Territory, State and Market: The Case of Mobile Phone System Localization. The topic is reconstructed by analyzing the allocation of regulatory attributions and administrative functions. Case-law concerning the limits of municipal regulatory powers and the entrustment to individuals of objectively public functions demonstrate a devaluation of the ability of urban-planning discipline to govern economic processes. In relation to denial measures, this statement is made clear by a motivation that the author defines as “strong” or “strengthened”, which undermines the protection of other interests that diverge from economic ones. A moment in the process of “objectification “of ownership regulation can be identified, as the works are classified as being of public utility regardless of the nature of the owner. Possible perspectives for resolving these issues appear to be a careful use of “prohibitive conditions”, the implementation of consensual instruments, a more accurate definition of municipal and private prerogatives, a non-fragmented vision of the development of these particular works of general interest, more in line with the “network” nature of these services. tion to denial measures, this statemene is made clear by a motivation that the author defìnes as "strong" or "strengthened", which undermines the proteccion of other interests that diverge from economie ones. A moment in che process of "objectifìcation "of ownership regulation can be identifìed, as che works are classifìed as being of public utility regardless of che nature of che owner. Possible perspectives for resolving these issues appear to be a careful use of "prohibitive conditions", che implementation of consensual instrumencs, a more accurate defìnition of municipal and private prerogatives, a non-fragmented vision of the development of these particular works of generai interest, more in line wich che "network" nature of these services.
La materia è ricostruita individuando l’allocazione delle attribuzioni normative e delle funzioni amministrative. L’ampia giurisprudenza in materia di limiti delle potestà regolamentari ed autorizzatorie comunali e l’affidamento ai privati dello svolgimento di funzioni oggettivamente pubbliche manifestano una dequotazione della capacità della disciplina urbanistica di governare i processi economici resa palese dalla pretesa, per i provvedimenti di diniego, di una motivazione che l’autore definisce “forte” o “rafforzata”, che mette in crisi la tutela degli altri interessi differenziati rispetto a quelli economici. È individuabile anche un momento del processo di oggettivizzazione della regolazione proprietaria, in quanto l’opera è qualificata di pubblica utilità a prescindere dalla natura del soggetto titolare del bene. Possibili prospettive per risolvere le criticità osservate appaiono un attento ricorso alle norme di proibizione, l’implementazione degli strumenti consensuali, una più accurata definizione delle prerogative comunali e dei privati, una visione non parcellizzata dello sviluppo degli impianti, più aderente alla natura “a rete” dei servizi di interesse.
Territorio, Stato e mercato: il caso della localizzazione degli impianti di telefonia mobile
DANIELE D'ALESSANDRO
2024-01-01
Abstract
Territory, State and Market: The Case of Mobile Phone System Localization. The topic is reconstructed by analyzing the allocation of regulatory attributions and administrative functions. Case-law concerning the limits of municipal regulatory powers and the entrustment to individuals of objectively public functions demonstrate a devaluation of the ability of urban-planning discipline to govern economic processes. In relation to denial measures, this statement is made clear by a motivation that the author defines as “strong” or “strengthened”, which undermines the protection of other interests that diverge from economic ones. A moment in the process of “objectification “of ownership regulation can be identified, as the works are classified as being of public utility regardless of the nature of the owner. Possible perspectives for resolving these issues appear to be a careful use of “prohibitive conditions”, the implementation of consensual instruments, a more accurate definition of municipal and private prerogatives, a non-fragmented vision of the development of these particular works of general interest, more in line with the “network” nature of these services. tion to denial measures, this statemene is made clear by a motivation that the author defìnes as "strong" or "strengthened", which undermines the proteccion of other interests that diverge from economie ones. A moment in che process of "objectifìcation "of ownership regulation can be identifìed, as che works are classifìed as being of public utility regardless of che nature of che owner. Possible perspectives for resolving these issues appear to be a careful use of "prohibitive conditions", che implementation of consensual instrumencs, a more accurate defìnition of municipal and private prerogatives, a non-fragmented vision of the development of these particular works of generai interest, more in line wich che "network" nature of these services.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.