impacts of exorbitant land price in urban form - a case of

Proceedings of 8th IOE Graduate ConferencePeer Reviewed

ISSN: 2350-8914 (Online), 2350-8906 (Print)Year: 2020 Month: June Volume: 8

Impacts of Exorbitant Land Price in Urban Form - A Case ofKageshwori Manohara Municipality

Swornima Munankarmi a, Ashim Ratna Bajracharya b

a, b Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Pulchowk Campus, IOE, TU, NepalCorresponding Email: a [email protected], b [email protected]

AbstractUrbanization has become unavoidable phenomenon observed all across the globe especially in developingcountries. One of the most significant impacts of urbanization is on the price of land. The supply of landis inelastic and the speculative demand for land breaks equilibrium of demand and supply which leads todeviation of land prices from their basic value. This study focuses on studying impact of exorbitant land priceson urban form of study area Kageshwori Manohara Municipality. Kageshwori Manohara is rapidly urbanizingmunicipality where the land price has increased in even faster pace. To gain insight into the current scenarioof study area, both qualitative and quantitative analytical methods were used using the data collected viainterviews with key informants and questionnaire survey. Various indicators with respect to land price at wardlevel were analyzed. The study has drawn conclusion and recommendations regarding the urban form andland management for the municipality, and for the urban areas that are in stage of rapid urbanization.

KeywordsLand Price – Urban Form –Urbanization – Urban Land Management

1. Introduction

Urbanization in Nepal, as a process, is largely theoutcome of location of new economic activities andpopulation movement as opposed to the outcome of aplanning effort [1]. Urbanization in Nepal isdominated by a few large and medium cities with anexcessive population concentration in the KathmanduValley. Kathmandu Valley accounts for 24 per cent ofthe total urban population [1]. With the population of2.5 million people, Kathmandu valley is struggling torespond to its current urbanization rate of around 4percent [2]. During the time period of 1989 – 2016,built up areas in Kathmandu valley has increased from5.10% (2153.79 Ha.) to 26.06% (11,020.62 Ha.) oftotal land area [3]. There is pressure of urban growthin peri urban areas of Kathmandu Valley as thedevelopment is sprawling outward from urban corewhich has led to huge rise in land price, landspeculation and uncontrolled urban development.

Land in Nepal has traditionally represented theprincipal form of wealth, the principal symbol ofsocial status, and the principal source of economicand political power [4]. In Nepal, land is still the most

secure form of financial investment and an asset topass to future generation. The growing population hasgenerated various demands of land use over limitedsupply of land resulting to increase in rent and landprice.

In absence of strong government regulation andintervention, land brokers, land developers and landowners have become the major actors involved indetermining the land price in the market. Thespeculative bubble in urban land market has becomechallenging land management issue in present context.Speculation adds to the demand for land, makingprices go even higher. Land becomes priced for futureuse, not present day use [5, 6]. Kathmandu haswitnessed spiraling increase in Land value decreasingaffordability for majority of population which ispromoting haphazard urbanization and urban sprawl.Fragmentation, unregulated urban land market,faulted land acquisition and compensation andincomprehensible zoning regulations characterize thecurrent urban land.

While urbanization and urban growth appearinevitable, urban areas are beset with a host of critical

Pages: 46 – 54

Proceedings of 8th IOE Graduate Conference

issues related to urban development, management andinstitutions. The evolving urban form is becomingincreasingly disorganized mixed with incompatibleland uses, declining level of amenities andneighborhood environment. Deficiency of urbaninfrastructures is highlighted by the situation of watersupply, sanitation, solid waste management, housing,transport and energy [7].

2. Problem Statement

Kageshwori Manohara Municipality is rapidlyurbanizing municipality where the land price hasincreased in even faster pace. In absence of properplanning and regulatory policies, this overpricing ofland has negative implications on urban form of themunicipality.

3. Research Objectives

The main objective of the research is to study the linkbetween urban land market and urban form. Thespecific objectives of this research are:

To study the implication of land price on elements ofurban form

To give recommendations regarding land managementin present and future scenario.

4. Literature Review

In context of urban development, Land is the keyunderstanding of two important aspects. Firstly, landis vital in explaining the shape, layout and growth ofurban forms. Secondly, it is at the center of city’sactivities, influencing economic development anddetermining the relationship between the differentsocial groups and activities [8]. Major characteristicsof urban land are continuous change in its value,continuous change of its comparative location withinthe city, and continuous change of its characteristicsin time. In order to be qualified as urban land,infrastructure should be maintained, the developmentrights should be determined by zoning plan andsuperstructure should be determined on the basis ofinfrastructure and zoning plans [9].

Price, expressed in money, is the generally acceptedmeans to compare values in a market. Market pricedesignates what a property might be sold for at aspecific period in time; value designates a property’s

actual worth in relation to other similar properties [8].In Nepal, there is major distinction in government rateand market rate of land. Government rate of land isthe legal rate and is necessary for loan and taxpurposes and is also the basis for compensation inland acquisitions. However, market rate; though it isinformal, is used in land transactions and is moredetermining factor in urban land use.

Land market can be defined as a site which bringstogether buyer and sellers to exchange land and landuse rights for an agreed price. Urban land market playsa critical role in shaping urban development outcomes– determining the location, density, form and price ofresidential, commercial and industrial development[10]. Efficient and equitable land markets are a prerequisite for well-functioning cities. Land market ofNepal is largely unregulated and informal. Haphazardland use and management is the ultimate price to payas outcome of urban land market practice of Nepal.

The term ‘urban form’ can be used simply to describea city’s physical characteristics [11] referring to itssize, shape, and configuration. There are five broadand inter-related elements that make up urban form ina given city- Density, Transport Infrastructure,Housing Type, Land Use and Layout. The effects ofland speculation on urban planning and developmentconsists of poor land subdivision, poor access roads,urban sprawl, lack of proper setback, emergence ofcul-de-sac, dominance of residential land uses overother land uses like recreational, commercial andpublic and semipublic as well as presence ofincompatible land uses [12].

Land management is dynamic and active processwhere the most appropriate land use is constantlychanging with management of its planning regulatoryand infrastructure activities [8]. Land management isdesigned to achieve planned urban expansion,adequate land supply and sustainable urbandevelopment. Urban intensification is regarded as theprevalent strategy to ease the pressures of urbansprawl through increasing the density of built formand activities [13]. Recently, participatory and moreflexible approach of land development andmanagement are in practice such as Land Pooling,Guided land Development etc.

5. Methodology

To achieve the stated objectives, suitable researchparadigm needs to be associated with the study. The

47

Impacts of Exorbitant Land Price in Urban Form - A Case of Kageshwori Manohara Municipality

nature of research requires both qualitative andquantitative research approaches (viz. PragmaticParadigm). First objective is to study the implicationof land price on elements of urban form. Theepistemological Position of research is post positivistwhere observations may involve error and reality isimperfect. Second objective is to giverecommendations regarding urban land management.Here, epistemological position is interpretivist wherethere are multiple subjective interpretations of socialreality.

Initially, literature review and case studies were doneto gather the required background knowledge. To gaininsight into the current scenario of study area, bothqualitative and quantitative analytic methods was usedand necessary data was collected via interviews withkey informants and questionnaire survey. The selectedkey informants were ward members, engineers, localbrokers and local residents and were interviewed upondifferent facets of overpriced land in municipality.The indicators of land price impact on urban form –population attributes, housing characteristics, land useconfiguration and transport infrastructure weredetermined on the basis of literature review andrelated data were collected from municipality. Themarket price of land was verified from differentsources such as local residents, local brokers, clients,property websites etc. At least five samples of landprices were taken to calculate each average land price.A questionnaire was developed using the variables ofland value determinants.

A total of 21,420 households (HH) from ward nos.9,8,7,6 & 5 were taken as sample frame. A total of160 HH samples were collected from the study areausing stratified random sampling method. The datawere analyzed and conclusions were drawn out.

6. Study Area

Kageshwori Manohara Municipality located in northeast of Kathmandu District in province no. 3 of Nepalwas declared municipality in December 2, 2014 bythe decision of council of ministers of Government ofNepal. With total area of 28.8 Sq. Km., it is dividedinto 9 administrative wards.

Geographically, Kageshwori Manohara Municipalitylies within 27 ° 41’ 20” to 27°46’ 33” North (Latitude)and 85 ° 21’ 45” to 85°28’ 19” East (Longitude)withelevation range of 1297 to 2258 meters from sea level[14]. The name of municipality was taken from

historical Kageshwori Mahadev temple situated inGagalphedi (Ward no.1) and Manohara River.

Figure 1: Location of Kageshwori ManoharaMunicipalitySource: GIS Shape Files, Preparation of Urban BaseMap and Municipal GIS of Kageshwori ManoharaMunicipality, Implementing Agency: KageshworiManohara Municipality, Office of Municipal Executive,Danchhi, Kathmandu

Table 1: Ward Level Population data of KageshworiManohara Municipality- 2075 B.S.

Ward No. Total Popn. Area (Sq. Km.) Pop. Density HH No.1 6784 9.82 690.84 15152 3468 1.55 2237.42 7523 2932 1.61 1821.12 6834 7785 2.96 2630.07 17965 9780 4.22 2317.54 23976 12886 3.03 4252.81 29417 19046 2.42 7870.25 49018 11032 1.72 6413.95 30299 28522 1.46 19535.62 8152

Total 102235 28.79 3551.06 26166Source: Household Population Survey, 2075 B.S.

(2018 A.D.), Kageshwori Manohara Municipality

The municipality has ample of agricultural land whichit has viewed as both strength and opportunity fromperspective of agriculture and probable industries. Butfrom planning perspective, there is always threat ofspread of urban sprawl towards vacant and agriculturalland.

48


7. Development Trend in Study Area

Figure 2: Chart showing population and HH databetween 2068 B.S. and 2075 B.S.Source: CBS National census 2068 B.S. (2011 A.D)and Household Population Survey, 2075 B.S. (2018A.D.), Kageshwori Manohara Municipality

Figure 3: Chart showing built up growth inKageshwori Manohara Municipality from 2010 A.D.to 2019 A.D.Source: Google Earth Images and GIS Shape Files,Preparation of Urban Base Map and Municipal GISof Kageshwori Manohara Municipality, ImplementingAgency: Kageshwori Manohara Municipality, Officeof Municipal Executive

As shown in figure 2, Population and Householdnumber of municipality has nearly doubled in span of7 years. Settlement increment is centered in ward no.9, 8, 7, 6 and 5 of the municipality and is sprawlinghaphazardly towards north of municipality. Thespatial temporal analysis of Google earth imagesshows that the percentage of built up has increasedfrom 7% to 20% in span of a decade.

Figure 4: Chart showing land Use DistributionPercentage of Kageshwori Manohara MunicipalitySource: GIS Shape Files, Preparation of Urban BaseMap and Municipal GIS of Kageshwori ManoharaMunicipality, Implementing Agency: KageshworiManohara Municipality, Office of Municipal Executive

Figure 5: Land use map of Kageshwori ManoharaMunicipalitySource: GIS Shape Files, Preparation of Urban BaseMap and Municipal GIS of Kageshwori ManoharaMunicipality, Implementing Agency: KageshworiManohara Municipality, Office of Municipal Executive

There is still dominance of agriculture in land coverof municipality. As shown in figure 4, 51% of totalland cover is occupied by agriculture. Total 4% ofland is occupied by roads. As seen in the map, roadnetwork in the municipality is highly unregulated anddeveloped without any sort of planning.

According to national urban development strategy(NUDS, 2017), the target of urban road density is 7.5km per Square km land area. Most of the roads are

49


very narrow (<4.0 m). Figure 6 shows that 57.7% oftotal municipal road are less than 4m wide. Theaverage road density for total area of municipality is19.29 km road per square km area and the density ofroad per 1000 population is 5.43 km. The density ofthe road in municipality is found to meet the nationalstrategy. The major constraint for the implementationof Municipal Transport Master Plan (MTMP) is toprovide sufficient right of way of the roads.

Figure 6: Chart showing percentage of Road Lengthof Municipality on the basis of Road WidthSource: GIS Shape Files, Preparation of Urban BaseMap and Municipal GIS of Kageshwori ManoharaMunicipality, Implementing Agency: KageshworiManohara Municipality, Office of Municipal Executive

8. Data Analysis

8.1 Analyzing Responses from Interviewswith Key Informants

According to Mr. Umesh Jung Thapa - StructuralEngineer of Kageshwori Manohara Municipality, Landprice varies greatly within a single municipality dueto settlement pattern. After earthquake of 2015 A.D.,in migration increased in Municipality especially inward nos. 9, 8 and 7 & commercial activities hasalso equally increased. Ms. Seema Acharya - WardEngineer, adds that the broker culture is one of mainreason for price hike in this area. Agriculture landis being divided into small parcels and sold withoutensuring provision of basic infrastructure leading tohaphazard urbanization.

Ms. Deepa Karki - Ward Engineer, cites that most ofroads have minimum road width. Road network isunregulated & there is problem linking feeder roads tomain road. The increase in number of vehicles onroad is causing increment in road accidents, trafficcongestion, and commuter hour loss. Similarly, Mr.Ram Babu Acharya - land owner, told that his family

decided to buy land here as the family has manyrelatives here in this area and is more accessible andnear to city center than previous location. They havesold 11 anna of ancestral land at Chhaimale, nearDakshinkali to be able to afford 3 anna land here.

8.2 Macro analysis of Indicators

Figure 7: Chart showing ward level populationdensity & average land price per anna

Figure 8: Chart showing ward level road densities &average land price

Figure 9: Chart showing ward level builtuppercentage & average land price

50


Table 2: Ward Level Population Density, Percentage of In migrants, Rental Households, Built ups, RoadDensities and Average Land Price per Anna

Ward No. Population density ppl/sq.km. % of In migrants % of Rental Households Builtup % in Ward Road Density Km./Sq. Km. Road Density Km./1000 ppl. Average Land Price/Anna

1 690.84 15.2 12.28 5.29 9.65 13.96 5750002 2237.42 11.2 11.17 32.25 18.01 8.05 12300003 1821.12 22.1 17.28 36.02 15.78 8.66 17000004 2630.07 42.2 21.49 26.68 19.41 7.38 17700005 2317.54 75.2 38.1 15.64 15.62 6.74 17750006 4252.81 73.5 28.18 35.31 31.71 7.46 22400007 7870.25 72.9 45.89 43.8 28.24 3.6 27000008 6413.95 81.2 51.22 44.76 31.6 4.92 29400009 19535.62 85.1 61.74 66.75 44.64 2.28 3310000

Source: Report - Preparation of Urban Base Map and Municipal GIS of Kageshwori Manohara Municipality,Implementing Agency: Kageshwori Manohara Municipality, Office of Municipal Executive, Danchhi, Kathmandu

Source of Land Price: Local Information Sources

Figure 10: Chart showing ward level percentage of inmigrants, rental households and average land price peranna

Source (Figure 7-10): Report - Preparation of UrbanBase Map and Municipal GIS of KageshworiManohara Municipality, Implementing Agency:Kageshwori Manohara Municipality, Office ofMunicipal Executive, Danchhi, Kathmandu Source ofLand Price: Local Information Sources

Macro level analysis is carried out in ward level whereaverage data of each ward is taken as base of analysis.The average land price is co related with the variablesselected as indicators in this research. The indicatorsselected to analyze the impact of land price on urbanform are population attributes, land use configurationand transport infrastructure.

It is seen in the graph that population density of theward no. 9 is exceptionally higher than other wards.Percentage of in migrant population is relatively higherin ward no. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. If we consecutively look intothe ward level data of rental population, Ward no. 5,7, 8 and 9 have exceptionally higher percentage ofrental households. Population attributes have strongco relations with average land price.

Percentage of Built up in each ward is dependent onthe composition of land cover. Ward 9 has the highestpercentage of built up in its land cover. Ward 1 and 5

has relatively low percentage of built up because theland cover of these ward consists of ample forest areaswhich is owned by government. Drastic differenceis not seen between the built up percentages of otherwards. There is positive but weak co relation betweenaverage land price and built up percentage of ward.

Ward no. 1 has higher road density per 1000population than per sq. km. of area. But it iscontrasting in rest of all wards. The differencebetween road densities increases as we movesouthwards of municipality. There is abrupt rise inroad density per Sq. Km. area between ward 5 and 6.Road density per 1000 population seems to be morestrongly co related with Average Land Price thanRoad density per Sq. Km. of area. Though the corelation between average land price and density per1000 population is stronger; it is negative co relation.

8.3 Micro Analysis of Indicators

Figure 11: Land cover Map of Ward no.8

For Micro analysis of indicators, Ward no.8 ofKageshwori Manohara Municipality is chosen. Theland cover/land use of Ward no.8 is dominated by

51


built ups/ Residential Land use. Agriculture land isbeing converted into built ups. The percentage ofdesignated open space is less than 1 percentage oftotal ward area. Commercial areas are developedalong major roads. Land is fragmented into smallplots for residential purpose. 41% of total cadastralplots are less than 3 anna or 95 sqm. 82% of totalbuildings are less than 2.5 storey. Net building densityis 3185 building per sq. km area of Residential land.Settlement pattern is organic without centralizedplanning. Road networks are unregulated with highnumbers of cul de sacs. 40% of total road is below 4meters width.

Figure 12: Road Network & Settlement Pattern ofWard no.8

Source (Figure 11 & 12) : GIS Shape Files,Preparation of Urban Base Map and Municipal GISof Kageshwori Manohara Municipality, ImplementingAgency: Kageshwori Manohara Municipality, Officeof Municipal Executive

8.4 Analysis of HH Questionnaire Survey

Figure 13: Chart showing average land prices peranna in intervals of 5 years

In the HH questionnaire survey, it is found that thereis huge gap in land plot size between indigenous andmigrated population. Among the 160 respondents,40% were indigenous (local) people and 60% migratedfrom somewhere else. The average plot size of localpeople is 252.38 Sqm. (0-7-3-3) while average plotsize of migrated respondents is 111.28 Sqm. (0-3-2-0). As per the gathered data, Average Land Price hasdoubled after 2015 A.D.

Figure 14: Chart showing locational choices ofrespondents

In the perception survey, when asked to respondentswhy they chose particular locality, most answered thefollowing reasons:

• Accessibility to market, school, workplace etc.• Provision of electricity, drinking water• Relatives nearby and good neighborhood

Also when asked about the negative aspect of thelocality, almost all respondents answered pollution(air and noise) as the major drawback of the area.

9. Discussion

Population density of Ward no.9 is comparable toaverage density of Kathmandu Metropolitan City -20,287 Ppl/ Sq. Km. Above 50% population share ofward no 5, 6, 7, 8, & 9 is of in migrants. At earlystage of urbanization, internal migration contributesmore to urban population growth than natural increase.But high rate of internal migration in absence ofsufficient planning creates problems such as squattersettlements, slum areas, traffic congestion, urban poor,urban sprawl, etc.

High percentage of rental household is seen in ward no.5, 7, 8 and 9. Due to locational attributes of ward no.7,8, and 9, rental HH is high in those wards. People tendto choose location here as it is near from urban center

52


and at the same time land price in these wards are highdecreasing affordability for many HHs.

Built up percentage is higher in wards with highaverage land price. Ward no 9, 8, and 7 are moreaccessible than other wards. Distance from city centeror accessibility is one of functions of Willingness topay (WTP) of consumers/buyers. When WTP ishigher, the land use of area is dominated by residentialland use. In absence of government’s intervention onland market, other land use will not be feasible.

The micro analysis of ward no.8 is the representationof urban form that is being developed in themunicipality. The edge between urban and rural areashas become undefined as open spaces and agricultureland gets encroached by settlements. The leapfrog ordispersed development pattern has resulted in manypocket spaces trapped between the built ups. Theevolving urban form is increasing private vehicledependency and longer commuting distances resultingmore traffic congestion and air pollution. It alsosubstantially increases the per-user costs of providingpublic services such as water supply, sanitation androad.

Ward no 9 has highest number of building per sq. km.of ward area, highest percentage of cadastral plotsbelow 3 anna and buildings above 2.5 storey.Likewise ward no. 8 and 7 have high percentage ofcadastral plots below 3 anna area suggesting landfragmentation. Micro analysis of ward no.8 shows thePrevalence of low height buildings relating to lowdensity development. Ironically, the faster growingcities, while having more sprawl, will actually bedenser in those areas that are actually developed.More land will be withheld from development, landvalues will be higher, and the densities in developedareas will be higher. Consecutively, landfragmentation will increase in surrounding region ofdeveloped area due to price hike fueled by speculation.One of key informant has indicated that commercialactivities are growing in ward no 9. In themunicipality, Ward no.9 is developing as urban subcenter and its peripheral effect is seen most in wardno. 8 and 7.

Ward no. 9, 8, 7 and 6 has high road kilometers persquare kilometers of ward area. It can be clearly seenthat population increment in those wards causedincrement in built up area which in turn induced roadnetwork development. These wards also have highestpopulation density amongst the wards of Kageshwori

Manohara Municipality. This can explain less roadkilometer per 1000 population in these wards.Population growth increases travel demand and if thetransport infrastructure cannot sufficiently respond tothe travel demand, traffic congestion is inevitable.

Road network of municipality is highly unregulatedwith severe lack of interconnectivity. Maintainingroad alignment and road width is very challenging.Major percentage of road is below 4m of width whichcannot address trip generation. As land prices are veryhigh, maintaining R.O.W of road is nearly impossible.Due to settlement pattern and road network, otherinfrastructures such as sewerage and water supplyhave high development costs.

10. Conclusions

The major effect of land price is seen on landmanagement and development. Municipality is facingdiscontinuous scattered development. Agriculturefield are being fragmented into residential plots. Dueto land price, people can afford in average 3 to 3.5anna of land which is affecting regulation of buildingsetbacks and R.O.W. Due to development pressureMunicipality is facing problem to designate largeopen spaces. Roads are narrow and meandering withpoor interconnectivity as most of roads are developedprivately just to sell the land. Concerned authoritiesfind it hard to implement plans and policies such asMTMP due to haphazard settlement development.

The dominant factor that determines the price of landis the locational attribute of plot. Land price is high inwards that are more accessible and near to urban center.From the perspective of urban planning, land price hasimpacts on urban form via urban density, settlementpattern and efficient infrastructural services. Withinspatial planning, the efficient management of urbangrowth is essential to promote compact, well plannedcity forms. Effective and innovative Land developmenttools based on participatory approach is necessary forbeforehand land management in areas susceptible tosprawl. If urban sprawl towards northern ward canbe controlled, ample agriculture land can be protectedand urban agriculture can be introduced. Governmentmust intervene in land market through rules, regulationand policies to control the sky rocketing land price andchannel the urban growth in desired path.

53


11. Recommendations

The main strategy of local and provincial governmentshould be control of sprawl. First of all, land usezoning of municipality needs to be done. Agricultureareas need to be protected by introducing andsubsidizing urban agriculture. Urban consolidationand Land use Intensification is necessary for areasthat are already engulfed by urban sprawl. For thisGovernment should carryout necessary strategies andpolicies for infill development. FAR can be increasedon the basis of development intensity. As roadwidening is major challenges for implementation ofMTMP, innovative approaches such as densitybonuses can be applied. Concerned authorities shouldfocus on increasing mix use development to reducedominance of residential land use in wards with highpercentage of built ups. For proper planning of areaswith immediate risk of sprawl, participatory andinnovative land development program must beinitiated.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to administrative andtechnical staffs of Kageshwori ManoharaMunicipality, informal land developers, respondents &interviewees - Mr. Umesh Jung Thapa, Ms. SeemaAcharya, Ms. Deepa Karki & Mr.Ram Babu Acharyaof the municipality who helped in the data collection.

References

[1] Shivit Bakrania. Urbanisation and urban growthin nepal. Birmingham, UK: GSDRC, University ofBirmingham, 2015.

[2] UNFPA Nepal. Population situation analysis of nepal.Kathmandu: UNFPA Nepal, 2017.

[3] Asif Ishtiaque, Milan Shrestha, and Netra Chhetri.Rapid urban growth in the kathmandu valley, nepal:Monitoring land use land cover dynamics of a

himalayan city with landsat imageries. Environments,4(4):72, 2017.

[4] Ashna S Mathema. Housing and land markets inkathmandu, nepal. Department of Urban Studiesand Planning Massachusetts Institute of Technology:Cambridge, MA, 1999.

[5] Fred E Foldvary. Market-hampering land speculation:Fiscal and monetary origins and remedies. AmericanJournal of Economics and Sociology, 57(4):615–637,1998.

[6] Surya Gyanwali. Impacts of land speculation(a case of private housing development - sunrisehomes). Department of Architecture, Urban PlanningProgram, Pulchowk Campus, Lalitpur, 2007.

[7] Nepal urban housing sector profile. UN-HABITAT,2010.

[8] Yogina Ranjitkar. Land value in kathmandu valley : Acase study of bhaisepati. Department of Architecture& Urban Planning, Pulchowk Campus, IOE, Lalitpur,Nepal, 2017.

[9] Semih Halil EMUR and Secil GulMEYDAN YILDIZ. Land speculation andurban rent in turkey. Electronic Journal of SocialSciences, 17(67), 2018.

[10] Mozart Vitor Serra, David E Dowall, Diana Motta,and Michael Donovan. Urban land markets and urbanland development: An examination of three braziliancities: Brasilia, curitiba and recife. 2015.

[11] Nicola Dempsey, Caroline Brown, Shibu Raman,Sergio Porta, Mike Jenks, Colin Jones, and GlenBramley. Elements of urban form. In Dimensions ofthe sustainable city, pages 21–51. Springer, 2010.

[12] Phanuel B Joshua, George Godwin Glanda, andFelix A Ilesanmi. The effects of land speculationon urban planning and development in bajabure area,girei local government, adamawa state. Journalof Environmental and Earth Science, 6(4):128–133,2016.

[13] Jun Yang, Gui Jin, Xianjin Huang, Kun Chen,and Hao Meng. How to measure urban land useintensity? a perspective of multi-objective decisionin wuhan urban agglomeration, china. Sustainability,10(11):3874, 2018.

[14] Preparation of urban base map & municipal gis ofkageshwori manohara municipality. KageshworiManohara Municipality, Office of MunicipalExecutive, Daachi, Kathmandu, 2019.

54

impacts of exorbitant land price in urban form - a case of

Documents