FULFILLING CITY BUDGET OR URBAN DEVELOPMENT? THE INFLUENCE OF SERBIAN LOCAL AUTHORITIES’ DECISION ON URBAN UNDERDEVELOPMENT

Nikola Makojević

Petar Veselinović

Sažetak

The aim of this paper is to analyze the socio-spatial and environmental impact of specific legal measure in the process of urban (re)development of Serbia’s cities centers, implemented in the first decade of post-socialist period – possibility for private developers to form plots and built multistory buildings with flats exclusively intend for market, including inherited inner city areas with dominantly individual housing. Due the state rapidly withdrew from the housing sector from the beginning of the 1990s, higher dependent on intergovernmental transfers and with the tight budgets, most local authorities brought several documents which make possible to exchange land for square meters in buildings constructed. The laissez-faire approach to urban planning, the flexibility of local documents and ad-hoc decisions created a platform for urban redevelopment of inner city areas which was profitable for local budgets and private developers, but created a whole set of environmental problems in terms of decries of parking spaces, decrease of greenery, waste management collection system and water and electricity supply issues.

Reference

• Brade, I., Hartfert, G., Wiest, K., Recent trends and future prospects of socio-spatial differentiation in urban regions of Central and Eastern Europe: A lull before the storm? Cities, 2009, Vol.26, Issue 5, pp 233-244.
• Churchill, A., Forward. In Cities in Conflict: Planning and Management of Asian Cities, edited by J. Lea, and J. Courtney, v-vi. Washington DC: World Bank, 1985.
• Clapham D., Hegedus J., Kintrea K., Tosics I. and Kay H. (eds), Housing privatization in Easter Europe. Westport, London: Greenwood Press, 1996.
• Damjanovic, D., Gligorijevic, Ur., Socijalno stanovanje, Prikaz stambenih politika Srbije i odabranih zemalja Evrope, Palgo centar, Beograd, 2010.
• DiGaetano, A., and P. Lawless, Urban governance and industrial decline: Governing structures and policy agendas in Birmingham and Sheffield, England, and Detroit, Michigan. Urban Affairs Review, 1999, 34:546-77.
• Djordjevic, M., Reducing Housing Poverty in Serbian Urban Centers: Analysis and Policy Recommendations, in Too Poor To Move, Too Poor To Stay: A Report on Housing in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Serbia, ed. J. Fearn (Budapest: Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute), 2004, pp.100-101.
• Elander, I., Partnerships and urban governance, International Social Science Journal, 2002, 54 (172):191–204.
• Ferencuhova, S., Coping with the Past. Urban Planning in Post-Socialist European Cities. In Urban governance in Europe, edited by F. Eckhardt, 2009, 275-297. Berlin: BWV.
• Haase, A., Grossman, K., Steinfuhrer, A., Transitory urbanites: New actors of residential change in Polish and Czech inner cities, Cities, 2012, Vol.29, Issue 5, pp.318-326.
• Hegedus J. and Tosics I., The disintegration of the East European housing model, In: Clapham D, Hegedus J., Kintrea K., Tosics I. and Kay H. (eds) Housing privatization in Eastern Europe. Westport, London: Greenwood Press, 1996, pp. 15–40.
• Hirt S., Whatever happened to the (post)socialist city? Cities, 2013,Vol.32, pp.S29-S38.
• Hirt S. and Stanilov K., Twenty Years of Transition: The Evolution of Urban Planning in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union, 1989-2009. Human Settlements Global Dialogue Series, No. 5. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT, 2009.
• Petovar, K., Nasi gradovi izmedju drzave i gradjanina: Urbana sociologija, Geografski fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu,  Arhitektonski fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu i IAUS, 2003.
• Petrovic, M., Post-Socialist Housing Policy Transformation in Yugoslavia and Belgrade, International Journal for Housing Policy, (2), Rutledge, 2001, pp.211–231.
• Pierre, J., Comparative Urban Governance: Uncovering Complex Causalities, Urban Affairs Review, 2005, 40 (4): 446-462.
• Sailer-Fliege, U., Characteristics of post-socialist urban transformation in East Central Europe, Geo-Journal, 1999, 49:7–16.
• Stocker, G., Regime Theory and Urban politics. In Theories of urban politics, edited by D. Judge, G. Stocker, and H. Wolman, 1995, 54-72. London: Sage.
• Szelenyi, I., Cities under socialism – and after, in Andrusz G. et al. (eds), Cities after Socialism, Blackwell, Oxford, 1996, pp. 286–317.
• Tosics, I., Determinants and consequences of spatial change in post-socialist cities. Paper presented at the conference: ‘‘Winds of societal change: Remaking post-communist cities’’ at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 2004.
• Tsenkova, S., Winds of Change and the Spatial Transformation of Post-socialist Cities. Baltic Worlds, Sodertons University, 2013, 1: 20-26.
• Tsenkova, S., Z. Budic-Nedovic, and P. Marcuse, The Urban Mosaic of Post-socialist Europe, In The Urban Mosaic of Post-socialist Europe, edited by S. Tsenkova, and Z. Nedovic-Budic, 2006, 3-20. Heidelberg: Springer – Verlag.
• Vasilevska, Lj., Vranic, P.  and  Marinkovic, A., The effects of changes to the post-socialist urban planning framework on public open spaces in multi-story housing areas: A view from Nis, Serbia.  Cities, 36, 2014, pp. 83–92.