Digitalisation of SPLUMA to Enhance Smart Township Policies at Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality: Literature Paper ()
1. Introduction
Smart township initiatives have emerged as an important policy response to persistent spatial inequality, uneven service delivery, and limited economic opportunities in South Africa’s townships and rural municipalities [1] [2]. These initiatives are embedded within national policy frameworks such as the National Development Plan (NDP) 2030, the Integrated Urban Development Framework (IUDF), and the District Development Model (DDM), which position municipalities as key actors in promoting inclusive local economic development [3] [4]. A central legislative instrument guiding spatial transformation is the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act 16 of 2013 (SPLUMA), which provides a statutory framework for spatial restructuring, land-use regulation, and coordinated planning [5].
Within a business ecosystem perspective, smart township initiatives extend beyond infrastructure development to include governance mechanisms that shape the spatial and institutional conditions enabling small, medium, and micro enterprises (SMMEs) to emerge and grow [6]. Spatial planning and land-use management are therefore critical components of this ecosystem, as they influence access to land, infrastructure, and market opportunities [2]. In this context, the digitalisation of SPLUMA through geographic information system (GIS)-based platforms, electronic land-use applications, and integrated spatial data systems has been promoted as a means to improve administrative efficiency, transparency, and coordination within municipal planning systems [7] [8].
Despite strong policy alignment and the integration of smart township priorities into municipal Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) and Local Economic Development (LED) strategies, implementation outcomes remain uneven [9] [10]. While existing studies frequently attribute these challenges to financial constraints and limited technical capacity, less attention has been given to the role of institutional arrangements within municipalities. In particular, the alignment between political leadership, administrative systems, governance coordination, and digital readiness remains underexplored.
Using EMLM as a case study, this study examines how institutional factors shape the implementation of smart township policy and the digitalisation of SPLUMA. By applying institutional and policy implementation theory, the study highlights how institutional coherence, coordination mechanisms, and organisational capacity influence the translation of policy intent into developmental outcomes.
2. Problem Statement
Smart township initiatives are increasingly promoted in South Africa as strategic policy instruments to address spatial inequality, improve service delivery, and stimulate local economic development [11]. These initiatives are embedded in national frameworks such as the National Development Plan 2030, the Integrated Urban Development Framework, and the District Development Model, and are reflected in municipal planning instruments including Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) and Local Economic Development (LED) strategies [12] [13]. Within this policy architecture, municipalities are expected to play a central role in coordinating and implementing development priorities in line with national spatial transformation objectives [14] [15].
Despite strong policy alignment, the implementation of smart township priorities at the municipal level remains inconsistent and often ineffective [16]. Many municipalities continue to experience a persistent gap between policy formulation and execution, where well-developed plans fail to translate into tangible development outcomes. This disconnect suggests deeper institutional constraints that extend beyond financial and technical limitations [17].
This challenge is evident in EMLM, where smart township priorities are incorporated into the municipality’s IDP and LED framework, yet progress in operationalising these initiatives remains limited [18]. Limited empirical research exists on how institutional arrangements, governance processes, and municipal capacity dynamics influence the implementation of smart township policies at the local level. Addressing this gap is critical for strengthening municipal capacity and improving the effectiveness of local development initiatives.
3. Research Question
Despite their strong presence in South Africa’s policy frameworks, smart township initiatives have seen limited success at the municipal level. This study examines the underlying factors that contribute to this persistent policy implementation gap. Accordingly, the study is guided by the following research question: “What institutional factors constrain the implementation of smart township policy and the digitalisation of SPLUMA at the municipal level in EMLM, particularly in relation to governance arrangements, coordination processes, and municipal capacity dynamics?”
4. Objective of the Study
The primary objective of this article is to examine the institutional factors that constrain smart township policy and digital SPLUMA implementation at the municipal level, using EMLM as a case study, with particular attention to governance arrangements, coordination processes, and municipal capacity dynamics.
5. Literature Review
Smart township initiatives have emerged in South Africa as policy responses to persistent spatial inequality, service delivery backlogs, and weak local economic performance in historically marginalised areas [2] [3]. These initiatives are closely aligned with national development priorities such as the objectives of the National Development Plan 2030, which emphasises spatial transformation, inclusive economic growth, and improved urban governance. Although the concept of smart townships lacks a single universally accepted definition, it broadly refers to the integration of digital technologies, infrastructure development, innovation ecosystems, and targeted support for small, medium, and micro enterprises (SMMEs) to stimulate inclusive local economic development [19]. In practice, smart township development seeks to address the structural legacy of apartheid spatial planning by improving connectivity, expanding access to economic opportunities, and strengthening the capacity of local economies to absorb investment and generate employment.
Central to this transformation agenda is the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA), which provides the statutory framework for spatial restructuring, land-use regulation, and integrated development planning in South Africa. SPLUMA aims to promote spatial justice, efficiency, sustainability, and resilience through coordinated land-use management and strategic spatial planning. Effective spatial planning under SPLUMA is therefore essential for smart township development because it determines land accessibility, infrastructure coordination, zoning flexibility, and the regulatory environment within which local enterprises operate [7] [8]. In particular, the alignment between spatial planning instruments such as Spatial Development Frameworks (SDFs), land-use schemes, and infrastructure investment decisions plays a critical role in shaping the economic viability of township spaces.
Despite strong policy support, the implementation of smart township initiatives and SPLUMA reforms remains uneven, particularly in smaller, rural, and capacity-constrained municipalities [8]. Although these priorities are formally embedded in Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) and Local Economic Development (LED) strategies, municipal implementation frequently prioritises regulatory compliance and planning documentation rather than context-sensitive and coordinated execution. This reinforces a persistent gap between planning commitments and practical outcomes on the ground [9] [20]. To address these challenges, national and provincial governments have increasingly promoted the digitalisation of SPLUMA processes through Geographic Information Systems (GIS), electronic land-use application platforms, and integrated spatial databases intended to improve administrative efficiency, transparency, and interdepartmental coordination. However, technological reform alone cannot guarantee effective implementation if underlying governance systems remain fragmented or under-capacitated.
Policy implementation theory suggests that weak administrative systems, fragmented coordination, and unclear institutional roles frequently undermine the translation of policy objectives into operational outcomes [21]. Within decentralised governance systems, such as South Africa’s local government framework, municipalities are required to implement multiple national and provincial programmes simultaneously, often without adequate technical capacity, financial resources, or institutional stability. This creates significant implementation pressures that may limit the ability of municipalities to coordinate complex development initiatives [20] [22]. Institutional dynamics such as leadership instability, blurred political-administrative boundaries, and weak accountability mechanisms further complicate governance processes and constrain effective decision-making at the municipal level [17] [23].
Recent scholarship increasingly identifies an institutional disconnect in which ambitious policy frameworks outpace municipal administrative capacity, resulting in fragmented planning, siloed departmental coordination, and weak implementation outcomes [24]-[26]. Under such conditions, development initiatives may remain formally embedded within planning instruments while lacking the operational mechanisms necessary for effective delivery. However, limited empirical research examines how these institutional dynamics specifically influence the implementation of smart township initiatives and SPLUMA reforms within municipal governance systems. This gap is particularly evident in EMLM, where these policy priorities are formally embedded within municipal planning frameworks but remain weakly operationalised in practice. Against this backdrop, this study applies an institutional governance lens to examine how governance arrangements, interdepartmental coordination processes, and digital planning capacity influence the implementation of smart township initiatives and SPLUMA reforms at the municipal level.
6. Methodology
The literature review was guided by purposive sampling to identify sources most relevant to the study’s focus on SPLUMA digitalisation, smart township initiatives, and LED. Scholarly articles, policy documents, and institutional reports were selected for their contributions to understanding institutional dynamics, governance structures, and implementation challenges at both the national and municipal levels. This approach ensured that the review captured critical theoretical insights from implementation theory and institutionalism, as well as empirical examples from South Africa and comparable global contexts. The selected literature informed the study’s conceptual framework and guided the design of semi-structured interview questions, helping to identify key institutional themes such as intergovernmental coordination, administrative capacity, and community participation. By linking the literature review to the qualitative data collection and analysis, the study established a coherent methodological foundation, ensuring that both theoretical perspectives and participant experiences were integrated to examine how digitalisation of SPLUMA can enhance LED in EMLM.
The literature review employed clear inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure that the selected sources were both relevant and rigorous. Inclusion criteria focused on studies, policy documents, and reports that addressed institutional dynamics, governance structures, and implementation challenges related to SPLUMA, smart township initiatives, and Local Economic Development (LED) in South Africa and comparable international contexts. Literature that provided theoretical grounding in implementation theory or institutionalism was also prioritized, as it directly informed the study's conceptual framework. Exclusion criteria eliminated sources that were outdated, irrelevant to spatial planning or LED, or lacked empirical or theoretical rigour. Additionally, studies focused solely on unrelated sectors or geographical contexts outside of South Africa or comparable developing regions were excluded. These criteria ensured that the literature review remained focused, coherent, and directly applicable to the study’s objectives, enabling a robust synthesis that guided data collection, coding, and thematic analysis in the qualitative case study of EMLM.
7. Summary of Findings
The data analysis revealed themes relating to the implementation of smart township initiatives in EMLM:
7.1. Misalignment between Political Priorities and Administrative Capacity
Participants reported that municipal political objectives frequently exceed the administrative capacity required for effective implementation [27]. Although strategic instruments such as Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) and Local Economic Development (LED) frameworks articulate ambitious smart township priorities, limited technical expertise, understaffing, and resource constraints undermine operationalisation. Officials often manage multiple programmes concurrently, reducing coordination, focus, and continuity in project delivery [20]. The misalignment between political ambition and administrative capacity reflects not only a resource deficit but also weaknesses in governance system design.
Digital SPLUMA platforms can mitigate capacity gaps by standardising procedures, automating workflows, and embedding measurable performance indicators into land-use management processes. Through procedural codification, digital systems enhance traceability between policy directives and administrative action [7] [8]. Nonetheless, evidence indicates that implementing digitalisation without adequate institutional preparedness can worsen existing capacity limitations instead of addressing them [28]. In this context, digital SPLUMA serves as both a governance reform instrument and a diagnostic tool, revealing structural weaknesses within municipal institutional frameworks.
7.2. Fragmented Planning and Coordination
Evidence from interviews and policy documents indicates persistent siloed planning and weak intergovernmental coordination within EMLM, where infrastructure, economic development, and digital initiatives are often implemented independently [9] [29]. This fragmentation leads to duplication of efforts, implementation delays, and misaligned development timelines, while overlapping responsibilities across local, provincial, and national spheres create uncertainty in accountability and decision-making [2] [8]. These coordination gaps undermine the effective implementation of smart township objectives and limit the transformative potential of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA). The digitalisation of SPLUMA through GIS-integrated platforms and shared spatial data systems offers a mechanism to centralise planning information and improve coordination. However, its effectiveness depends on integration within formal coordination structures, performance management systems, and intergovernmental reporting frameworks [7] [21] [28].
7.3. Limited Institutional Learning and Community Engagement
Participants indicated that institutional learning mechanisms, such as performance reviews, monitoring, and feedback loops, were weak or inconsistently applied [30]. Similarly, community participation processes were largely procedural rather than substantive, limiting local ownership of township projects. Focus group participants reported minimal consultation in project planning and limited follow-up on community inputs [2] [9]. Weak institutional learning and limited monitoring mechanisms constrain effective smart township implementation [31]. Digital SPLUMA platforms strengthen organisational learning by generating real-time performance data, tracking land-use approval timelines, and identifying procedural bottlenecks within administrative processes. Empirical research shows that digital governance systems improve transparency and administrative accountability by creating structured data environments that support continuous performance monitoring [7] [28].
Through systematised data capture, digitised platforms generate audit trails, measurable turnaround indicators, historical records of decision-making patterns, and enhanced data-driven evaluation capacity. Research on digital government systems demonstrates that structured information management improves oversight, transparency, and institutional memory by formalising administrative processes and enabling performance tracking [7]. Such systems strengthen policy feedback mechanisms and support evidence-based decision-making, thereby enabling municipalities to refine spatial planning processes and improve governance performance [21] [28].
This allows municipalities to move from reactive governance towards evidence-based, adaptive management. When institutional learning processes are embedded in digital systems, implementation becomes an ongoing, iterative process rather than a fixed, static one.
7.4. Reskilling of Officials
The successful digitalisation of SPLUMA requires not only technological infrastructure but also significant reskilling and institutional adaptation within the municipality [32]. The findings highlight that the participants indicated that many officials lack advanced competencies in Geographic Information Systems (GIS), digital land-use management platforms, data analytics, and electronic records management. While SPLUMA provides a legislative framework for spatial planning reform, its effective digital implementation depends on human capital capable of operating and sustaining digital systems [7].
Reskilling must therefore extend beyond basic ICT literacy to include specialised competencies in digital spatial planning, online application processing, electronic document workflow systems, and integrated data management. International evidence demonstrates that digital planning systems only improve efficiency where institutional actors possess the skills and organisational routines required to embed new technologies into daily administrative processes [28].
In the context of EMLM, capacity-building should form part of a structured institutional strategy that includes training in GIS and spatial data analysis, certification in digital planning systems and e-governance, cross-departmental digital coordination workshops, and partnerships with higher education institutions. Empirical research on digital government transformation shows that technological reforms do not automatically improve performance unless accompanied by organisational capacity development and institutional alignment [7]. Without systematic and sustained reskilling, the digitalisation of SPLUMA risks becoming a compliance-driven reform that merely transfers existing inefficiencies into electronic systems rather than fundamentally transforming institutional performance and governance outcomes. Studies further emphasise that digital platforms embedded in weak institutional environments often reproduce existing administrative fragmentation instead of resolving governance bottlenecks [21] [28].
7.5. New Data Sets
Digitalisation of SPLUMA creates opportunities to generate and integrate spatial and economic datasets that strengthen local economic development planning and spatial governance. Many municipalities still rely on fragmented, paper-based records and outdated cadastral systems, limiting data accuracy and coordination. Transitioning to digital platforms enables real-time spatial databases that integrate land-use applications, zoning schemes, infrastructure networks, informal settlement mapping, and economic activity nodes [7] [8]. Such systems enhance transparency, interdepartmental coordination, and evidence-based decision-making, reinforcing alignment between regulatory processes and development objectives within the SPLUMA framework [33].
Research on digital governance demonstrates that integrated information systems improve administrative accountability and policy coordination when embedded within institutional structures and planning systems [7]. In spatial governance contexts, digital platforms strengthen regulatory alignment by improving data integration, workflow tracking, and intergovernmental information sharing [28]. For EMLM, integrated digital spatial datasets support the identification of underutilised land, mapping of township economic nodes, tracking of application processing timelines, and alignment of infrastructure investment with spatial priorities. Digital platforms also enable predictive planning through trend analysis, compliance monitoring, and infrastructure demand forecasting [28].
However, the expansion of digital datasets raises governance concerns regarding data accuracy, cybersecurity, ownership, and interoperability. Effective implementation therefore requires clear data governance frameworks, standardisation protocols, and secure shared access mechanisms to ensure reliable and coordinated spatial management.
7.6. Biased Legal Frameworks
Although SPLUMA was enacted to promote spatial justice and address apartheid-era inequalities, its implementation is often constrained by inherited regulatory practices and procedural rigidity that reproduce exclusionary spatial outcomes [5]. Complex zoning schemes, costly application requirements, and lengthy approval processes disproportionately affect small-scale developers and township-based enterprises [34]. Regulatory bias can emerge when formal planning systems unintentionally privilege established commercial actors while marginalising emerging enterprises [35]. In EMLM, stringent procedures and high compliance costs may limit access to land-use opportunities for SMMEs [4].
Digitalisation of SPLUMA offers an opportunity to reduce these structural constraints by simplifying and standardising application processes, improving transparency, publishing accessible zoning information, and automating workflows. Digital planning systems enhance procedural fairness, accountability, and predictability in land-use decisions [7], strengthening access to development rights for township enterprises and advancing spatial justice objectives [2] [36]. However, digital reform alone is insufficient it must be accompanied by legal and by-law reforms to ensure alignment with constitutional principles and inclusive development goals [14].
7.7. Digitalisation of SPLUMA as an Institutional Reform Mechanism
The Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act 16 of 2013 (SPLUMA) was enacted to promote spatial justice, sustainability, efficiency, and resilience in South Africa’s planning system [36]. While SPLUMA provides the legislative foundation for spatial transformation, its implementation remains heavily dependent on municipal institutional capacity. Increasingly, digitalisation has emerged as a critical mechanism for operationalising SPLUMA’s principles [5].
Digital SPLUMA systems involve the use of electronic land-use application platforms, GIS-enabled spatial planning tools, online zoning registers, and integrated data dashboards to streamline administrative processes and improve transparency. Empirical studies demonstrate that digital planning platforms enhance procedural efficiency, reduce processing time, and improve coordination across municipal departments [7] [8].
From an institutional perspective, digitalisation represents not merely a technological upgrade but a governance reform that restructures organisational routines, accountability mechanisms, and interdepartmental coordination [37]. Although SPLUMA was enacted to promote spatial justice and address apartheid-era inequalities, its implementation is often constrained by inherited regulatory practices and procedural rigidity that reproduce exclusionary spatial outcomes. Complex zoning schemes, costly application requirements, and lengthy approval processes disproportionately affect small-scale developers and township-based enterprises. Regulatory bias can emerge when formal planning systems unintentionally privilege established commercial actors while marginalising emerging enterprises [5]. These regulatory constraints highlight the need for more adaptive and digitally enabled planning systems capable of simplifying development procedures, improving transparency, and widening access to spatial development opportunities for township entrepreneurs [38]. In EMLM, stringent procedures and high compliance costs may limit access to land-use opportunities for SMMEs.
Digitalisation of SPLUMA offers an opportunity to reduce these structural constraints by simplifying and standardising application processes, improving transparency, publishing accessible zoning information, and automating workflows. Digital planning systems enhance procedural fairness, accountability, and predictability in land-use decisions [7], strengthening access to development rights for township enterprises and advancing spatial justice objectives [2] [36]. However, digital reform alone is insufficient it must be accompanied by legal and by-law reforms to ensure alignment with constitutional principles and inclusive development goals [14].
8. Discussions
8.1. Interpreting Implementation Failure through an Institutional Lens
This study demonstrates that the stalling of smart township initiatives in EMLM is not primarily the result of weak policy design, but rather reflects deeper institutional misalignments that shape how policies are interpreted, prioritised, and enacted at the municipal level. Drawing on implementation theory and institutionalism, the findings reveal that smart township policies falter when political ambition, administrative capacity, and governance arrangements are insufficiently aligned. This confirms the argument that policy outcomes are contingent not only on formal plans, but on the institutional conditions under which implementation occurs [21] [37]. The misalignment between political priorities and administrative capacity identified in EMLM illustrates what institutional theorists describe as a divergence between formal authority and operational capability. While political leadership articulates ambitious development agendas within IDPs and LED strategies, administrative systems lack the skills, staffing stability, and organisational routines required to translate these ambitions into practice [39] [40]. This institutional disconnect results in implementation overload, fragmented responsibility, and weakened accountability, reinforcing the planning–practice gap observed in South African local government. and highlights the importance of strengthening municipal institutional capacity, particularly through skills development, organisational stability, and digital governance systems.
8.2. Institutional Disconnect as a Mechanism of Policy Stalling
The concept of institutional disconnect provides a useful analytical mechanism for explaining why smart township initiatives stall during implementation [25] [41]. In EMLM, this disconnect manifests across three interrelated institutional domains: political–administrative relations, intergovernmental coordination, and organisational learning [24]. Rather than operating as isolated challenges, these institutional weaknesses interact to undermine coherent policy execution [26].
Fragmented planning and coordination across municipal departments and government spheres reflect a lack of integrative governance mechanisms capable of aligning infrastructure development, local economic development, and digital initiatives [20]. Implementation theory highlights that multi-actor policy environments require clearly defined roles, coordination platforms, and shared accountability frameworks to prevent duplication and inertia [21]. In the absence of institutional coordination and learning mechanisms, smart township initiatives risk becoming compliance-driven exercises embedded in planning documents without operational traction [38] [42].
The findings further indicate that institutional disconnect is not only structural but also procedural and relational. Weak intergovernmental coordination and siloed departmental planning are reinforced by limited institutional learning and largely procedural forms of community participation that seldom shape substantive decision-making [43] [44]. Such conditions undermine feedback loops, reduce administrative adaptability and constrain municipalities’ capacity to recalibrate implementation strategies in response to emerging socio-economic and spatial challenges [45].
8.3. Institutional Capacity Beyond Resources and Skills
The findings extend existing scholarship by showing that institutional capacity constraints in EMLM go beyond technical skills and financial resources to include governance coherence, institutional learning, and participatory quality. Rather than defining capacity narrowly in terms of staffing or budgets, this study emphasises organisational routines, monitoring systems, and institutional memory as central to implementation performance [37]. Weak performance tracking and procedural participation limit accountability and continuity, reinforcing stalled implementation across planning cycles [46] [47].
Digital SPLUMA systems can strengthen governance by improving monitoring, reducing discretionary decision-making, enhancing interdepartmental coordination, and enabling accessible public participation. When embedded within institutional structures, digital platforms enhance transparency and policy coordination [7]. However, in contexts of weak institutional coherence, digitalisation may reproduce fragmentation if not accompanied by organisational alignment and capacity development [21] [28]. Thus, digital SPLUMA should be understood as an institutional transformation process rather than a standalone technical reform functioning as a catalytic mechanism to reshape governance alignment and implementation dynamics [5].
8.4. Theoretical Implications for Smart Township and Local Governance Research
This study contributes to implementation theory by demonstrating that institutional disconnect mediates the relationship between policy alignment and implementation outcomes in a municipal context. While existing scholarship acknowledges the gap between policy intention and delivery, the findings show that this divide is actively reproduced through institutional misalignment and weak coordination within local governance systems [48].
By applying institutionalism to smart township initiatives, the paper extends smart city literature beyond its conventional technological focus, arguing that implementation success is primarily governance-dependent rather than technology-driven [3]. Smart township development should therefore be conceptualised as an institutionally embedded process requiring sustained alignment between political leadership, administrative systems, and participatory governance structures [11].
The digitalisation of SPLUMA should be conceptualised as an institutional governance reform rather than a technical upgrade. Recent analyses show that land-use management reforms reshape administrative authority, coordination mechanisms and accountability systems within local government [5]. Digital SPLUMA therefore holds potential to address political-administrative misalignment and fragmented coordination. Yet, evidence from South Africa’s digital government experience indicates that technology alone is insufficient; effective transformation requires institutional realignment, reskilling and integrated governance frameworks [43] [49]. When embedded within coherent regulatory and interdepartmental systems, digital planning platforms can enhance approval efficiency, strengthen spatial data integration and support LED by accelerating enterprise formalisation and aligning infrastructure investment with spatial priorities [50] [51].
9. Conclusions
This study investigated the factors contributing to the stalling of smart township policies during implementation at the municipal level, using EMLM as a case study. The findings show that implementation challenges do not primarily arise from weak policy design or lack of strategic alignment, but from institutional disconnects within the municipal system. Misalignment between political priorities and administrative capacity, fragmented coordination across departments and spheres of government, and limited institutional learning mechanisms collectively undermine effective policy execution, even where smart township objectives are embedded in IDPs and LED strategies.
The study makes a theoretical contribution by demonstrating that the implementation gap in township development contexts is best explained through the interaction of policy implementation dynamics and institutional arrangements. Integrating implementation theory with institutionalism highlights how governance norms, organisational routines, and accountability structures shape the interpretation and enactment of policies. This extends the existing smart township scholarship by foregrounding institutional coherence as a critical determinant of sustained implementation.
Empirically, this study offers context-specific evidence from a resource-constrained municipality, demonstrating the influence of institutional arrangements on development outcomes and addressing a gap in municipal-level smart township research. From a practical perspective, the findings highlight the importance of strengthening administrative capacity, clarifying governance roles, improving coordination, institutionalising monitoring and learning processes, and fostering meaningful community participation.
Future research should examine the effectiveness of institutional reforms across multiple municipalities and assess their long-term impact on local economic development and inclusive township growth. Overall, effective smart township implementation depends on strengthening institutional coherence and governance capacity to translate policy commitments into tangible socio-economic outcomes.
While digitalisation of SPLUMA presents significant opportunities to streamline land-use management and support local economic development, its success depends on institutional readiness, administrative reskilling, regulatory reform, and intergovernmental alignment. Digital transformation should therefore be embedded within broader municipal governance reform to ensure that technological innovation translates into inclusive spatial and economic outcomes.