ONE STOP CENTRE (OSC): LESSONS ON BEST PRACTICES IN PLANNING SYSTEM DELIVERY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v17i9.590Keywords:
decision-making, planning, delivery system, One Stop Centre, developmentAbstract
Malaysia has been experiencing rapid development since its independence in 1957, which has transformed its economic base from agriculture to industry. Rapid urbanisation has, itself, led to the continued rise of economic growth, and an acceleration of neoliberal market values. In turn, these have (re)shaped Malaysia’s planning system. Certainly, planning systems have a role in contributing, often directly, to the country’s needs and aspirations, particularly in the decision-making process. This effort is evidenced by the improvement of the planning system’s delivery mechanism, known as One Stop Centre (OSC). The OSC was initiated by the Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government on the 13th of April, 2007 to improve the planning system delivery and procedures at all local planning authorities by coordinating and shortening the approval process. However, relatively little is known about the effectiveness of OSC in the property development sector. Hence, this paper presents a synthesis of results on the effectiveness of OSC in other countries, with the objective of developing an understanding of how OSC rationalizes the success of the property development sector through its policies and planning practices. The knowledge of these theoretical situations serves as a basis for future strategic planning decisions, and as a guide in the planning system delivery of real estate development, particularly in the Malaysian context.Downloads
References
Abdullah, A. A., Harun, Z., & Rahman, H. A. (2011). Planning process of development project in the Malaysian context: A crucial brief overview. International
Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 1(2), 74-81.
Ahmad, I., Ahmad, F., & Arbi, E. (2011). One Stop Centre as a boon to property development approval process. A case study: City Hall of Kuala Lumpur. Retrieved from http://mjs.um.edu.my/index.php/jdbe/article/download/5308/3101
Fyers, A., & Flahive, B. (2017). Fast check: New Zealand has the fastest growing population in OECD. Retrieved from http://i.stuff.co.nz.
Hernando, D. S. (2000). The mystery of capital: why capitalism triumphs in the west and fails everywhere else. New York: Basic Books.
Kerzner, H. (2009). Project management: A system approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (10th ed.). New York: Van Nostrand.
Kincaid, D. (2003) Adapting buildings for changing uses, guidelines for change of use refurbishment. London: Spon Press.
Maidin, A. J. (2012). Malaysian Town and Country Planning: Law and Procedure. Malaysia: CLJ Publication.
McKim, R., Tarek, H., & Attalla, M. (2000). Project performance control in reconstruction project. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(2), 137-141.
Ministry for the Environment NZ (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mfe.govt.nz/
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employability (2016). Multi Proof Retrieved from https://www.building.govt.nz/
Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Malaysia (2008). Upgrading of the procedure on the delivery system and development plan process and the implementation of the One Stop Centre (2nd ed.). Kuala Lumpur: Author.
Mitropoulos, P., & Howell, G. A. (2002). Renovation projects: Design process problems and improvement mechanisms. Journal of Management in Engineering, 18(4), 179-185.
Moullier, T. (2009). Reforming building permits: Why is it important and what can IFC really do? Washington, DC.: International Finance Corporation.
Nguyen, L. D., Ogunlana, S. O., & Lan, D. T. X. (2004). A study on project success factors in large construction projects in Vietnam. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 11 (6), 404-413.
Omar, D., & Leh, O. L. L. (2009). Malaysian development planning system: Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan and public participation. Asian Social Science, 5(3), 3036.
Palmer, K. (2017). Project: Legal issues in the New Zealand planning system. Retrieved from https://www.productivity.govt.nz
PEMUDAH (2010, October). Seminar on the First Steps of Successful Reform in Doing Business. October 5-6, 2010, Taipei, Chinese Taipei.
Porter, L., Marti-Costa, M., Torva, M. D., Cohen-Bar, E., Ronel, A., Rogers, D., & Gibson, C. (2013). Finding hope in unpromising times: Stories of progressive planning alternatives for a world in crisis/Neoliberal planning is not the only way: Mapping. Planning Theory & Practice, 14(4), 529-529.
Rashid, A. A. (2012). The role of urban governance to enhance Kuala Lumpur City-Region development. Global Journal of Human Social Science Arts & Humanities, 12(12), 16-24.
Singapore Department of Statistics (2017). Retrieved from http://www.singstat.gov.sg.
StatsNZ (n.d.). Retrived from https://www.stats.govt.nz
Town and Country Planning Act 1976 (2009) (Malaysia).
United Nations (n.d.). Sustainable development goals. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
Urban Redeelopment Authority (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.ura.gov.sg
Watson, V. (2013). Planning and the ‘stubborn realities’ of global south-east cities: Some emerging ideas. Planning Theory, 12(1), 81-100.
The World Bank (2018). Doing Business 2018. Reforming to Create Jobs. A World Bank Group Flagship Report, Washington.
Yuen, B. (2009). Guiding Spatial Changes: Singapore Urban Planning. In Lall, S.V. et al. Urban Land Markets. Improving Land Management for Successful Urbanization. Springer: USA
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright & Creative Commons Licence
eISSN: 0128-0945 © Year. The Authors. Published for Malaysia Institute of Planners. This is an open-access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.
The authors hold the copyright without restrictions and also retain publishing rights without restrictions.
