Next Article in Journal
Response of Soil Aggregate Stability to Phosphorus, Nitrogen, and Organic Fertilizer Addition: A Meta-Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Presenting a Novel Evolutionary Method for Reserve Constrained Multi-Area Economic/Emission Dispatch Problem
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 13
10.3390/su151310616
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Urban Growth Management in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: An Assessment of Technical Policy Instruments and Institutional Practices

by
Abdulaziz Aldegheishem
Urban Planning Department, College of Architecture and Planning, King Saud University, Riyadh 11574, Saudi Arabia
Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10616; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310616
Submission received: 29 May 2023 / Revised: 20 June 2023 / Accepted: 26 June 2023 / Published: 5 July 2023
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This paper assesses the effectiveness of technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth and examines their relationship with institutional practices in the city of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A quantitative method by means of a questionnaire was adopted to examine research questions, while a qualitative method was used to better understand technical policy instruments and their relationship with institutional practices. Findings reveal that technical policy instruments are unable to manage urban growth effectively. A number of factors, such as lack of community participation, low coordination levels, and a failure to disseminate clear information have contributed to this lack of effectiveness. Therefore, the creation of a national framework to link institutional practice to technical policy instruments is required in order to improve the overall capacity of urban authorities to manage urban growth.

1. Introduction

Cities, as human and physical concentrations, are enlarged by means of the urbanization process, and both the size and density of cities are changing as a result of rapid urban growth [1]. According to the World Urbanization Prospects Report, issued by the United Nations in 2018, 55% of the world’s population was already living in urban areas; by the year 2050, 68% of the world’s population is expected to be living in urban areas, with roughly 90% of this increase taking place in developing countries [2]. The outcomes of today’s rapid urbanization in developing countries are unsustainable urban development, low quality of life, inadequate infrastructure, informal settlements, environmental threats, loss of farmland, decreased regional open spaces, and water threats [3,4,5,6]. Such challenges raise the question as to whether urban institutions in developing countries can respond effectively to the outcomes of rapid urbanization.
Effective management of urban growth improves quality of life, achieves sustainable urbanization, and increases economic opportunities, by maximizing the investment revenues of urbanization [7]. To achieve these objectives, governments develop policy instruments to manage urban growth effectively based on a range of planning alternatives, which can be segmented into financial and technical instruments [8,9]. Financial instruments include fees, taxes, charges, public ownership (parks, leisure areas, utilities, etc.), location efficient mortgages, and historic rehabilitation taxation [10,11]. Technical instruments include growth control, plans (master, provincial, local, detailed, action), public facility ordinances, building standards, land subdivision (zoning), greenbelts, urban growth boundaries, and urban service boundaries [10,11]. Financial and technical instruments, if operated efficiently and in tandem, effectively control, guide, and manage the processes of urban growth [12].
The choice of policy instruments has spatial and economic consequences on land use systems, sustainable environment, investment, and the use of natural resources such as water and energy [10,11,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Thus, policy instruments are considered as planning interventions by which local authorities achieve the objectives of sustainable development and quality of life [11]. They are designed based on an analysis of urban problems from a number of perspectives, including environmental, social, economic, political, and legal [14].
Technical policy instruments provide practical solutions to the inherent gaps in spatial planning systems, and the complexity of urban problems is more likely to affect the adoption of technical policy instruments [11]. Hence, the effectiveness of the instruments selected for use plays an important role in overcoming urban problems; in this case, effectiveness refers to the extent to which the outcomes of policy instruments achieve the predetermined goals of urban planning [8]. Furthermore, effectiveness does not operate in a vacuum; rather, it is accompanied by institutional practices [10,13,19,20,21].
Over the last three decades, continuous rapid urban growth in Riyadh has resulted in environmental challenges, while increasing the demand for housing, transport, and energy. Growing urban challenges increasingly raise the question of the extent to which technical policy instruments have responded effectively to these challenges. The current literature shows that urban growth has not been managed effectively [22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. Consequently, the outcomes of this ineffectiveness are uncontrolled urban sprawl [19,31], land speculation [19], high demand for services and infrastructure [32,33], environmental threats [34], and road congestion [35].
The rise and fall of urban challenges and their relationship to institutional practices and policies should be an important focus of urban research. Therefore, this paper outlines a theoretical framework which could be used to examine the impact of institutional practices on the ability of technical policy instruments to manage urban growth in Riyadh. Although academic literature has extensively discussed the environmental and socio-economic costs of urban growth, there has been limited research on policy instruments [6,10,11,13,19,20,21,36]. An empirical investigation into the effectiveness of technical policy instruments could improve knowledge and significantly enhance the decision-making process. Despite the important role of policy instruments in managing urban growth, this topic has been relatively ignored by most developing countries [13,20,21,25,33,34,36,37,38,39]. Urban authorities should be held accountable for the provision of adequate services and sustainable urban development, while a better understanding of how the use of planning instruments improves the management of urban growth, increases the ability to overcome issues which may lead to deviations from the expected outcome, and in turn increases the effectiveness of policy instruments. The empirical findings of this study, if translated into best practices, will contribute to an improved performance of urban institutions which operate in developing countries, particularly in Saudi Arabia.

2. Urban Growth and Technical Policy Instruments in Riyadh

Riyadh, as the capital of Saudi Arabia, lies in Riyadh region, with an urban area of all region at the time of writing covering 404,240 km² [23]. However, Riyadh was a small town in the early 1900s, covering an area of less than 1 km2; the population at that time was less than 19,000 inhabitants [30].
From 1930 to 1950, Riyadh grew at a yearly rate of about 5%, with a population of 46,000 inhabitants in 1946 [31]. By 1960, Riyadh had grown to cover an area of 85 km2 [40]. The urban challenges facing the government at the time were a lack of services and institutional frameworks designed to manage urban growth. In response to these challenges, several laws were issued during the 1930s; for example, the law enacted in 1932 which created the municipality of Riyadh, the Capital and Mayorship Act in 1937, and the Emirate Act in 1939 [30].
The Supreme Planning Board was established in 1961 in order to streamline development planning [30]. The Department of Municipal Affairs was created in 1962 with the aim of providing services, including the preparation of master plans [31]. The period from 1950 to 1970 witnessed several transformations; for example, the preparation of local plans, an improvement in municipal services, and the enhancement of socio-economic development [22]. Between 1970 and 1990, the population of Riyadh increased, with more than a million inhabitants by the 1980s; the urban area increased correspondingly to cover 1600 km2 by 1986 [40]. The institutional framework for both local and national governance was completed in 1975; at this time, the Ministry of Planning oversaw the ‘big picture’ of planning and development, while the Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs controlled urban planning and infrastructure provision [27]. Accordingly, the first Master Plan for Riyadh was developed in 1972 by Doxiadis Associates. However, although the master plan took expected challenges, objectives, and the contemporary priorities of urban development into consideration, higher than expected urban growth outstripped the ability of the plan to cope with reality [27]. Therefore, the second Master Plan was developed in 1981 by SCET, which focused on specific failures of the original plan, particularly with regards to implementation and uncontrolled urban growth [22]. By the early 2000s, the population had once again exploded beyond expectation; it was estimated to be 4.4 million inhabitants in 2002, covering an area of 1782 km2 [40]. Riyadh’s current population is estimated to be 6.5 million [23], covering an area of 2435 km2 [22].
In response to the challenges of urban growth, the Riyadh Development Authority developed the Comprehensive Riyadh Strategic Plan (CRSP) in 2003. One aspect of the strategy was to determine an expected urban boundary for the year 2030; that is, an area of 5000 km2, which would be consistent with the area required to accommodate an expected population of 8.2 million [23,27]. In line with CRSP, the Riyadh Metropolitan Zoning Plan and Provisions Act identified a sustainable zoning structure for future land development [23]. Furthermore, again based on CRSP, several local action plans were developed for Riyadh, with a detailed plan for each local area [27]. The National Spatial Strategy was instigated in 2001 and updated in 2015, and was designed to ensure the norms of balanced development for all provinces were achieved by means of development nodes and economic activities [23].
Recent urban planning practice has observed several changes in the transformation to urban governance. These changes include:
▪
modification of institutional frameworks
▪
municipal elections
▪
participation of women in municipal councils
▪
municipal autonomy in decision-making processes and approval of plans and programs
▪
enablement of municipalities to generate income from services provided to the public
▪
establishment of special development units in most cities (e.g., Mecca and Medina)
▪
changes in methods of coordination at both the central and local level
▪
enhancement of public-private partnerships
▪
a post-welfare model of governance
▪
methods used to update information
▪
modification of spatial planning guidelines [22].
These changes have contributed to a slight improvement of the socio-economic and environmental conditions of large cities in Saudi Arabia.
In 2016, the Saudi Arabian government adopted a national vision for Saudi Arabia until 2030. The vision aims to reduce dependence on oil, diversify the economy, and improve public services. It has taken urban planning practice into account by focusing on housing affordability and quality of life in cities. The housing program aims to provide housing solutions which enable citizens to own adequate houses based on their needs and financial capabilities. The program also provides financial solutions to improve the quality of existing housing, with legislative and regulatory frameworks for the housing sector. The Quality of Life program aims to improve the urban environment, promote the principles of livable cities, and enhance the principles of smart cities. Significantly, these programs promise a better future and better performance for urban growth management.
Vision 2030 adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that had been developed by the United Nations to meet the current needs of people in terms of preserving resources for future generations. Saudi Arabia has initiated a holistic agenda for tracking its progress on sustainable urban development. The SDGs consist of 17 goals; goal 11 is primarily concerned with urban sustainability, seeking to make cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable. It has nine indicators: affordable housing, public transportation, waste management and air quality, green and safe public spaces, preservation of natural and cultural heritage, adaptation to climate change and natural disasters, durable and flexible buildings, resilient urban development, and creation of sustainable neighborhood design, to strengthen socioeconomic and environmental linkages between cities and suburbs. Local authorities have developed several strategies for each indicator to achieve SDGs, such as the National Transport Strategy and the Housing Program. Local authorities prepared the Voluntary Local Review (VLR) by cooperating with United Nations organizations operating in Saudi Arabia (such as UNESCWA and UN-Habitat) to measure progress in terms of achieving the SDGs. VLR assessment indicates that some indicators have achieved compatibility, such as affordable housing; others suffer from major challenges, and most of the indicators are still in the achievement phase.
During the last five years, Riyadh has started considerable efforts to transform itself into a smart city. The Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs and Housing developed the Smart Government Strategy of 2020–2024, which defines objectives, initiatives, and action plans to accelerate the transformation towards urban smartness. The strategy considers all smart city dimensions including a smart economy, smart environment, smart mobility, smart living, smart people, and smart governance. In response to these dimensions, several smart megaprojects took place in Riyadh such as the Riyadh Metro, the Al Widyan, and the King Salman Park. As a result, Riyadh was ranked 30th out of 141 cities in the IMD Smart City Index of 2023.
Table 1 summarizes the most important actions taken in succeeding phases of urban growth in Riyadh.

3. Theory and Hypotheses

It has been argued that the technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia include growth control (i.e., enforcement), plans (master, provincial, local, detailed), strategies (e.g., the National Spatial Strategy), public facility ordinances, building standards, land use subdivision (zoning), greenbelts, and urban growth boundaries. The ability of technical instruments to manage urban growth effectively is primarily based on institutional practice by urban authorities [10,11,13,21,23]. Institutional practice includes the decision-making process (i.e., decentralized/centralized), community participation in the decision-making process, coordination strategies, information quality, employee performance, and finance [41,42,43,44,45,46,47].
Recognition of the impacts of urban growth has stimulated policymakers worldwide to establish technical policy instruments that control urban growth in a sustainable way. Technical policy instruments have been in place for several decades in most countries, including the United Kingdom [9], Switzerland [17], South Korea [15], Saudi Arabia [19], and Jordan [21]. In other countries, such as the United States [10,12,18], technical policy instruments have been developed by individual municipalities. In China, technical policy instruments have been developed according to economic dimensions to maximize revenues of real estate and urban economics [6]. In India, technical policy instruments have been used to conserve agricultural land and stimulate efficient land use. These instruments primarily comprise limiting city size, restricting the use of agricultural land, stimulating residential density, and enhancing greenbelt policy [20]. In a comparative study of the greenbelts of London, Frankfurt, and Seoul, Xie et al. [3] found that greenbelts, as a technical policy instrument, have failed to prevent urban sprawl in cities. Technical policy instruments impact all urban sectors, including housing, transportation, infrastructure, and economic development. For example, Debrunner and Hartmann [17] provide evidence from Switzerland showing that the policy of affordable housing is inconsistent with local demand for population and employment, due to the limitations of urban policy instruments in the housing sector. Siedentop et al. [16] analyzed the literature on urban policy instruments in North American, European, and some Asian and Oceanic countries. They found that one of the key factors that impacts, whether positively or negatively, on the performance of urban policy instruments is the institutional practice of the execution of these instruments. A review of the literature provides support for the relationship between institutional practice and the ability of technical policy instruments to manage urban growth effectively. Rakodi [13] notes that the overall performance of urban policy instruments in developing countries is poor due to the failure of institutional practice to use urban policy instruments effectively; that is, urban growth is haphazard. Both Al-Hathloul and Mughal [48] and Mandeli [25,26] demonstrate that the absence of effective institutional practice has contributed to the inability of urban policy instruments to control urban growth in Saudi Arabia, while Alnsour [21] concludes that the lack of effective urban policy instruments in Jordan is a direct result of the corresponding lack of institutional policies and practices. McGill [36] observes that the inability of several African countries to create urban resilience is due to weak institutional practices in terms of coordination, data quality, training programs, and emergency management. Koroso et al. [49] asserts that the inefficiency of land use in Ethiopia is a result of inadequate policy techniques used to manage urban land use. Tugac [50] establishes that urban management policies regarding infrastructure in Turkey have enhanced economic growth, but failed to enhance quality of life, while Vongpraseuth and Chio [51] conclude that urban policy instruments in Vietnam are unable to encourage direct foreign investment, due to the inflexibility of institutional practice. Ahmad et al. [52] confirms that the failure of urban growth management in Pakistan is a result of the lack of institutional performance.
It can be noted that Saudi Arabian urban authorities have not changed institutional practices enough to achieve effective urban policies. Numerous studies on urban governance and urban growth management in Saudi Arabia (e.g., [19,23,25]) confirm that the urban planning process is based on centralized decision making, a lack of community participation, low coordination levels, poor information quality, and limited institutional performance. This implies that the effectiveness of technical policy instruments is likely to be low and thus unable to provide practical solutions to urban challenges.

3.1. Decision-Making/Centralization

Urban policy instruments in Saudi Arabia are administered using a centralized approach [19,25,26,30,31]. In a highly centralized system, decisions are made solely by top management so as to adhere to urban planning objectives [13]. While top managers may be aware of urban challenges, they are unlikely to be fully knowledgeable about the technical aspects of these challenges [39]. Hence, the degree of centralization is most likely to influence the effectiveness of the technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth [21]. The term “degree” refers to the extent to which the decision making process is concentrated at the top level of an organization [53]. Factors such as uniformity of action, enhancing motivation, facilitating procedures, coordination of activities, and effective communication, all play an important role in determining the degree of centralization. Recent academic research has concluded that the decision-making process is still centralized in Saudi Arabia [19,53,54]. Therefore, this study suggests the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
Centralization has a significant impact on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia.

3.2. Community Participation

Community participation is one of the basic components of good governance. There are many goals for community participation in the urban planning process, including determining problems accurately, understanding priorities and needs, informing the public, raising awareness, generating adequate solutions, and producing appropriate policies and plans [55]. This implies that community participation in preparing, implementing, and evaluating urban plans provides opportunities for local authorities to make correct decisions [56]. However, the level of community participation relies on techniques used to facilitate participation, such as community representation and the nature of the political regime [57]. On the other hand, the effectiveness of participation in the urban planning process is also influenced by several factors, such as knowledge, social media, individual willingness, and political culture [21]. The ability of local authorities to interact with these factors efficiently often improves the participation process; therefore, the effectiveness of technical policy instruments is significantly related to community participation in urban planning. In reality, community participation in urban planning is low in Saudi Arabia [25,29,58]. Therefore, this study proposes the second hypothesis as follows:
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Community participation has a significant impact on the effectiveness of the technical policy instruments used in managing urban growth in Saudi Arabia.

3.3. Coordination

Coordination is an essential method for ensuring that all urban authorities work in conjunction with one another. Successful coordination across urban institutions is determined by effective communication networks for planning programs and policies, together with service delivery. The establishment of joint communication networks between urban authorities ensures an effective exchange of ideas and information, improves knowledge, and expedites the smooth transformation of ideas into practice [59]. This implies that effective coordination contributes to implementing technical policy instruments properly. Additionally, it must be recognized that coordination is further influenced by a set of institutional, legal, and administrative factors [60]. Depending on the input of these factors, coordination can be positive or negative, or in some instances, no coordination occurs [61]. For positive coordination to occur, there needs to be policy integration and strategic cooperation [61]. Therefore, urban authorities evaluate the actual extent to which coordination is achieved. Such evaluation provides opportunities to enhance positive coordination, which in turn influences the effectiveness of technical policy instruments. In Saudi Arabia, the current coordination mechanisms are inadequate due to two major issues: a lack of communication between the various urban institutions, and overlapping roles between separate authorities [23]. Therefore, this study proposes the third hypothesis as follows:
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
Coordination has a significant impact on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments used in managing urban growth in Saudi Arabia.

3.4. Information Quality

The process for planning actions often begins with the need for accurate information so as to implement technical policy instruments correctly; hence, data availability, diversity, updates, and accuracy are all required, in addition to professional staff equipped with skills, knowledge, and experience in managing data [62]. High standards are required for information to meet the application standards specified by urban institutions where those institutions are able to ascertain their information requirements; this suggests that information quality is related to information requirements. High standards for information collection ensures appropriate selection, adequate design, and accurate implementation of urban policy instruments [63]. Hence, information quality can be seen as a determinant for the performance of technical policy instruments in managing urban growth. Studies [29,31] conclude that utilizing low quality data to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia has led to inadequate decision making and inaccurate plans. Based on the literature, the fourth hypothesis of this study can be formulated as follows:
Hypothesis 4 (H4).
Information quality has a significant impact on the effectiveness of the technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia.

3.5. Financial Condition

Finance often directs the availability and use of resources for urban authorities, such as human resources, technology, equipment, and communication. Addressing urban problems and providing services requires the assurance of systematic governmental financial support [64], as short term financial arrangements hinder future planning options and will most likely lead to a considerable increase in total cost. Hence, benefits and cost are two important measures of financial support. In developing countries, urban authorities often do not have access to sufficient finance to meet urban challenges and provide services on a long-term basis. Thus, a gap between revenue and expenditure can be expected. Urban authorities depend on four financial sources: governmental transfers, returns from local areas (such as municipalities), loans, and international development grants [21]. For the most part, municipalities focus on raising the required revenue to address urban problems and provide services for their local residents. However, local revenue generation has been linked to governance (i.e., centralized or decentralized). Existing studies indicate that the annual budget allocated to urban institutions in Saudi Arabia is considerable yet insufficient to manage sustainable urban growth [24]. Furthermore, rapid urban growth in Saudi Arabia has accelerated the growing demand for space, infrastructure, and services, leading to an increase in costs for the application of urban policy instruments [27,31]. Therefore, this study proposes the fifth hypothesis as follows:
Hypothesis 5 (H5).
Financial situation has a significant impact on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia.

3.6. Employee Performance

Employees with multiple skills are a valuable asset for an urban authority. Employee performance refers to the ability of a staff member to accomplish required duties and tasks completely in a timely fashion [65]. This implies that employee performance is related to quality, quantity, and efficiency of work [65,66]. Therefore, urban authorities need to be aware of each individual’s skills and abilities, in order to manage them efficiently and to in turn align them with the institution’s overall urban planning policy [67]. Employee performance is influenced by job communication and by interactions between employees, managers, and stakeholders [66]. Similarly, institutional culture facilitates the acquisition of new knowledge and skills if appropriate training to enhance employee performance is provided [59]. Hence, there is a clear relationship between the effectiveness of policy instruments and employee performance. Current academic literature (e.g., [29,54]) indicates that current employee performance in Saudi Arabian urban authorities is hindered by a lack of effective training with regards to new knowledge. Therefore, this study suggests the sixth hypothesis as follows:
Hypothesis 6 (H6).
Employee performance has a significant impact on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia.

4. Methodology and Methods

4.1. Measurement of Dependent Variable

It has been argued that effectiveness refers to the extent to which the outcomes of policy instruments achieve predetermined goals [8,11,21]. Study [21] (pp. 274–279) examines the effectiveness of urban policy instruments based on several dimensions, such as technical competence, efficiency, responsiveness, sensitivity, and environmental protection, as shown in Table 2. Based on [8,21,68], a five-point scale (1 = very low to 5 = very high) has been developed to measure the effectiveness of policy instruments.

4.2. Measurement of Independent Variables

-
Decision-making/centralization
The extant literature on urban governance in Saudi Arabia confirms that the decision-making process is centralized (e.g., [19,23,25,30,31]). Thus, a five-point Likert scale (1 = never to 5 = always) based on [69] (p. 282) has been used to measure centralization. This scale consists of the following six items:
  • It is difficult to take action until decisions have been approved by the Director.
  • Managers are required to ask the Director before making decisions.
  • Employees are required to ask the Director before taking action.
  • All decisions made by Managers must be approved by the Director.
  • Employees must receive permission from their Manager before taking action of any kind.
  • Any matter must be referred to the Manager, who will then consult with the Director for the final decision.
-
Community participation
Community participation refers to the level of engagement for community representatives in the urban planning process [23]. Community representatives are persons who have been chosen to act or make decisions on behalf of the general population, such as elected individuals in Municipal Councils, elected members in Chambers of Industry and Commerce, and civil society organizations [58]. To measure the participation of community representatives, three dimensions need to be considered, including attendance of participants, communication between the participants and urban authorities, and the nature of participation [58]. A five point Likert scale (1 = not at all to 5 = full participation) has been developed based on [58,70,71] to measure community participation in the urban planning process. This scale consists of the following six items:
  • Attendance of community representatives at local meetings.
  • Communication of community representatives with urban authorities.
  • Participation of community representatives in the preparation of urban plans.
  • Participation of community representatives in the preparation of city strategies.
  • Participation of community representatives in monitoring the implementation of plans.
  • Contribution of community representatives to evaluating planning programs.
-
Coordination
Coordination refers to the extent to which local authorities work together to achieve common goals while at the same time seeking to solve urban problems based on effective communication and knowledge (UN-Habitat, 2019). To measure coordination, this study has developed a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) based on [23,59,61]. This scale consists of the following six items:
  • People in other urban authorities frequently communicate with us regarding urban problems.
  • People in other urban authorities communicate with us in a timely way about urban problems.
  • People in other urban authorities communicate with us to describe urban problems accurately.
  • We communicate with people from other urban institutions to solve problems.
  • Urban institutions share goals regarding urban issues.
  • People in other urban authorities know about our work.
-
Information quality
Information quality refers to the usefulness of information in technical policy instruments. According to [72], there are many dimensions which should be taken into account when measuring information quality supplied by and for urban authorities, such as accuracy, validity, reliability, accessibility, ease of use, sources, and security. This study develops a five-point Likert scale (1 = very low to 5 = very high) based on [63,72]. This scale consists of the following thirteen items:
  • Sufficient information links and databases to manage urban growth.
  • Reliability.
  • Accuracy.
  • Validity.
  • Clarity.
  • Timely updates.
  • Ease of access.
  • Credible sources.
  • Ease of use.
  • Ease of application for problem solving.
  • Comprehensiveness.
  • Perceived value.
  • Security.
-
Financial condition
Financial condition is measured by the funding allocated to implement plans and by the level of financial stability for urban authorities. Managers and directors were asked to assess the financial situation of their institutions. A five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) was adopted from [73] (pp. 464–465) to assess this variable. This scale consists of the following seven items:
  • Our financial condition is satisfactory.
  • We have sufficient funds for the next three months based on current availability.
  • Our plans are fully financed.
  • Our credit rating is satisfactory.
  • We have not taken out a loan during the last five years.
  • We are able to transfer budget surpluses to the next budget.
  • We are able to maintain existing financial benefits for employees.
-
Employee performance
Employee performance is one of the critical factors which have an impact on the management of urban growth. Employee performance can be measured by assessing work quality, costs, and development [66]. This study has developed a five-point Likert scale (1 = never to 5 = always) based on [65,66] in order to measure employee performance. This scale consists of the following nine items:
  • Employees work to a high standard.
  • Employees work in a timely manner and meet deadlines.
  • Employees accomplish work quickly.
  • Employees meet budgetary constraints.
  • We trust our employees.
  • Employees receive incentives.
  • Employees attend training programs.
  • Employees contribute to creating a positive institutional culture.
  • Employees communicate easily with managers and supervisors.

4.3. Data Collection

A quantitative method has been employed to meet research objectives. A quantitative method was used to test research hypotheses, with data collected via an online questionnaire. All variables included in the theoretical model are addressed in the questionnaire, with variables relating to the descriptive objectives. However, the study also uses qualitative methods to obtain interpretations deeply for quantitative results. Mayors, managers, and assistants were targeted within the urban planning authorities in Riyadh. This study included all of the municipalities of Riyadh for a total of 40. Before proceeding further, it is important to explain that each municipality consists of a Mayor, two Vice Mayors, and sixteen managers. In addition to the municipalities, Amana, the Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs and Housing (MOMRAH), and the Royal Commission for Riyadh Development (RCRD) were also included in this study. Table 3 presents the total number of questionnaires distributed and the number returned. A total of 818 questionnaires were sent online to selected respondents during March 2022, with 337 completed questionnaires returned for a response rate of 41%.
In general, the items and scales used in this study have been adopted from other studies which have emphasized meeting the requirements of validity and reliability. In addition, to determine validity, questionnaire items were scrutinized and pre-tested by several academics and experts in Saudi Arabia.
The reliability of a measure is an indication of the consistency of the instrument. This study used a Cronbach’s alpha measurement of internal consistency to evaluate the overall reliability of the measurement scale, where alpha gives an estimate of the proportion of the total variance that is not due to error and this represents the reliability of the scale [74]. The recommended minimum acceptable level of reliability (alpha) is 0.60 [74]. Table 4 confirms that test results for Cronbach’s alpha in this study exceed the minimum level.
Regarding respondent characteristics, the results demonstrate that more than half of the respondents (69.6%) were university graduates, 21.6% had a college diploma, and 8.8% were postgraduates. In total, 57% of the respondents were aged between 50–59 years, while 31.6% were aged between 40 and 49 years. Therefore, 68.3% of the respondents had between 10–20 years of experience, 18.4% had more than 20 years of experience, and 13.7% had less than 10 years of experience. As a result, sample characteristics reveal how there is a considerable variation between respondents, which both enriches and enhances the results of this study.
A qualitative method was used to gain a better understanding for quantitative results and in-depth perception concerning the impact of institutional practices on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with both top managers and experts, due to their superior technical understanding and knowledge of policy instruments, providing in-depth analysis of the points under investigation. Gaining broader perspectives from top management is essential, as it supplements and validates the questionnaire’s findings. Fifteen face-to-face, semi-structured interviews were conducted with top managers from several urban authorities. Twenty managers were approached initially, but five declined to participate. The targeted group included managers from all of the main urban authorities in Riyadh. Interviewees were selected based on experience and extensive involvement in the implementation of urban governance practice and technical policy instruments. Table 5 presents the breakdown of interviewees.
The semi-structured interview includes three sections:
▪
The first seeks to establish how urban authorities consider technical policy instruments. Questions in this section seek to explore and identify practical understanding and perception of technical policy instruments.
▪
The second section explores the relationship between institutional practices and technical policy instruments, as previous academic literature has linked the effectiveness of technical policy instruments to institutional practices (e.g., [10,13,23]).
▪
The third section asks interviewees to provide practical solutions to improve the effectiveness of existing technical policy instruments in the context of urban governance.

5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Descriptive Statistics

Table 6 presents the indicators of descriptive statistics and correlation analysis of study variables. Results reveal that the highest mean is 3.100 for finance, indicating that urban authorities have sufficient funds to manage urban growth effectively. Standard deviation values for the study variables demonstrate that the study means accurately represent the research population, where the highest standard deviation was 1.415 for finance and the lowest standard deviation was 0.803 for information quality. The correlation analysis findings reveal that a significant relationship exists between the effectiveness of technical policy instruments and community participation, coordination, information quality, finance, and employee performance, with a significance level of 0.01. However, the results indicate that there is no significant correlation between the effectiveness of technical policy instruments and centralization.

5.2. The Effectiveness of Technical Policy Instruments

Table 6 verifies that the level of effectiveness of technical policy instruments is low, with an average of 2.985 out of 5. Respondents stated that current technical policy instruments are unable to achieve their objectives; that is, effective urban planning.
It was supported in the literature by evidence that urban policy instruments are still poorly developed in developing countries [13]. It has been argued in the literature that the effectiveness of technical policy instruments in Saudi Arabia is highly influenced by institutional practices and that this can also influence both sustainable development and quality of life [25,26,48]. Empirical findings provided by Alnsour [21] in the case of Jordan confirm that there is a strong relationship between the effectiveness of technical policy instruments and institutional practices. McGill [36] argues that current urban policy instruments in several African countries are unable to create urban resilience. Tugac [50] concludes that urban policy instruments in Turkey have prompted economic development but have failed to improve quality of life.
The results of regression, according to the managers interviewed, are directly linked to the fact that several technical policy instruments are inappropriate in the local context. A total of 80% of the managers interviewed declared that, because the spatial planning system in Saudi Arabia is based on a Western context, the differences between Western and developing countries in terms of socio-economic, political, cultural, environmental, and topographic contexts means that these instruments are unsuitable for the local context.
The majority of the managers interviewed stated that decision makers would prefer not to employ technical policy instruments based on Western planning systems, either because they refuse to accept constraints on their own perceptions of best practices for managing urban growth, or because technical policy instruments based on a foreign model are inappropriate for local socio-economic conditions. The latter particularly applies when instruments are impractical, and thus unable to maximize economic benefits for the public. Most of the interviewees asserted that Western models are based on a free market with high levels of public participation, and that Saudi Arabian communities are in the development stage; as a result, deviations and gaps have emerged. One of the interviewees said:
An endeavor to combine Western planning ideology and local planning ideology has resulted in some negative consequences in the whole planning system, and the socio-economic context was not considered accurately.
The previous paragraph verifies that technical policy instruments have been unable to predict future trends for urban growth in Riyadh, since the instruments used in the urban planning process are inconsistent with the local socio-economic context.

5.3. Factors Affecting the Effectiveness of Policy Instruments

Table 7 presents the results of the multiple regression analysis by which the research variables were tested. It demonstrates that the value of R (which explains the correlation coefficient between predictors and technical policy instruments) is 0.582. R2 (which reflects the amount of explained variance in technical policy instruments by predictors) is 0.339, with an adjusted R2 of 0.309, which is close to R2. It also reveals that the F value is 11.353, which is significant at the level of 0.01.
Table 7 verifies that there are no concerns regarding multicollinearity, as the values of tolerance and variance inflation factor (VIF) do not outstrip the generally accepted maximum level of 10, and tolerance values with no values less than the maximum level of 0.2. Therefore, there is no support for the existence of a multicollinearity problem. The Durbin-Watson value is 1.178, which falls between acceptable levels (less than 1 or greater than 3 are deemed to be unacceptable). Therefore, the regression model is statistically fit.
-
Decision making/centralization
Regression findings reveal centralization has no significant impact on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments. The hypothesis is not supported at the 0.05 significance level. Therefore, the hypothesis is fully rejected. These results contradict other empirical studies conducted in Saudi Arabia (e.g., [25,29,39]), which determined that centralization creates several obstacles in managing urban growth, such as a limited margin of autonomy with regards to planning and management. Hence, it can be concluded that the effectiveness of technical policy instruments is unrelated to the centralization system.
The qualitative results indicate that a few respondents believe the centralization system used to manage urban growth has several advantages, such as controlling financial resources and distributing urbanization benefits fairly. However, most of the respondents oppose this; they believe centralization leads to lower efficiency in service delivery, inappropriate decision-making, and a lack of understanding in terms of the needs and priorities of residents. Moreover, the majority of the managers interviewed noted that Saudi Arabia has already begun the transformation process from a centralized to a decentralized system, providing three reasons for this transformation: the first is that financial restrictions result in ineffective performance, the second is the growing inefficiency of urban institutions when attempting to manage urban growth thus resulting in a lack of urban economic revenues, and the third is the contradiction between policies developed by local urban institutions and national policies. A positive action by the Saudi Arabian government has enhanced the principles of accountability and transparency by establishing the Anti-Corruption Authority in 2011. One of the managers stated:
It is not possible to achieve effective management for urban growth without achieving decentralization, and it is not possible to develop decentralization unless accountability and transparency are also achieved.
Over the last decade, according to the interviewees, the government has begun to transfer some of its powers and tasks to local urban authorities. This transformation is still in the development stage, because the transfer of powers from a higher to a lower level of the hierarchy requires institutional arrangements to avoid any mismatch of reference values or a lack of procedural details. As a result, even though it is still in the beginning stages, this transformation has significantly reduced the negative impact of centralization on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments.
-
Community participation
Empirical results reveal community participation has the highest impact on the effectiveness of technical policy instruments with a beta of 0.300. The hypothesis is not supported at the 0.05 significance level. Therefore, the hypothesis is fully accepted. The existing literature supports these results, verifying that current urban management instruments are influenced greatly by community participation in developing countries [56]. The results of this research also agree with empirical findings implemented in other Saudi Arabian contexts (e.g., [22,29,39]).
The majority of the managers interviewed agreed that community participation in the decision making process is a recent development in Saudi Arabia; thus the concept of community participation needs time to become common practice. In addition, a lack of unified policy between urban institutions regarding the tools which encourage community engagement has contributed to a lack of community participation. One of the interviewees provided an example:
There is no unified policy between urban institutions regarding the use of social media services such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, and many more. In addition, these services are mostly used for information, rather than a platform to encourage local residents to become more involved in the decision-making process.
Although the majority of the managers would prefer to gain an understanding of the needs and desires of the local community from the people themselves, they explained that current activities and procedures do not support community engagement in the decision-making process. This has led to a lack of information, monitoring by the public, and socio-economic benefits. The ability of urban institutions to link the objectives of community participation to effective programs while including more residents is key to ensuring the effectiveness of community participation.
-
Coordination
Study results verify that there is a significant relationship between the level of coordination and the effectiveness of technical policy instruments. The hypothesis is not supported at the 0.05 significance level. Therefore, the hypothesis is fully accepted. These results are in line with studies which have already been conducted in Saudi Arabia (e.g., [23,27,54]) in which the coordination process between urban institutions was deemed to be ineffective. The results imply that current coordination channels are ineffective in terms of empowering public policy instruments.
Most of the interviewees believe that urban institutions lack the capacity to coordinate their activities with others. They noted how in reality the management of urban growth deals with multi-sectoral actions and programs which could occur simultaneously, requiring a high level of coordination. Policy domains do not enable urban institutions to effectively manage urban growth at multi-sectoral levels. Another challenge is overlapping roles when more than one institution has similar plans and programs. One of the managers provided an example:
The Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs and Housing has planning programs, and so does the Ministry of Economy and Planning. These two separate programs, directed at the same people, are uncoordinated, while effective coordination would save money, time, and effort.
The majority of the managers interviewed explained that a lack of coordination between urban institutions is related to a number of reasons, such as specialization, performance, power, beliefs, values, and policies. Most of the interviewees considered coordination as a main concern, due to increasing urban challenges, such as climate change, and the fact that efficient, sustainable urban growth cannot be achieved by the actions of any individual urban institution. The majority also stated that it is impossible for any one urban institution to develop a holistic strategy of urban growth without involving other urban institutions. Therefore, it is impossible to successfully manage urban growth without using collaborative channels to prepare plans, adopt alternatives, and make correct decisions.
-
Information quality
Study results reveal that a significant relationship exists between the current level of information quality and the effectiveness of technical policy instruments. The hypothesis is not supported at the 0.05 significance level. Therefore, the hypothesis is fully accepted. This is consistent with empirical findings from other studies in Saudi Arabia (e.g., [27,40]) which verified that a lack of quality information poses a major challenge for urban growth management.
According to the majority of the managers interviewed, to date relevant information regarding urban planning, the dynamics of urbanization, and the management of information systems is relatively limited. Most of the managers disclosed that techniques used to identify problems, determine priorities, and plan for future projections, monitoring, and evaluation operate ineffectively due to insufficient detailed data; moreover, this lack of information affects all spatial levels. Some interviewees also noted that urban data infrastructure is basically non-existent, exacerbated by a lack of shared information between urban institutions. Hence, developing effective digital mass spatial infrastructure is virtually impossible in the current situation. According to one of the top managers:
A range of institutional supports is required for improving the information system used to manage urban infrastructure.
As a result, the inability of policy instruments to effectively manage urban growth is related to the current situation: a deficient information system, the unavailability of detailed data across all spatial levels, and a lack of institutional support to develop urban data infrastructure.
-
Financial condition
Study findings clarify that there is no significant relationship between the financial condition and the effectiveness of technical policy instruments. The hypothesis is not supported at the 0.05 significance level. Therefore, the hypothesis is fully rejected. This contradicts the findings of previous empirical studies conducted in Saudi Arabia (e.g., [22,24,30,31,54]) which found that a lack of finance restricted the ability of urban authorities to control urban growth. This contradiction is explained by the fact that this study has ascertained how the actual challenge is a lack of financial autonomy in urban authorities, and not the ability to access sufficient financial resources, as Saudi Arabia is still in the transformation phase towards decentralization. For example, in 2020 the Saudi Arabian government allocated $14.5 billion for municipal services and $15 billion for basic equipment and transport [75]; this verifies that the challenge lies in the mechanism of the decision-making process, and not in fiscal distribution.
-
Employee performance
The empirical results reveal that there is no significant relationship between employee performance and the effectiveness of technical policy instruments. The hypothesis is not supported at the 0.05 significance level. Therefore, the hypothesis is fully rejected. This contradicts previous empirical findings for Saudi Arabia (e.g., [24,29,39,53]) which found that a lack of either skilled or trained human resources is a major challenge for urban institutions with regards to achieving sustainable urban development.
According to most of the managers interviewed, the government’s initiative to provide incentives and improve the quality of training programs has been deemed paramount to efficient operations in urban institutions and has improved overall performance. One top manager said:
A growing body of evidence illustrates that increased spending on training results in better employee performance.
The improvement in training programs has contributed to raising employee performance technically and administratively. The majority of the managers confirmed that current human resources are able to play a more effective intervening role when encountering urban challenges; this implies the existence of skilled and trained staff.

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

This study provides important insights into the theoretical and practical aspects of urban growth management. It contributes to the current literature on urban planning by providing empirical evidence of whether, and how, urban institutional practice impacts on the technical policy instruments used in managing urban growth, and thereby increases our understanding of how instruments approach and manage urban growth.
The study findings confirm that the technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia are ineffective. Factors contributing to this include a lack of community participation, deficient levels of coordination, and poor quality information. Both quantitative and qualitative findings provide empirical evidence for the absence of a national framework to build relationships between technical policy instruments and institutional practice. It is therefore necessary to create such a framework, ensuring that any obstacles which could hinder efficiency are taken into account. At the same time, existing technical policy instruments should be reassessed in line with the local context, with regards to social, economic, political, spatial, and environmental aspects, in order to raise their level of effectiveness.
Institutional practices in terms of information quality have been found to support the management of urban growth, in accordance with existing spatial planning levels. Attempts to manage urban growth based on insufficient information has led to an increase in urban challenges. Thus, information quality must be improved if the policy instrument objectives are to be achieved. Measures could be used such as promoting an information lifecycle approach and mapping data against the various phases of this lifecycle, resulting in a more effective context for information, better decision making, and improvements in technical capacity.
Successful participation requires setting clear objectives and improving communication between all stakeholders by using engagement platforms and establishing community networking. Providing incentives for participatory groups can also improve community participation, with the ensuing dialogue enhancing community participation by frequent meetings with local residents and stakeholders.
Effective coordination reduces conflict and delays, while ensuring local urban authorities can function more efficiently. Ambiguous responsibilities and overlapping roles at the multi-sectoral levels should be addressed. Thus, coordination needs to occur across all multi-sectoral levels, with managers expanding coordination between levels and sectors. In other words, broader socio-economic contexts of urban growth management need to be taken into account by all stakeholders to improve the level of coordination.
None of the suggestions for positive change outlined in this research can be put into practice without a continuing transformation towards decentralization; furthermore, it is difficult to raise the performance of urban institutions without institutional and political support.
This study focuses on the factors affecting technical policy instruments used to manage urban growth in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, future research should assess the factors affecting financial policy instruments used to manage urban growth in other developing countries. The extrapolation of the results of this study to other cities in the Arab Gulf States is another area for future research. Such studies would enhance comparative research and improve the knowledge and understanding of best practices in managing urban growth. Future research could also address other factors such as local culture which may be affecting the performance of policy instruments in Saudi Arabia.

Funding

Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2023R295), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Berry, J.L.P.; Okulicz-Kozaryn, A. The city size distribution debate: Resolution for US urban regions and megalopolitan areas. Cities 2012, 29, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision; Population Division; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  3. Xie, X.; Kang, H.; Behnisch, M.; Baildon, M.; Krüger, T. To what extent can the green belts prevent urban sprawl? A comparative study of Frankfurt am Main, London and Seoul. Sustainability 2020, 12, 679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. World Bank. Managing Urban Spatial Growth: An Evaluation of World Bank Support to Land Administration, Planning and Development; Approach Paper; IEG Evaluation: Washington. DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  5. Xu, F.; Bao, X.H.X.; Li, H.; Kwan, M.; Huang, X. Land use policy and spatiotemporal changes in the water area of an arid region. Land Use Policy 2016, 54, 366–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Zhao, P. Managing Urban Growth in a Transforming China: Evidence from Beijing. Land Use Policy 2011, 28, 96–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Keith, M.; O’Clery, N.; Revi, A. The future of the future city? The new urban sciences and a PEAK Urban interdisciplinary disposition. Cities 2020, 105, 102820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Shahab, S.; Clinch, P.J.; O’Neill, E. Impact-based planning evaluation: Advancing normative criteria for policy analysis. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2019, 46, 534–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cochrane, A. Understanding Urban Policy: A Critical Approach; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  10. Bengston, N.D.; Fletcher, O.J.; Nelson, C.K. Public policies for managing urban growth and protecting open space: Policy instruments and lessons learned in the United States. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2004, 69, 271–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Blair, R. Managing urban growth: Can the policy tools approach improve effectiveness? Public Work. Manag. Policy 2001, 6, 102–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Nelson, C.A. Growth Management and Urban Planning in the United States. In International of the Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 447–452. [Google Scholar]
  13. Rakodi, C. Forget planning, Put Politics First? Priorities for urban management in developing countries. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2001, 3, 209–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Alexander, E.R. Evaluation in Planning: Evolution and Prospects; Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.: Farnham, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  15. Lee, H.J.; Lim, S. The selection of compact city policy instruments and their effects on energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector: The case of South Korea. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 37, 116–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Siedentop, S.; Schmidt, S.; Dunlop, A. Managing Urban Growth at the Regional Level: A Review of the International Literature. Spat. Res. Plan. 2022, 80, 659–677. [Google Scholar]
  17. Debrunner, G.; Hartmann, T. Strategic use of land policy instruments for affordable housing—Coping with social challenges under scarce land conditions in Swiss cities. Land Use Policy 2020, 99, 99–104993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Woodruff, S.; Bowman, O.A.M.; Portney, K. Urban resilience: Analyzing the policies of U.S. Cities 2021, 115, 103239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Aina, A.Y.; Wafer, A.; Ahmed, F.; Alshuwaikhat, M.H. Top-Down Sustainable Urban Development? Urban Governance Transformation in Saudi Arabia. Cities 2019, 90, 272–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jain, M.; Korzhenevych, A.; Pallagst, K. Assessing growth management strategy: A case study of the largest rural-urban region in India. Land Use Policy 2018, 81, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Alnsour, J. Effectiveness of Urban Management in Jordanian Municipalities. In The Sustainable City IX; Marchettini, N., Brebbia, C.A., Pulseli, R., Bastianoni, S., Eds.; Urban Regeneration and Sustainability; WIT Press: Surrey, UK, 2014; pp. 271–282. [Google Scholar]
  22. Amer, S.M.; Majid, R.M.; Ledrra, A.T. The Riyadh Urban Growth Boundary: An analysis of the factors affecting its efficiency on restraining sprawl. Int. J. Built Environ. Sustain. 2021, 8, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. UN-Habitat. Future Saudi Cities Programme. In Saudi Cities Report 2019; UN-Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  24. Mandeli, N.K. Sustainable Development & Governance in Saudi Cities. J. Eng. Sci. 2019, 47, 565–584. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mandeli, N.K. New Public Governance in Saudi cities: An empirical assessment of the quality of the municipal system in Jeddah. Habitat Int. 2016, 51, 114–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mandeli, N.K. The Realities of Integrating Physical Planning and Local Management into Urban Development: A case study of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Habitat Int. 2008, 32, 512–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Al-Hathloul, S. Riyadh Development Plans in the Past Fifty Years (1967–2016). Curr. Urban Stud. 2017, 5, 97–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Al Qahtany, A.; Rezgui, H.L. A consensus-based framework for the sustainable urban planning development: As an approach for Saudi Arabian cities. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Dev. 2014, 5, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Ajaj, M.H.A. The Role of Local Municipal Branches in Planning, Developing and Managing Urban Growth in Saudi Arabian Cities: A Case Study of the City of Jeddah. Ph.D. Thesis, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  30. Mubarak, F.A. Urban Growth Boundary Policy and Residential Suburbanization: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Habitat Int. 2004, 28, 567–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Garba, B.S. Managing Urban Growth and Development in the Riyadh Metropolitan Area, Saudi Arabia. Habitat Int. 2004, 28, 593–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Abubakar, I.R.; Aina, Y.A. Population Growth and Rapid Urbanization in the Developing World. In Achieving Sustainable Cities in Saudi Arabia: Juggling the Competing Urbanization Challenges; Benna, U.G., Garba, S.B., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2016; pp. 42–63. [Google Scholar]
  33. Gazzeh, K.; Abubakar, I.R. Regional Disparity in Access to Basic Public Services in Saudi Arabia: A sustainability challenge. Util. Policy 2018, 52, 70–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gadou, M.A.H.; Quazi, M.A. Role of Planning and Management in Promoting Urban Development: Case Study of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. J. Eng. Sci. 2009, 37, 193–215. [Google Scholar]
  35. Aldalbahi, M.; Walker, G. Riyadh Transportation History and Developing Vision. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 216, 163–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. McGill, R. Urban resilience—An urban management perspective. J. Urban Manag. 2020, 9, 372–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Menzori, D.I.; Nunes de Sousa, C.I.; Gonçalves, M.L. Urban Growth Management and Territorial Governance Approaches: A master plans conformance analysis. Land Use Policy 2021, 105, 105436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Al-Shihri, F. Principles of Sustainable Development and Their Application in Urban Planning in Saudi Arabia. J. Eng. Sci. 2013, 41, 1703–1727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Meaton, J.; Alnsour, J. Spatial & Environmental Planning Challenges in Amman, Jordan. Plan. Pract. Res. 2012, 27, 376–386. [Google Scholar]
  40. Shakir Khan, M.; Suhail, M.; Alharbi, T. Evaluation of Urban Growth and Land Use Transformation in Riyadh Using Landsat Satellite Data. Arab. J. Geosci. 2018, 11, 540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kemp, R.; Parto, S.; Gibson, R.B. Governance for sustainable development: Moving from theory to practice. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. 2005, 8, 12–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Alshuwaikhat, H.; Aina, Y.; Rahman, S.M. Integration of urban growth management and strategic environmental assessment to ensure sustainable urban development: The case of Arabian Gulf cities. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan. 2006, 1, 203–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Jordan, A. The governance of sustainable development: Taking stock and looking forwards. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 2008, 26, 17–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Gennaio, M.; Hersperger, M.A.; Burgi, M. Containing urban sprawl—Evaluating effectiveness of urban growth boundaries set by the Swiss Land Use Plan. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, 224–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Scott, C. Governmentality and strategic environmental assessment: Challenging the SEA/good governance nexus. J. Environ. Assess. Policy Manag. 2011, 13, 67–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Smith, R.; Wiek, A. Achievements and opportunities in initiating governance for urban sustainability. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 2012, 30, 429–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Zurina, M.; Hukil, S. Appraising good governance in Malaysia based on sustainable development values. J. Sustain. Sci. Manag. 2012, 7, 247–253. [Google Scholar]
  48. Al-Hathloul, S.; Mughal, M. Urban growth management—The Saudi experience. Habitat Int. 2004, 28, 609–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Koroso, H.N.; Lengoiboni, M.; Zevenbergen, A.J. Urbanization and urban land use efficiency: Evidence from regional and Addis Ababa satellite cities, Ethiopia. Habitat Int. 2021, 117, 102437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Tugac, C. Evaluation of urban infrastructure policies in Turkey for climate resilience and adaptation. Sustain. Resilient Infrastruct. 2023, 8, 190–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Vongpraseuth, T.; Chio, G.C. Globalization, foreign direct investment, and urban growth management: Policies and conflicts in Vientiane, Laos. Land Use Policy 2015, 42, 790–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ahmad, I.; Mayo, S.M.; Bajwa, I.U.; Rahman, A.; Mirza, A.I. 2013. Role of development authorities in managing Spatial Urban Growth; a case study of Lahore Development Authority, Pakistan. Pak. J. Sci. 2013, 65, 546–549. [Google Scholar]
  53. Albassam, A.B. Achieving Sustainable Development by Enhancing the Quality of Institutions in Saudi Arabia. Int. Soc. 2021, 36, 439–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Alshebil, Y.A. Towards Making Urban Planning Practices More Effective Amid Rapid Urban Growth in Riyadh: Saudi Arabia. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  55. Bryson, M.J.; Quick, S.K.; Slotterback, S.C.; Crosby, C.B. Designing public participation processes. Public Adm. Rev. 2013, 73, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Martins, S.M.; Fundo, P.; Rosa, D.F. Community Participation in the Identification of Neighbourhood Sustainability Indicators in Brazil. Habitat Int. 2021, 113, 102370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Feldman, S.M.; Quick, S.K. Generating Resources and Energizing Frameworks through Inclusive Public Management. Int. Public Manag. J. 2009, 12, 137–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Alshihri, S.F.; Bouregh, S.A.; Al-Harigi, A.F. Public Participation in Preparing Urban Plans, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: The Case of Dammam Metropolitan Area. Mansoura Eng. J. 2014, 39, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Jreisat, J.E. Rethinking Administrative Capacity Development: The Arab States. Public Organ. Rev. 2012, 12, 139–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Metcalfe, L. International policy co-ordination and public management reform. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 1994, 60, 271–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Braun, D. Organizing the political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies. Sci. Public Policy 2008, 35, 227–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Salaj, A.T.; Lindkvist, C.M. Urban Facility Management. Facilities 2021, 39, 525–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Romanelli, M. Analysing the Role of Information Technology Towards Sustainable Cities Living. Kybernetes 2020, 49, 2037–2052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Lu, J.; Li, B.; Li, H. The Influence of Land Finance and Public Service Supply on Peri-Urbanization: Evidence from the counties in China. Habitat Int. 2019, 92, 102039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Daley, M.D. Performance appraisal as an aid in personnel decisions: Linkages between techniques and purposes in North Carolina municipalities. Am. Rev. Public Adm. 1993, 23, 201–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Johnsen, A. Strategic Planning and Management in Local Government in Norway: Status after Three Decades. Scand. Political Stud. 2016, 39, 333–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Li, W.; Feng, T.; Timmermans, J.P.H.; Li, Z.; Zhang, M.; Li, B. Analysis of citizens’ motivation and participation intention in urban planning. Cities 2020, 106, 102921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Howleit, M. Policy instruments, policy styles, and policy implementation: National approaches to theories instruments choice. Policy Stud. J. 1991, 19, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Van der Voet, J. The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. Eur. Manag. J. 2014, 32, 373–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kwon, H.K.; Shao, S.; Nah, S. Localized social media and civic life: Motivations, trust, and civic participation in local community contexts. J. Inf. Technol. Politics 2020, 18, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Nah, S.; Yamamoto, M. Civic Technology and Community Building: Interaction Effects Between Integrated Connectedness to a Storytelling Network (ICSN) and Internet and Mobile Uses on Civic Participation. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 2017, 22, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Alnsour, J.; Meaton, J. The Use of University Research in Planning Decision Making in Jordanian Municipalities. Habitat Int. 2015, 49, 206–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Maher, C.S.; Deller, S.C. Measuring municipal fiscal condition: Do objective measures of fiscal health relate to subjective measures? J. Public Budg. Account. Financ. Manag. 2011, 23, 455–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Hair, F.J.; Babin, J.B.; Anderson, E.R.; Black, C.W. Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed; Prentice-Hall International, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  75. Ministry of Finance. Saudi Arabia-Budget; Ministry of Finance: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 2020.
Table
Table 1. Phases of Urban Growth and Actions Taken.
Table 1. Phases of Urban Growth and Actions Taken.
PhaseMain Actions
Introduction phase; 1900 to 1930Public policy for services
Establishment of authorities
Growth phase; 1930 to 1970Riyadh becomes the capital
Initiation of review to define national development objectives
Initiation of a master plan for Riyadh
Rapid growth phase; 1970 to 1990Five-year national development planning
Doxiadis Associates master plan
Modification of the Doxiadis master plan by SCET
Maturity phase; 1990 to presentContinuation of national five-year development planning
Extension of urban boundaries
Infrastructure development and maintenance programs
MEDSTAR
Comprehensive Riyadh Strategic Plan (CRSP)
Riyadh Metropolitan Zoning Plan
National Spatial Strategy
Transformation into urban governance
National Spatial Strategy updated
Municipal elections
Special development units established in most cities
Participation of women in municipal councils
Development of coordination and partnership approaches
Saudi Vision 2030 (housing and quality of life)
Voluntary Local Review (VLR) (Assessment of SDGs)
Smart Government Strategy of 2020–2024
Table
Table 2. Measurement of the Dependent Variable.
Table 2. Measurement of the Dependent Variable.
DimensionsItems
Technical competence
-
Ease of implementation for technical policy instruments
-
Ease of understanding of technical policy instruments
-
Ability of technical policy instruments to coordinate with each other to overcome urban problems
Efficiency
-
Implementation costs of technical policy instruments fall within financial restraints
-
Technical policy instruments successfully meet targeted objectives
Responsiveness
-
Responsiveness of technical policy instruments to overcome urban problems and challenges
-
Speed of responsiveness of technical policy instruments to overcome urban problems and challenges
Sensitivity
-
Social benefits of technical policy instruments (e.g., transparency, justice, etc.)
-
Economic benefits of technical policy instruments (e.g., projects, services, and contribution to the economy)
Environmental protection
-
Contribution of technical policy instruments to protection of the environment
Table
Table 3. Sample Profile.
Table 3. Sample Profile.
OrganizationsSample CalculationSent
Questionnaires		Returned
Questionnaires
Municipalities40 municipalities × one mayor of each municipality = 40
40 municipalities × 2 vice mayors of each municipality = 80
40 municipalities × 16 managers of each municipality = 640
Total = 40 + 80 + 640 = 760		760310
MOMRAHThe number of selected managers and experts is 383819
RCRDThe number of selected managers, experts, and assistants is 20208
Total818818337
Table
Table 4. Results of the Reliability Test.
Table 4. Results of the Reliability Test.
VariablesNo. of Itemsα Value
Effectiveness of technical policy instruments100.816
Centralization60.882
Community participation60.876
Coordination 60.824
Information quality130.873
Financial condition70.883
Employee performance90.847
Table
Table 5. Profile of interviewee.
Table 5. Profile of interviewee.
Urban OrganizationsTarget Number of
Interviewees		Actual Number of
Interviewees
Riyadh Municipality (Amana)98
MOMRAH75
RCRD42
Total2015
Table
Table 6. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations.
Table 6. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations.
VariablesMSD123456
1. Technical Instruments2.9850.8131
2. Centralization2.72861.111−0.0441
3. Participation2.97140.9050.429 **0.1211
4. Coordination2.77860.8900.304 **−0.250 **0.180 *1
5. Information Quality2.75710.8030.292 **0.0550.0200.0451
6. Finance3.10001.4150.295 **−0.0010.384 **−0.205 *0.224 **1
7. Employee Performance3.07861.2470.278 **0.1250.461 **−0.179 *0.0840.806 **
**: correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *: correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table
Table 7. The Regression Model.
Table 7. The Regression Model.
Independent VariablesUnstandardized
Coefficients		Standardized Coefficientst-ValueSig.ToleranceVIF
BStd. ErrorBeta
Constant PPI0.5350.359-1.4900.139--
Centralization−0.0260.056−0.036−0.4690.6400.7901.266
Community participation0.2700.0760.3003.5360.0010.7241.382
Coordination0.2450.0730.2683.3460.0010.9111.098
Information quality0.2460.0750.2433.2550.0010.3802.630
Finance0.0690.0740.1200.9300.3540.7391.353
Employee performance0.0490.0840.0750.5810.5620.3852.598
R = 0.582R2 = 0.339Adjusted R2 = 0.309F = 11.353Sig. 0.000Durbin-Watson = 1.178
Level of Significance: 0.05 or less.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Aldegheishem, A. Urban Growth Management in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: An Assessment of Technical Policy Instruments and Institutional Practices. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10616. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310616

AMA Style

Aldegheishem A. Urban Growth Management in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: An Assessment of Technical Policy Instruments and Institutional Practices. Sustainability. 2023; 15(13):10616. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310616

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aldegheishem, Abdulaziz. 2023. "Urban Growth Management in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: An Assessment of Technical Policy Instruments and Institutional Practices" Sustainability 15, no. 13: 10616. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310616

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop