a survival aspect, there are some policies in place to ensure that afflicted people can regain shelter after losing it in a disaster. However, in reality, it is difficult for victims to regain their lives and lifestyles. The place assigned to a victim may play a role in piecing together their survival for the time being, but it is difficult to live a normal life there. This is because both the building style and the surrounding environment have changed drastically. In order to stay where they are now, financial support may be needed; however, such support is very limited in Japan, whether for homes or for shops and businesses. Housing lacks good-quality private tenancies, and the basic need for affordable housing is not considered at the foundation of housing policy. On the other hand, it is believed that places for stores and business should basically be exposed to market competition.</p><p> We cannot respect for the status of stay under the current spatial policy. Viewing the status of stay as a property or as a place of survival is not sufficient to respect the individual. The land is more than that. It has the spatial aspect of supporting the existence of an individual. The loss of status of stay is a state of emergency. To respect the status of stay, it is necessary to consider the prevention of emergencies as the principle behind urban-space policy, and to consider the full response in the case of emergencies.</p>

Journal

Citations (1)*help

See more

References(2)*help

See more

Related Projects

See more

Keywords

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top