**3. Land Management in European Countries**

Over the years, the narrowly defined discipline of *land policy* has evolved into *land management*. As recently as the 1980s and 1990s, *land policy* was defined and practiced as:

. . . the name suggests, [it] deals with the resource "land". It involves preparing the land for urban development and other uses that conform to the plan. It helps to ensure that the land is available to users who are suitable from an urban planning point of view. (Güttler 1997, pp. 78–91)

<sup>2</sup> Axial coding: selection of categories/codes that appear useful for generating theory/answering a question; possibly forming "code families".

As of the 2000s, the discipline was referred to in an international context as land and property management and defined as follows:

Land and property management, as an action-oriented component of spatial development and land policy, encompasses all planning and development processes as well as evaluation and regulatory measures for the use of land and built structures. For this purpose, it uses the necessary legal instruments, economic procedures and engineering methods as well as forms of governance, thus supporting sustainable land use and the functioning of the real estate market at the same time. (Kötter et al. 2015, pp. 137–146)

Both definitions are good examples of the evolution of land management. The second one gives a brief overview of the understanding of land management in the context of this book chapter. It contains the elements and aims of land management.

#### *3.1. Process of Land Development in European Countries*

The European countries have experience in the field of land management, in the areas of land banking, land administration and land management systems (including land registration). Even if the systems of the individual countries differ in detail, generally valid statements can still be made (Williamson et al. 2010). The land development process covers a broad spectrum of tasks, from project development, the acquisition or subdivision of land, legal assessment and planning approval and construction work to the allocation of development incentives and costs. Based on planning permissions or land-use permits, the process of land development manages the transformation (e.g., in land use) of existing rural or urban areas and also realizes new building areas (e.g., districts) with new physical infrastructures (Williamson et al. 2010).

The land development process (Figure 1) is divided primarily into three main phases: (1) the initial stage, (2) the land development phase and (3) the phase of mobilization and use.


**Figure 1.** Land development process. Source: extended according to Hendricks et al. (2017), used with permission.

The land development process is usually associated with the change in land use, land tenure and land value. Every step in the development process causes an increase in the land value (realized at purchase prices) and is determined by the (free) market forces (supply and demand).

#### *3.2. Land Management Instruments in Europe*

Land management instruments are important for settlement structures and urban development. The systematic use of land management instruments supports the development, order and protection of land as a limited resource. Construction activities for housing, commerce or services and the provision of land for technical infrastructures and public facilities can be controlled.

Each country has its own understanding of land administration and therefore land management instruments are used in different ways. The overarching land management instruments are applied differently in the municipalities of each country, depending on their needs. In this case, land management instruments commonly used throughout the country are considered. The specific application at the municipal level needs to be elaborated in further research.

A comparison of the European country administration systems shows that there is no single European land administration policy (Williamson et al. 2010). Nevertheless, common land management instruments of the land administration systems within European countries can be identified.

Types of Steering Measures in Land Development

From a general land management perspective, land development instruments usable in urban expansion and urban renewal can be categorized as steering measures: (1) voluntary instruments, (2) financial instruments and (3) legal instruments, as presented in Figure 2. Steering refers the possibilities provided—i.e., that the municipalities have to promote social, economic and ecological aspects within their own administrative area.

Voluntary instruments include types of planning instruments, participatory instruments, negotiation and land banking as private interim purchases. Voluntary instruments are all instruments which are optional and not legally binding (Bouwma et al. 2015). Unlike the legal instruments, they rely on free will of the participated parties. The steering possibility of the public is only low—a lot of convincing and negotiating is required.

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are organized between public and private sectors. The purpose of these is the joint work on urban and regional development functions that none of the partners involved can handle alone and which are of benefit to the partners involved (Schaeffer and Loveridge 2001). There are three kinds of partnerships:


In the negotiation, both parties act on an equal level. A voluntary transaction is a private purchase of land or real estate with both parties on an equal level (private law regulations). Additionally, the municipality has no superior position as in public instruments. Content of the contracts could be also a private land reallocation.

The private interim purchase is an approach of land banking, which is similar to the public interim purchase, with the difference that a private developer buys, develops and sells land of their own free will. Costs, risks and also the profits lie with the developer (Alterman 2012)—often the private interim purchase is combined with a negotiation (urban contract) with the municipality.

<sup>3</sup> The most frequent form of public–private partnerships is a cooperative arrangement regulated by a contract.

**Figure 2.** Land development instruments. Source: Graphic by authors.

Financial instruments intervene in the economic balance of development. They include both financial incentives (direct steering—e.g., subsidies) and financial involvement (indirect steering—e.g., cost sharing, charges/fees, and taxes) in costs for urban development stakeholders. Subsidies include the financial support of individual households as well as persons or the financial support for the purchase price of land or the construction of new living space/affordable housing (Europe—e.g., European Social Fund: ESF). The financial support for new living spaces is mostly important for cities with a rise in population and a reduction in the vacancy rate (Silva and Acheampong 2015).

An alternative financial instrument is cost sharing. Responsibility for the provision of the necessary infrastructure (technical infrastructure such as roads and utilities, electricity, water, sewage or public facilities such as playgrounds, kindergartens and schools) lies in general in competence of the municipality, but their production costs can be transferred to a developer. The level of cost sharing is a matter for negotiation and will manifest in an urban contract (see below, legal instrument—contract). In contrast to a private negotiation, the municipality is superior in the process. If a municipality itself develops, they have to pay the costs for initial provision, especially for vehicular and pedestrian infrastructures (roads, paths, squares). The costs can be shifted by charging connection fees to be paid by the owners (Silva and Acheampong 2015). In some countries, the possibility of value capturing is possible for financing the development costs. The raise of value amount can be taken or used to pass on development costs (Hendricks et al. 2017).

Legal instruments are regulated by laws and are legally binding (Silva and Acheampong 2015). Three subgroups can be distinguished: planning instruments, land banking and development instruments.

Formal plans are of the planning instruments type. The function of urban land-use planning is to prepare and manage the structure and the use of land in the municipality (Healey and William 1993; Silva and Acheampong 2015). There can be subdivision in the zoning plan with general regulations (e.g., different land uses such as residential, commercial or industrial) that apply to the whole municipal territory and the binding land-use plan with detailed planning and design for individual parts of the municipal territory (Silva and Acheampong 2015). Regulatory content and liabilities vary in European countries.

Another type of legal instrument is land banking with the subcategories pre-emptive right, public purchase and public interim purchase. The pre-emptive right means that person A and person B conclude a sales contract, whereby persons could also be companies or municipalities. The pre-emptive right allows the municipality to take the place of the buyer. The agreements of the contract continue to apply (Wirth and Wolff 2012; Kaiser et al. 2016). An early and strategic land supply (purchase of land) offers the municipalities scope for action. They are independent and can mobilize and realize the areas according to their goals and ideas. Cities which have tight markets but bought land early on are now profiting from the results. Public interim purchase means that the municipality is first a buyer and then a supplier on the municipal land market. In an early phase, the municipality buys low-cost land, mainly arable land at the edge of the cities, and sells it at a higher price as building land for residential or commercial purposes. Sometimes, the arable land is held for years before a development (Alterman 2012).

One of the development instruments is expropriation, which implies that the removal of property rights by the state is only permissible in the public interest. The land is reused for common goods afterwards. The owner receives monetary compensation, but it can also be paid to another plot of land in an equivalent location. The instrument is strictly regulated (ECHR European Convention on Human Rights; Council for the Environment and Infrastructure 2017). The (public) reallocation means the redistribution of land intends to create land that is suitable for buildings or other uses in terms of location, shape and size. This procedure aims to reorganize or extend certain areas of both developed and undeveloped lands (Council for the Environment and Infrastructure 2017).

The last category in this topic is the urban contract. It is an agreement between the municipality and third parties that include preparation and implementation of urban development measures or other agreements. The municipality is superior and can use its planning right to negotiate the contents of the contract. However, the municipality is influenced by competition and high investment sums, so that it may not exploit this balance of power for economic reasons. An important part of the urban contract is the height of transferable costs from the municipality to a developer. Signing the contract is a precondition for the development of a plot (Hendricks et al. 2017).

#### *3.3. Good-Practice Examples from Europe*

In the following subsections, information of the instruments is provided (voluntary, financial and legal). The conclusion highlights their relevance in terms of supporting socially integrative cities. Here, the focus lies on legal instruments in combination with other sets of common instruments, since they provide the most direct opportunities for steering the implementation of urban development.

#### 3.3.1. The Netherlands

In the Netherlands, there are four practices for developing land. A distinction is made between the acquisition or nonacquisition of land by the municipality and whether negotiations take place with other stakeholders. In the following, only the Active Land Policy approach with contractual negotiations will be described (Fischer and Foißner 2002; Tennekes 2018). These negotiated land-use plans (instrument under study) are a frequently used instrument for the development of cities (Tennekes 2018). In order to counteract increased land prices, development costs and speculation of land, this planning approach was established as a new land management strategy in the Netherlands in the 1990s (Tennekes 2018).

#### (Core) Content of the Instrument

As private developers increasingly own land in potential development areas (land speculation in the 1990s; land often without the right to build), it had become impossible for the municipality to acquire the land at a reasonable price for building development (Tennekes 2018). The negotiated land-use plans between the municipality and private developers combine several individual land management instruments into one overall measure and are based on the principle of public–private partnerships. The obvious instruments are: (urban) contracts, formal plans as well as public interim purchase. Under the contract, the municipality can agree on different items with the developers, which can spatially vary.

There are basically two approaches of development:

• Building claim model: Private landowners and municipalities negotiate the sale and price of the land. The municipality develops the land, manages the land and reallocates the land according to future land-use claims. The divided land is re-purchased by the contracting parties at the previously negotiated price (Tennekes 2018).

• Joint venture model: Private landowners and the municipality establish a development company together under private law that bundles and develops the land. The company (public–private partnership) can then sell the land to others or develop the property itself (Tennekes 2018).

### Effect in Terms of Supporting Socially Inclusive Cities

The Dutch approach of interim purchase of land for development leads to urban development tailored to the goals and needs of the municipality. Based on urban calculations, the municipality can negotiate reasonable prices for the land. The money raised from the sale of the land can be used to cover the costs of public facilities and technical infrastructure and (affordable) housing. This procedure is transparent and uniform for all contractual partners, which in turn increases acceptance among developers. The revenue enables the municipalities to establish needs-based services (e.g., primary and secondary schools, social housing), which can contribute to the satisfaction of the population living there.

The municipality can thus actively guide urban development and integrate social aspects in urban renewal and urban expansion areas. In addition, the municipality can specifically prevent urban sprawl and maintain the security and order of the areas. Since the municipality takes over all development measures itself and has an overview of all development steps, this can lead to an accelerated planning process.

#### Stakeholders Involved in the Planning and Implementation Process

The main stakeholders in the Dutch urban development process are primarily the municipality and private developers or corporations (Tennekes 2018; Holtslag-Broekhof et al. 2018). The development-led approach, i.e., that land-use plans are drawn up through negotiations on a project-by-project basis, encourages early and close cooperation between the stakeholders in urban development. Other stakeholders are citizens who can be formally or voluntarily involved in different steps of the planning process. The voluntary participation of citizens is at the discretion of the municipality. The involvement of citizens has both potentials (co-decision, acceptance) and risks (longer time for voting, good management in coordinating the management). There may exist tensions between effectiveness and citizen participation and other democratic values. Especially in the joint venture model, municipalities have a double role—as government actors protecting the public good and as private actors invested in the venture. Demanding additional social investments may put the municipality at (financial) risk. It provides opportunities for socially integrative development, but also poses risk due to these roles.

#### Classification in Systematization

Negotiated land-use plans consist of several land management instruments. These are legal instruments (formal planning and development instruments as well as land banking). However, negotiated land-use plans as an overall measure take into account the project-based planning approach in the Netherlands and support socially inclusive cities as a part of the negotiated content.

#### Interim Conclusion Regarding Negotiated Land-Use Plans

This instrument is probably more suitable for urban expansion areas. However, its use in urban renewal areas is not excluded. The instrument especially attracts attention because of the close cooperation with private developers. The public–private partnerships enabled the municipality to cover the costs of and provide public services and social housing. As a result of discussions and negotiations with the landowners, the municipality is able to implement the city-wide goals.

#### 3.3.2. Germany

In the German context, the focus is also on legal instruments to support socially integrative cities: one example of steering an intended development process is the so-called building land strategy (instrument under study).

#### (Core) Content of the Instrument

Using the tool of a basic decision (of the municipality), the municipality can commit itself to manage a social, environmental and/or economic orientation.<sup>4</sup> With the basic decision, the municipality already sets a future direction for the entire municipal territory. The basic decision is legally binding for the municipality. Building land strategies are basic decisions that combine the possible elements of an urban contract. Building land strategies create various benefits for municipalities and developers, such as the mobilization and conversion of building land potential and the acceleration of land development processes and the basic decision to ensure sustainable land use.

<sup>4</sup> Objectives of municipal building land strategies are: Social, economic and urban planning objectives. Social Objectives: Improvement of housing supply through housing funding quota and housing construction quota. Economic objectives: Discounted sale of real estate; transfer of costs to developers. Urban planning objectives: Quality objectives of urban development such as building culture, urban development standards and environmental standards.

Effect in Terms of Supporting Socially Inclusive Cities

Building land strategies promotes qualified urban land use, as well as sustainable land use. The municipality chooses their core criteria in a municipal resolution which is binding and afterwards negotiated in each urban contract (e.g., a special portion of affordable housing, green aspects). These strategies offer the mobilization and conversion of building land and the acceleration of processes. The application of building land strategies allows the municipality to partially transfer the financial effort of mobilization to investors (Weitkamp et al. 2017). This, in turn, leads to a reduction in the burden on the municipal budget. Due to the contractual agreement (urban contract) and transparency in the development process, the investor also benefits from the timely use of construction rights. The cost burden for investors is usually capped and depends on an increase in the land value of the respective area to be developed (Suering and Weitkamp 2019). An advantage of building land strategies is the fixation of a transparent and uniform strategy instead of individual case decisions of urban development contracts. Furthermore, they offer fast and secure implementation of the projects, transparency and uniformity.

The investor gives his basic agreement, and subsequently the negotiations for the cost transfer take place. The contract is concluded between the municipality and the investor. After signing the contract, projects are interpreted by the public and the citizens participate. After the participation has taken place, a land-use plan is established and the investor can implement his construction project.

#### Stakeholders Involved in the Planning and Implementation Process

The investor and the municipality are primarily involved in the actual development process. Other stakeholders in a development process can be landowners, developers, financial institutions, planning and building authorities, building contractors, professional advisers and third parties. The actual basic decision and development project can be preceded by citizen participation (meetings) or informal plans. Through these preceding measures, the acceptance and satisfaction can be increased (Williamson et al. 2010; Jeschke and Weitkamp 2017).

#### Classification in Systematization

Thus, a building land strategy is a mix of legal and financial instruments (Suering and Weitkamp 2019).

#### Interim Conclusion Regarding the Building Land Strategies

The social integration in building land strategies can be realized by focusing on social objectives. Instead of making far-reaching economic demands, the municipality can focus on, e.g., social housing (Adolphs et al. 2019; Weitkamp et al. 2020). To this

extent, it uses its room for negotiation to achieve socially integrative goals. With the transfer of obligations to the private sector, the (economic) advantage does not exclusively remain with the investor. Structures that serve the common good are created based on the realization of social and technical infrastructures, housing promotion and climate aspects.

#### 3.3.3. France

In France, too, there are different instruments to support social aspects in land development. The application depends on the respective requirements and needs of the region or municipality. Therefore, not all instruments are applied equally everywhere. With a focus on social aspects (mainly social housing), there is the procedure of land banking (instrument under study), particularly selling land to housing companies in France (Cahier Pratique Documents 2014; Hendricks et al. 2017). The basis for this procedure is the strategic development policy "politique de la ville" and different laws on solidarity and urban renewal. A national authority for urban renewal is established to monitor and steer construction measures. This authority becomes a new central element of the "politique de la ville" (Bauhardt 2005; Glasze and Weber 2010).

#### (Core) Content of the Instrument

Until the 1970s, many social housing estates were built on the outskirts of cities. After that, the existing stock was considered sufficient and the focus was on subsidies in the form of housing subsidies rather than on promoting the construction of new housing. Over the years, many of the social housing estates have been neglected, with many requiring redevelopment or demolition (Glasze and Weber 2010; Reiter 2011). The need for social housing is very high again today. Therefore, the land banking procedure in the urban development process focuses on social housing.

Traditionally, local authorities sell their land to housing developers. This is to ensure the provision of affordable rental housing development. When developing land, the predefined themes and objectives of the region and municipality must be taken into account.

#### Effect in Terms of Supporting Socially Inclusive Cities

The right to housing is established in French law. The purpose of construction, planning, allocation and operation of social rental housing is to give people with low incomes access to affordable housing. This should lead to an improvement in housing conditions and a social mix in cities and neighbourhoods (Glasze and Weber 2010).

Apart from simply providing people with housing, there are numerous other effects. Some of them are described in more detail.

The land banking approach in France works against the rise in prices for real estate and land, which has been observed for several years. Further, it counteracts advancing urban sprawl. Urban sprawl often has a direct effect on infrastructure. By stopping urban sprawl, costs for infrastructure facilities can be saved at the same time. Thus, good land policy and land management can counteract the effects mentioned above. In addition, the municipality is to provide social (or adequate) housing in the long term. Land reserves in public hands, which are developed according to demand, can prevent price speculation by private developers.

#### Stakeholders Involved in the Planning and Implementation Process

The main stakeholders in this process are the local authorities and housing developers. The municipalities sell their land to the companies. After receiving the land, the housing companies are responsible for building social housing. Social housing in France is regulated by a strong involvement of the public sector (Cahier Pratique Documents 2014; Hendricks et al. 2017). The construction of new social housing depends, on the one hand, on the municipality itself as the planning authority, and on the other hand on the possibilities (e.g., financial possibilities) of the housing companies.

#### Classification in Systematization

The French example also involves a mix of legal and financial instruments to provide the population with social (or adequate) housing. Traditionally, municipalities buy land and resell it to social housing companies.

#### Interim Conclusion Regarding Land Banking

The construction of social housing to provide affordable housing for the population is heavily dependent on municipalities and housing companies. For many years, the need for social housing was covered, which led to the instrument being pushed into the background of planning. Nowadays, old strategies need to be focussed on and new strategies need to be developed to meet the increasing demand for affordable housing. In this way, the social integration of people in French cities can be successful.

#### *3.4. Comparative Consideration of Good Practice Examples from Europe*

In European countries, land management instruments are used at different stages in a development process—mostly in the first two stages of the development process, as in the three examples of the Netherlands, Germany and France. The aim of the instruments is to steer towards a sustainable land use; this can include a change of the type of usage. The most common type of urban development in Europe is a developer-led development (Hepperle et al. 2017; Gerber et al. 2018). For a developer model, two scenarios exist.

Scenario 1 (expansion or renewal): The land is owned by a developer. There is a gap between actual land use and intended land use. According to the law, the developer is only obliged to build on the gap in such a way that the type and degree of the development fit in with the surrounding buildings. The municipality does not influence the use of the area or the possibility of demanding the realization of affordable housing. If the gap raises, a land-use plan is needed for development. In this case, instruments such as a building land strategy (Germany) or negotiated land-use plans (the Netherlands) could be used.

Scenario 2 (classical expansion): The land is owned by a developer. It is arable land without building rights or greater innercity areas with land-use plans or with former uses such as, e.g., industrial use. The developer wants to develop the land into a new quarter. For this purpose, the owner needs a land-use plan to acquire a building permit. Scenario 2 describes the most common one in Europe. Especially in this scenario, the applicability of the described legally and financing instruments from the Netherlands, Germany and France can mean an added value for the support of socially integrative cities.

However, the city normally tries to combine the preparation of the land-use plan with negotiating (urban contract in Germany or negotiated land-use plan in the Netherlands) preconditions such as taking over all development costs (including public ones) or realizing affordable housing. To this extent, an urban contract can be deployed for different purposes and urban aims—e.g., preparation of infrastructure, permit agreements, reallocation contracts or realization of affordable housing—and the social integrity can be realized in the negotiation process. If the developer does not agree, there will be no planning process needed for permission. Thus, the municipality is able to use its planning right to force special conditions on the developer.

The same effect can be seen using the public interim purchase (land banking in France to promote social housing). There, the city is free to define condition for reselling their own land. However, unlike urban contracts, the city and not a developer bears the complete financial risk. It takes a financially strong city or strategic land banking to be able to carry out an interim purchase at a large scale. However, it offers the greatest steering opportunity for cities. Social integration can be carried out without hindrances within the financial frame of the municipal budget.

#### **4. Conclusions and Outlook**

Many European cities are confronted with the challenges of the rapid, sustainable and demand-oriented provision of space for the supply of people. Planning processes and land management instruments are necessary so that cities can be developed in an orderly and structured manner. Cities are aware of the versatile instruments for activating or restructuring land. The main challenge is the sensible application and combination of different instruments for socially integrative cities.

The land development process proceeds as described in Figure 1. Steering measures are carried out in the first and second phases—the Initial and Land Development Phases—of the development process. In the third phase, processes of urban development are finished. The mentioned land management instruments do not have the same scope and potential for steering socially integrative urban development. Even though the municipalities have knowledge of the legal framework, the challenge posed is the combination of the instruments to achieve a sustainable outcome.

The possibilities to influence land development through steering measures are immense. Every land development instrument offers certain advantages, but also has its limitations. In general, there are a lot of instruments to steer a social integrative city. It is up to the city if it wants to make a conscious choice of which instrument or instruments to apply to a situation. A social integrative development also depends on whether the municipality has to weigh up certain issues against other equally important urban planning issues. Here, a social integrative development may be pushed into the background or will be part of a compromise decision (as shown in the case of the negotiated land-use plan in the Netherlands). The instruments for it exist and can also be used very purposefully (support of legal instruments through financing strategies), as the cases of the Netherlands, Germany and France illustrate. Moreover, these can also be used in a very targeted manner (support for legal instruments through financing strategies).

Land management instruments (e.g., negotiations or interim purchase) are a good example of land development through their steering possibilities. The municipality decides on their aims, e.g., social integration, for the development of the land. Municipality and developer have to negotiate the detailed conditions while the municipality can act freely on their own land in terms of interim purchase (as shown in the cases of the negotiated land-use plan in the Netherlands and the building land strategies in Germany).

The land management strategies in the selected countries all include:


The general findings show that land management instruments are advantageous when supporting socially integrative urban expansion and renewal. To what extent this can happen depends on the individual context (case-by-case decision in the individual area). Thus, the general assessment provides the potentials of individual instruments, and needs reflect regarding broader practice experiences depending on specific projects.

The identified land management instruments support socially integrative matters. The combination of informal instruments (integrated urban development concepts, renewal concepts) and formal instruments (zoning plan or binding land-use plan, as shown in the three case studies) allow strategic and incremental development as well as legally binding steering.

Socially integrative urban development focuses on managing urban expansion, promoting urban density, regenerating existing urban areas and fostering dynamic communities. Strategies for managing sustainable land use must take into account the individual framework conditions for land ownership and land management systems. Land management must play a key role in the transition to urban sustainability through socially integrative cities, because its instruments are able to steer the defined urban aims—e.g., urban contracts, land-use plans (as shown in the Netherlands and Germany) or land banking (as shown in France). Different instruments are needed because of the different initial conditions in urban expansion or urban renewal—combinations of instruments allow a target-oriented development process. The social needs of each city are highly individual and the range of instruments is very diverse. Since not every instrument is equally suitable for all challenges in cities, a detailed choice of usable instruments is required.

If the city intends to develop in a sustainable manner, it shall integrate social aspects in renewal and expansion areas. Economically operating cities should be recommended to carry out demand analyses, move away from supply planning and specifically address their individual needs. This will lead to higher benefits, which could be used for realizing urban aims. This can be supported and implemented by different land management instruments. Therefore, land management instruments allow steering a social integrative process in different stages of the development process and different preconditions. Cities are recommended to use the portfolio of instruments on a case-by-case basis to enable sustainable development.

**Author Contributions:** J.S.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Analysis, Investigation, Validation, Writing—original draft, Visualization, Writing—review & editing. A.O.: Conceptualization, Writing—original draft, Supervision, Visualization, Writing—review & editing. A.W.: Conceptualization, Writing—original draft, Supervision, Visualization, Writing—review & editing.

**Funding:** This research was funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Grant Agreement No. 770141.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**


© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
