Space as a commodity: How widespread is corruption in urban planning

Urbanism in Serbia for years it is not only a question of profession, but also a question of power. Changes to plans by urgent procedure, conversion of public areas, accelerated procedures for large ones investor and the weakening of public control mechanisms have opened up the dilemma of whether spatial planning is conducted in the interests of citizens or capital.

In such an environment, the space increasingly becomes a training ground for political-economic settlements, and less often the public good that the state protects in the name of the community.

How widespread is such a perception among the experts themselves? And what is the actual volume corruption in urban planning?

A commodity, not a resource of general interest

The results of the latest survey show that distrust in the system is deep. More than three-quarters of surveyed professionals (78 percent) believe that space in planning practice is mostly treated as a marketable commodity and not as a resource of general interest.

The research was conducted by New Planning Practice in cooperation with the Association of Urban Planners of Serbia, through a survey among urban planners and planners of various profiles, during the second half of December 2025. The results were presented at an expert round table in the House of Engineers. The goal was to determine how experts recognize and experience corruption in their own professional environment, but also what pressures they are exposed to.

The key conclusion is that market interests and capital requirements dominate planning practice, often to the detriment of the public interest and transparency of the process.

Public and particular interests

More than half of the respondents (52 percent) believe that the public interest is often suppressed in favor of private interests at the level of the institution where they work. This indicates that pressures do not only come from outside, but are often present within the institutions themselves.

Only about a quarter of respondents (24 percent) believe that the public interest is mostly protected, while 17 percent believe that it is only partially protected.

Almost half of those surveyed (48 percent) state that they very often notice irregularities or corrupt practices in their professional environment, while 39 percent notice them occasionally. In other words, the perception of systemic problems is far more widespread than sporadic incidents.

Pressures contrary to professional beliefs

A third of the respondents (33 percent) state that they were repeatedly directly exposed to pressure to implement a solution that contradicts their professional and ethical beliefs. A similar percentage (31 percent) experiences such pressure occasionally, while 25 percent say it happens rarely. Only eight percent of respondents claim that they have never been exposed to such requests.

These data show that personal exposure to pressures is slightly lower than the general perception of corruption in the environment, but still high, which indicates the normalization of practices in which professional standards are called into question.

Are urban planners a cover for corruption

When it comes to systemic corruption and its impact on the very role of urban planners, 54 percent of respondents partially agree with the statement that urban planners serve as a technical cover for corrupt practices.

An even more pronounced attitude refers to the respect of procedures: 59 percent of respondents fully agree that plans and procedures are formally respected, but in practice they are used to achieve particular interests, which permanently distorts the purpose of planning.

Professional integrity under pressure

A special segment of the research dealt with professional integrity and urban planners’ reactions to pressures. The questions covered the feeling of personal vulnerability, opportunities to respond and the role of the professional community in protecting its members.

Although the perception of corruption turned out to be very high, only a fifth of the respondents (21 percent) state that they often feel abused for the purpose of pursuing someone’s interests, while 40 percent have this feeling occasionally. On the other hand, 28 percent say that they rarely feel that way, and nine percent never.

Source: eKapija