Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Guy, S.
Right arrow Articles by Rowley, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 39, No. 7, 1181-1196 (2002)
DOI: 10.1080/00420980220135554
© 2002 Urban Studies Journal Limited

Development Cultures and Urban Regeneration

Simon Guy

School of Architecture and Planning and Landscape, University of Newcastle, Claremont Tower, Newcastle upon Tyne, NEI 7RU, UK, s.c.guy{at}newcastle.ac.uk

John Henneberry

Department of Town and Regional Planning, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN, UK, j.henneberry{at}sheffield.ac.uk

Steven Rowley

Department of Town and Regional Planning, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN, UK, s.rowLey{at}sheffield.ac.uk

The importance of levering private finance and investment into urban regeneration is a central consideration of policy. Attention has focused on institutional investors' motives for holding regeneration investments and on how they might be encouraged to put more money into inner-city areas. The paper argues that, while helpful, the impact of such an approach upon urban regeneration will be limited. This is because, by definition, institutional investors are only interested in institutional property and buildings which do not conform to this frame of reference will not be of interest to them. However, other actors see things differently. Independent developers embrace the challenge presented by fringe locations, mixed uses and the local urban culture and aesthetic—and translate these characteristics into development values. Urban policy needs to address the contrasting ways in which the nature, construction and application of investors' strategic rationality intercept with local development conditions. In particular, greater emphasis should be given to encouraging independent, locally based forms of property investment and development.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Urban StudHome page
J. Henneberry and C. Roberts
Calculated Inequality? Portfolio Benchmarking and Regional Office Property Investment in the UK
Urban Stud, May 1, 2008; 45(5-6): 1217 - 1241.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Urban StudHome page
J. Doak and N. Karadimitriou
(Re)development, Complexity and Networks: A Framework for Research
Urban Stud, February 1, 2007; 44(2): 209 - 229.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Urban StudHome page
I. Nappi-Choulet
The Role and Behaviour of Commercial Property Investors and Developers in French Urban Regeneration: The Experience of the Paris Region
Urban Stud, August 1, 2006; 43(9): 1511 - 1535.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Urban StudHome page
M. Ball, L. Le Ny, and P. J. Maginn
Synergy in Urban Regeneration Partnerships: Property Agents' Perspectives
Urban Stud, October 1, 2003; 40(11): 2239 - 2253.
[Abstract] [PDF]