Malaysian Development Plan System: Issues and Problems, One Decade after its Reform (2001–2011)

In 2001, the Town and Country Planning Act 1976 (Act 172) was amended through Act A1129 (2001). The amendments included provisions to allow four levels of government involvement (Federal, Regional, State and Local Authority) in spatial planning, with the intention of establishing a more effective development plan system in Malaysia. However, an assessment of the relationship between legislative provision and the implementation of development planning is urgently required to consider a number of issues, including delays in adopting plans and the continued existence of out of date plans. Therefore, this paper discusses issues and problems encountered by selected local planning authorities in the implementation of the development planning system. The discussion focuses on the capacity and capability of these authorities with regard to legal aspects, administration, finance, human resource issues and technical support. The data were obtained through mixed methods i.e. postal surveys, interviews with representatives from selected local authorities and focus group discussions with selected professional town planners. The findings demonstrate that most of the issues and problems encountered in implementing the development plan system at each plan level in Malaysia are legal in origin.

[1]  O. L. H. Leh,et al.  Malaysian Development Planning System: Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan and Public Participation , 2009 .

[2]  P. Booth.  The control of Discretion: Planning and the Common-Law tradition , 2007 .

[3]  Emily Talen,et al.  Do Plans Get Implemented? A Review of Evaluation in Planning , 1996 .

[4]  I. Masser,et al.  Managing Fast Growing Cities : New Approaches to Urban Planning and Management in the Developing World , 1993 .

[5]  Zakiah Ponrahono,et al.  Matrix Sustainable Strategies Compatibility Analysis of Malaysia's Sustainable Development Strategies in Three-Tier Development Plan System , 2011 .

[6]  Willem Salet,et al.  Evolving Institutions , 2002 .

[7]  M. Mattingly.  From town planning to development planning: A transition through training , 1988 .

[8]  L. L. Meng.  Town planning law in Malaysia , 1991 .

[9]  C. Rakodi.  Urban plan preparation in Lusaka , 1987 .

[10]  Richard K. Norton,et al.  Using content analysis to evaluate local master plans and zoning codes , 2008 .

[11]  C. M. Haar.  Cities, law, and social policy : learning from the British , 1985 .

[12]  Mohammed Abdullah Eben Saleh,et al.  A vision for directing future planning efforts: the case of villages of southwestern Saudi Arabia , 2002 .

[13]  B.J.S. Hoetjes.  Trends and issues in municipal twinnings from the Netherlands , 2009 .

[14]  M. Cuddy,et al.  A comparison of the land authority for Wales (United Kingdom) and the land commission of New South Wales (Australia) , 1987 .

[15]  Foziah Johar,et al.  GIS and development control system for a local authority in Malaysia , 2003 .

[16]  Janet Crawford,et al.  Evaluating the Outcomes of Plans: Theory, Practice, and Methodology , 2010 .

[17]  Zhenghong Tang,et al.  Linking Planning Theories with Factors Influencing Local Environmental-Plan Quality , 2009 .

[18]  E. Buitelaar,et al.  Plan-Led Planning Systems in Development-Led Practices: An Empirical Analysis into the (Lack of) Institutionalisation of Planning Law , 2011 .

[19]  Carole Rakodi,et al.  Forget planning, put politics first? Priorities for urban management in developing countries , 2001 .