Land Use Policy 61 (2017) 251–264 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Land Use Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landusepol Assessing land use plan implementation: Bridging the performance-conformance divide Eran Feitelson a,∗ , Daniel Felsenstein a , Eran Razin a , Eliahu Stern b a Department of Geography, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel b Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 11 May 2016 Received in revised form 31 October 2016 Accepted 8 November 2016 Keywords: Plan implementation evaluation Land use planning Regional planning Israel a b s t r a c t The assessment of land use plan implementation is a contentious issue. The debate centers on whether the crucial evaluation element is conformance of development to plan directives or alternatively, plan performance, i.e. the degree to which the plan is actually used. An analytic framework combining both conformance and performance in the evaluation of (regional) land use plans is applied to the case of the Central District Plan in Israel. Qualitative and quantitative simulation methods are exploited. Qualitative analysis reveals that both performance and conformance are greater than indicated by non- contextualized, numeric evaluations. Additionally, high conformance does not necessarily imply good plan performance. Quantitative simulation suggests that plan performance with respect to land values and densities is initially pronounced as expectations for development are subdued but subsequently tends to wane merging with the counterfactual trend. Findings imply that plan assessment needs to consider the transaction costs of land use re-designation and actors’ perceptions of the probability that plan amendments will be approved. These perceptions differ across actors as a function of the political influence that they wield. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Assessing the implementation of land use plans is fraught with pitfalls (Talen, 1997). Land use plans are multi-dimensional and their effects are felt over extended time periods. Moreover, there is no clear counter-factual against which to compare outcomes. Hence, it is not surprising that the (scarce) attempts to conduct such assessments often deplore the lack of firm theoretical foun- dation (Alfasi et al., 2012; Bengston et al., 2004; Faludi, 2000; Talen, 1996). In this paper we strive to advance such an analytic frame- work for the evaluation of (regional) land use plans and apply it to the case of the Central District Plan in Israel. One major controversy in the evaluation of land use plans is whether the evaluation should assess the conformance of develop- ment to the plan or whether it should focus on the performance of the plan – that is, on the degree to which the plan is actually used. 1 The majority of recent studies, including those conducted ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: efeitelson@gmail.com (E. Feitelson). 1 In this study we focus on the performance of plans, rather than on the success or lack thereof of planning systems. Evaluation of planning systems as such has been widely discussed and differs methodologically from the evaluation of plans in Israel, tend to focus on the conformance of development to the plans, utilizing technological progress in GIS and remote sensing to achieve this goal (Abrantes et al., 2016; Alfasi et al., 2012; Frenkel and Orenstein., 2012; Laurien et al., 2004). Yet, previous studies have suggested that land use plans are not blueprints and hence the real test is the extent to which plans affect decision making, rather than the extent to which deviations from the plan exist (Alexander and Faludi, 1989; Faludi, 1987, 2000; Mastop and Faludi, 1997). Inherently, these two approaches can be perceived as two sides of the same coin. In Fig. 1 the bottom arrow depicts how a cer- tain phenomenon (for example, population density) is expected to evolve if no plan is put into place (business as usual – BAU). The top arrow shows the growth of the phenomenon under con- sideration (density) as stipulated in the plan assessed while the middle arrow depicts the evolution of density over time in practice. A conformance-based assessment compares the density stipulated in the plan with that achieved in practice labeling the plan a “fail- ure” when densities do not reach the prescribed level. In contrast, (Talen, 1996). Nevertheless, plan implementation also pertains to the interpreta- tions and rulings of planning commissions regarding the proposed development and the extent to which they conform or deviate from the plan. Hence, the assessment of planning committee policies is part of plan implementation evaluation. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.11.017 0264-8377/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.