ABSTRACT The power of the State to alter the conditions of land use through planning laws continues to attract theorisation at the possible intersection between planning and property. As planning laws become more complex, and by needs responsive to environmental degradation - including the consequences of climate change - landowners will arguably suffer loss of market value of their land despite broader community benefit. This article analyses the contention that land planning regulation is itself property - a claim made by Paul Babie in this journal in 2016. It does so in four parts, focusing on the law’s own construction of both real property and planning permissions. It analyses the nature, content and source of the estate in fee simple in Queensland, followed by analysis of Penner’s ‘bundle of rights’ argument to ascertain whether planning laws might be comprehended within this conception of property. It goes on to assess planning permissions in terms of Honore’s incidents of property before establishing the nature, content and source of planning rights. Finally, it clarifies how planning law responds to climate change, suggesting that downstream liabilities rather than front-line environmental protection is at stake. In conclusion, it posits a conceptualisation of property alternative to that of Babie.

中文翻译：

---

一个关于财产的故事，用我自己的话来说

摘要 国家通过规划法改变土地使用条件的权力继续在规划和财产之间可能的交叉点上吸引理论化。随着规划法律变得更加复杂，并且由于需要响应环境退化——包括气候变化的后果——尽管社区利益更广泛，但土地所有者可能会遭受土地市场价值的损失。本文分析了土地规划规制本身就是财产的论点——Paul Babie 于 2016 年在该杂志上提出的主张。它分为四个部分，重点关注法律本身对不动产和规划许可的构建。它分析了昆士兰州费用简单的遗产的性质、内容和来源，接着分析 Penner 的“权利捆绑”论点，以确定是否可以在这种财产概念中理解规划法。在确定规划权利的性质、内容和来源之前，它继续根据 Honore 的财产事件评估规划许可。最后，它阐明了规划法如何应对气候变化，表明下游责任而不是一线环境保护处于危险之中。总之，它提出了一种替代婴儿的财产的概念化。暗示下游负债而不是一线环境保护受到威胁。总之，它提出了一种替代婴儿的财产的概念化。暗示下游负债而不是一线环境保护受到威胁。总之，它提出了一种替代婴儿的财产的概念化。