Dutch planners recently adopted a more development oriented planning system and now search for marked-oriented planning instruments. The US-concept of transferable developments rights, where development possibilities are being transferred between areas, thus receives a lot of attention in the Netherlands. However, where in the American planning practice TDRs are used to compensate landowners for takings, the Dutch planners see it as a possible instrument to redistribute between profitable and non-profitable developments. This reflects the shift in Dutch planning towards a more conditional planning (confer concurrency, `pay as you grow¿). The assumption behind this type of planning is that the market itself should be able to resolve planning problems without (or only with little) (financial) public intervention. The Limburg-experiment might be an interesting conservation case. The Space for Space project in Brabant, where the demolishment of stables is being financed with the building of houses on large plots will be the conversion case. Instruments for re-allocation do not exist in the Netherlands. However on a local level the Dutch did create common land exploitation companies wherewith some spatial exchange took place (GrondExploitatieMaatschappij). In the new CBD of Amsterdam, re-allocation issues are also present.@en

Non-financial compensation increasingly receives attention in both planning practice and science across the world. Non-financial compensation exists when a government compensates a person or company with an interest in land for the loss of one or more of his property rights therein by creating a new property right that he can either use or sell. It also exists when a government provides an incentive for developers to realise certain planning goals either on their land or on the land of others and the government does not directly subsidise that realisation but creates a property right that they can use or sell when they have realised the goals. We distinguish between single-purpose and multi-purpose types of non-financial compensation. A single-purpose type of non-financial compensation exists when the nonfinancial compensation-scheme is not a planning tool in itself but only exists as a way to compensate the landowner for his loss. It relates to the compensation of a loss of right and could be considered as a passive instrument as it is only used to compensate. A multi-purpose type of non-financial compensation exists when the scheme not only compensates the landowners, but is also used as a tool to reach a certain spatial planning development goal. This type of scheme relates to an opportunity to develop something additional and implies an actively deployed scheme. The paper elaborates on why government has to and wants to compensate and why government can recapture added value in spatial planning cases.@en