Sample land economy interview questions

How do you think studying Land Economy can contribute to addressing current environmental and sustainability challenges?

I think studying Land Economy provides the tools to approach environmental and sustainability challenges from multiple, interconnected perspectives — economic, legal, and social — which is crucial because these problems aren’t purely scientific. Climate change, for example, is as much about how land is valued, regulated, and managed as it is about carbon levels.

From an economic perspective, the discipline helps you understand how markets can both cause and correct environmental degradation. I’d be interested in how economic instruments like carbon pricing, pollution taxes, or biodiversity offsetting can internalise environmental costs — but also in their limitations, for example, when market signals fail to reflect long-term ecological value.

The legal dimension is equally important. Laws on property rights, planning, and environmental protection shape how land is used and conserved. Studying Land Economy would help me see how legal frameworks can incentivise sustainable land use — for instance, how planning law can balance development with conservation, like the green belt..

Then there’s the social and governance aspect. Land Economy highlights that sustainable outcomes depend on negotiation between competing interests — developers, local authorities, communities, and environmental groups. I find that fascinating because it turns sustainability into a question of coordination and fairness: who bears the costs, who benefits, and who decides.

Ultimately, what excites me about Land Economy is that it doesn’t treat the environment as an isolated issue, but as a thread running through the way societies grow and allocate land. I’d hope to learn how better planning, valuation, and policy design can make sustainability economically viable and socially inclusive — not just environmentally ideal.

Have you conducted any independent research or projects related to Land Economy? If so, can you tell us about your findings and the methodologies you employed?

“Yes — for my EPQ I explored the question ‘To what extent has Transport for London been the most impacted sector within urban planning due to the remote working paradigm in London as a result of COVID-19?’

My approach was interdisciplinary. First, I reviewed policy reports and transport usage data from TfL to measure the immediate revenue and ridership impacts of the pandemic. Then, to capture spatial spillovers, I used GIS software to map changes in house prices across London boroughs, comparing central areas highly dependent on commuting with suburban areas where demand rose due to remote work.

The methodology combined:

Spatial analysis in GIS to track how housing markets shifted relative to transport accessibility;

Comparative trend analysis across boroughs (central vs outer London) to detect divergence;

Policy evaluation of TfL funding structures and reliance on fare revenue.

Findings: I found that while TfL’s fare revenue fell sharply, the impact rippled into urban planning more broadly: central London property values and demand for office space weakened, while some suburban areas saw relative resilience or even growth in house prices. This suggested that remote work didn’t just impact transport directly but also reshaped locational preferences and land values.

Implication: My conclusion was that TfL was heavily affected, but not in isolation — it became part of a wider structural shift in urban planning where transport, housing, and land use interacted dynamically.

Reflection: The project showed me how important spatial and economic analysis is in Land Economy — linking data, geography and policy to understand long-term planning challenges. If I had more time, I’d expand with regression modelling to better quantify the causal link between transport usage decline and property value changes.”

EPQ:

I started with TfL data: during the first lockdown, passenger numbers fell by over 90%, and even by late 2021 ridership was still only about 60–70% of pre-pandemic levels. That translated into a revenue loss of roughly £2 billion in a single year.

To explore wider urban effects, I used GIS to map house price changes across London. I found that between 2020–2022, average prices in central boroughs like Westminster and Camden stagnated or even fell slightly — around –1 to –2% — whereas in outer areas such as Bromley or Havering, they rose by up to 5–6%. This highlighted how remote work shifted demand away from central areas reliant on commuting, towards more suburban locations.

My conclusion was that while TfL was hit hardest in the short term, the more significant story was a broader structural shift in urban planning: transport, housing markets and land use patterns are tightly interconnected.

The project showed me the value of combining economic reasoning with spatial tools — and if I had more time, I’d test causality formally with a regression, controlling for factors like income, housing supply and local amenities.”

How do you perceive the relationship between economics and the environment in the context of Land Economy?

Thesis — The relationship is two-way: the environment provides scarce, spatially fixed assets (land, ecosystem services) ; simultaneously economic activity changes the environment via exploitation, pollution and land-use change. Land Economy sits at that interface to manage trade-offs.

Economics, at its core, is about how societies allocate scarce resources to meet human wants. The environment provides the ultimate foundation for those resources — it’s our stock of natural capital. So the relationship between economics and the environment is inseparable: economics depends on the environment, yet often undermines it when natural limits are treated as externalities rather than assets.

In the context of Land Economy, that relationship becomes very tangible. Decisions about land use — whether to develop, conserve, or repurpose — reflect how we value environmental resources in economic terms. When markets fail to capture the true social cost of pollution or habitat loss, economics can drive environmental degradation. But equally, economic reasoning offers the tools to correct that — through mechanisms like carbon pricing, conservation credits, or better valuation of ecosystem services.

Paul Collier, in The Plundered Planet, describes nature as a form of capital that can either be plundered or transformed into lasting prosperity depending on governance. I find that idea compelling because it reframes sustainability as an economic management challenge, not just a moral one. It’s about converting finite natural wealth into long-term social benefit — exactly the kind of balance Land Economy seeks to achieve through the intersection of markets, policy, and law.

What skills do you believe are essential for success in Land Economy, and how have you developed or demonstrated these skills?

I think success in Land Economy depends on the ability to think analytically, to connect ideas across disciplines, and to communicate them persuasively.

Analytical thinking matters because Land Economy turns real-world uncertainty into structured reasoning. I developed this through the GAIN Investment Challenge, where I had to interpret data and make investment choices under constraints. It taught me that numbers only become meaningful when linked to human behaviour — a mindset I’d bring to analysing, say, how housing markets respond to policy incentives.

Equally important is interdisciplinary reasoning. Land Economy sits where economics, law, and the environment overlap, so seeing connections is crucial. When I attended a Wandsworth planning committee meeting, I saw how an economic argument for redevelopment could clash with social and environmental priorities. That experience made me appreciate how decisions about land aren’t purely financial — they reflect value judgments about place and community.

Finally, communication is key, because influencing land use requires persuasion as much as analysis. Writing articles for my school’s magazine on issues like urban regeneration taught me how to express complex ideas clearly without oversimplifying them. It showed me that clarity can bridge the gap between technical evidence and public understanding — exactly what effective policymaking relies on.

Can you discuss a time when you faced a complex problem or dilemma and how you approached finding a solution?

A complex problem I faced was when I was co-founding my school’s Maths Society. We had strong enthusiasm among students but no clear structure, and our initial meetings were chaotic — everyone had ideas, but nothing was coordinated. I realised the challenge wasn’t mathematical at all; it was organisational and human.

I started by identifying what the group actually needed — consistency, purpose, and inclusion. So I proposed a rotating leadership model where each member could lead a session on a topic of interest. That gave everyone ownership and turned a disorganised group into a collaborative one. Attendance grew because people felt invested rather than directed.

What I took from that experience was that solving complex problems often means redefining them — in this case, from a lack of order to a lack of shared incentive. It taught me to approach dilemmas by understanding motivations, aligning interests, and designing systems that make participation sustainable.

How do you envision applying your knowledge and skills gained from studying Land Economy in a real-world context?

I see Land Economy as giving me the tools to bridge the gap between analysis and action — using economic reasoning, legal understanding, and environmental insight to shape how places evolve sustainably.

In practice, I’d like to apply what I learn to urban policy and regeneration — areas where economic ambition and social responsibility often collide. For example, understanding how planning law, land valuation, and environmental policy interact could help me design development strategies that unlock land value without displacing communities or degrading ecosystems.

What excites me is that Land Economy doesn’t stop at theory — it trains you to quantify trade-offs, evaluate policy impacts, and translate data into decisions that affect real lives. I can imagine applying that in roles that sit between the public and private sectors — advising on urban redevelopment or sustainable investment, where you have to balance profitability with long-term social and environmental returns.

Ultimately, I’d hope to use the skills from Land Economy to make land and policy work more efficiently and equitably — ensuring that economic growth supports, rather than undermines, environmental and social well-being.

Is decentralisation necessary for good quality regional policymaking?

• North south divide, south prioristised since closer to decision making, policies for South often prioristised

• A notable example of a regional policy in the UK that was scrapped due to its low priority in London is the Regional Spatial Strategies (RSSs). Introduced in 2004, RSSs provided a strategic planning framework for regions outside London, aiming to bridge local planning with national policy goals. However, in 2010, the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government announced their abolition, citing the desire to decentralise planning powers to local authorities.

  Critics argued that this move left a significant gap in regional planning, particularly affecting areas in the North. The Communities and Local Government Committee warned that the abolition created a "planning vacuum," making it more challenging to deliver necessary infrastructure and development projects that require coordination beyond local boundaries. This decision exemplifies how policies perceived as low priority in London can be discarded, potentially exacerbating regional disparities.

  The UK2070 Commission has highlighted such instances, noting that the centralisation of decision-making in London often leads to policies that overlook the unique needs of peripheral regions, thereby entrenching inequalities

“Decentralisation can greatly improve policy quality, but it isn’t always necessary or sufficient.

Advantages: Local authorities know their communities’ needs better, so they can design more tailored housing, transport, or skills policies. Devolved powers in Greater Manchester, for instance, have allowed more integrated approaches to transport and health.

Risks: If local governments lack funding, expertise, or accountability, decentralisation can entrench inequalities or produce capture by local elites. For example, if fiscal powers are devolved without redistribution, wealthier regions can surge ahead while poorer ones fall behind.

So I’d argue decentralisation works best when paired with fiscal equalisation, capacity-building, and mechanisms to manage spillovers (like regional transport). It’s not about decentralisation for its own sake, but about matching responsibilities to the right scale of governance.”

9. Could regional immigration policies be used to address current labour shortages in the UK?

In principle, yes — Canada and Australia already use regional visa schemes to direct migrants to areas with shortages. For the UK, it could help fill gaps in health care, agriculture, or social care outside London.

But there are challenges. Migrants tend to cluster where jobs, networks, and amenities already exist — so retention would be hard without broader investment in housing, services, and integration. Legally, immigration policy is reserved nationally, so regional visas would require structural reform.

I think the most effective solution would be a hybrid approach: keeping a national immigration system, but allowing local authorities to request fast-tracked visas for sectors or areas with persistent labour shortages. However, immigration alone won’t solve the problem — wages, training, and working conditions also need to improve to make these jobs attractive and sustainable.

So it could help, but only as part of a broader labour market strategy.

No parliament can bind its successors.” Discuss this statement in relation to the UK.

This reflects the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty: Parliament can make or unmake any law, and future Parliaments can always repeal earlier Acts.

For example, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 tried to constrain when elections could be called — but it was later repealed. The European Communities Act 1972, which entrenched EU law supremacy, was also repealed by the EU Withdrawal Act after Brexit.

In practice, however, some measures are politically hard to reverse: devolution settlements, or international treaties, create expectations and costs that make repeal difficult even if legally possible.

So in strict law, it’s true: Parliament cannot bind its successors. But politically, successors can be constrained by institutions, international obligations, and public expectations. The real debate is whether the UK should entrench some laws through a codified constitution — trading flexibility for stability.

Why are some countries less developed than others?

Institutions: Countries with inclusive institutions (property rights, rule of law) attract investment and innovation; extractive ones often stagnate. North vs South Korea is a striking contrast.

Geography: Landlocked states or those in disease-prone tropics face structural disadvantages.

History: Colonial extraction and artificial borders created path dependencies.

Conflict and governance: Civil wars and weak states deter investment.

Human capital & technology: Education and health drive productivity.

Some countries remain less developed due to a complex interplay of historical, institutional, and economic factors. In his book The Plundered Planet, economist Paul Collier argues that the mismanagement of natural resources, often termed "resource curse," can impede development. He suggests that countries rich in natural resources, like Nigeria, may experience slower economic growth due to factors such as corruption, conflict, and neglect of other sectors.

Nigeria exemplifies this paradox. Despite being one of the world's largest oil producers, it faces significant development challenges. The country grapples with weak institutions, political instability, endemic corruption, and inadequate infrastructure, all of which hinder its development. For instance, the oil wealth has often been misappropriated by elites, leading to environmental degradation and social unrest, particularly in the Niger Delta region Financial Times.

One key reason some countries are less developed than others lies in how they manage natural resources. In The Plundered Planet, Paul Collier argues that the “resource curse” often traps resource-rich countries in underdevelopment. For example, oil wealth can generate huge revenues, but in the absence of transparency and accountability, it tends to fuel corruption rather than development. Political elites may divert resource rents for personal or political gain instead of investing them in infrastructure, education, or public services.

Collier also highlights how low or poorly designed taxation systems contribute to this problem. When governments rely heavily on oil revenues instead of taxes, citizens have little reason—or ability—to hold leaders accountable for how money is spent. This weakens democratic pressure for efficient public investment and good governance. In contrast, in countries where citizens pay higher taxes, there is usually stronger demand for transparency and effective state spending, leading to more sustainable growth.

In short, The Plundered Planet shows that underdevelopment often results not simply from a lack of resources, but from the way those resources are governed. Poor transparency, corruption, and weak fiscal systems prevent resource wealth from translating into broad-based economic and social development.

Furthermore, Nigeria's overreliance on oil has stunted the growth of other sectors, such as agriculture and manufacturing. This lack of diversification makes the economy vulnerable to global oil price fluctuations, exacerbating economic instability.

In summary, the underdevelopment of countries like Nigeria can be attributed to a combination of historical legacies, institutional weaknesses, and economic mismanagement. Addressing these issues requires comprehensive reforms, including strengthening institutions, diversifying the economy, and ensuring equitable distribution of resources.

In The Plundered Planet, Paul Collier argues that Nigeria’s experience with oil illustrates how resource wealth can actually undermine development when transparency and accountability are weak. Although Nigeria earns billions from oil exports, much of this revenue never reaches its citizens; instead, it is lost through corruption, hidden accounts, and unrecorded spending. Because oil income flows directly to the government rather than being raised through taxes, leaders face little pressure to explain how funds are used, and citizens have few means to hold them accountable. Collier calls this “unearned income” — wealth that encourages patronage and political favouritism rather than productive investment. As a result, Nigeria’s oil wealth has not translated into better infrastructure, education, or healthcare. The reliance on oil also distorts the wider economy, stifling other sectors such as manufacturing and agriculture — a phenomenon known as Dutch Disease. Ultimately, Collier shows that it is not simply the presence of resources but the lack of transparency, weak institutions, and limited citizen oversight that leave countries like Nigeria less developed despite their natural wealth.

What policies can we use to improve development?

Two ways we need to stimulate and also remove the barriers to development

Improving development requires tackling the underlying barriers that prevent countries from converting resources into broad-based prosperity. As Paul Collier argues in The Plundered Planet, this begins with increasing transparency and accountability in government, particularly in how public revenues—such as oil income or taxes—are managed. When citizens can see how money is spent, it reduces corruption and strengthens trust in institutions.

From an economic perspective, fiscal and monetary policy can also be used to stimulate development. Effective taxation broadens the state’s capacity to fund infrastructure and social services, while prudent monetary policy—such as managing interest rates—helps maintain stability and encourage investment. Yet, these policies can only work if supported by strong institutions: governments must enforce property rights, ensure fair regulation, and build administrative systems capable of delivering public goods efficiently.

At the same time, development depends on investing in human capital—through universal education, accessible healthcare, and vocational training—to build a productive, adaptable workforce. Parallel investment in infrastructure and connectivity—transport networks, reliable electricity, and digital systems—helps integrate markets and attract both domestic and foreign investment.

Planning applications: would you allow someone to paint their door purple in a conservation site

S — State

“At first glance, painting a door purple seems trivial, but within a conservation area it raises a real question about how far individual property rights should be limited to preserve collective heritage value.”

A — Analyse

“Conservation areas exist to maintain the architectural or historic character of a place, so any alteration — even cosmetic — can have cumulative visual impacts. However, the planning system also needs to be proportionate. If the colour change doesn’t harm the area’s significance, strict refusal might be unnecessary.”

E — Explore

“In practice, many councils use Article 4 Directions to control such changes, requiring permission only where visual unity is key — for example, in Georgian terraces or listed streetscapes. A bold purple door might disrupt that uniform aesthetic, but in some contexts it could even enhance diversity or reflect local culture. The decision should rest on whether the change materially affects the character that justified the area’s designation.”

L — Link

“So, I’d probably allow it if it doesn’t undermine the architectural integrity or visual harmony of the street. The key principle is proportionality — planning should protect public value without over-regulating harmless personal expression.”

Should nature have rights?

S — State

“It depends on how we define ‘rights’. If we mean legal personhood — the idea that rivers, forests, or ecosystems can hold legal standing — then there’s a strong argument that recognising nature’s rights could help correct how human law undervalues environmental systems.”

A — Analyse

“Traditionally, rights are reserved for individuals or entities capable of legal duties. Nature can’t represent itself, so we’d rely on human guardians — similar to how we represent children or corporations. Granting rights to nature might shift our legal frameworks from an anthropocentric view — seeing nature as a resource — toward an ecocentric one, where ecosystems have intrinsic value.”

E — Explore

“We’ve already seen experiments with this: New Zealand granted the Whanganui River legal personhood, and Ecuador’s constitution recognises the rights of nature. These models can improve conservation outcomes, but they also create legal complexity — who speaks for a forest when development and livelihoods are at stake? Economically, assigning rights could internalise environmental costs, similar to Pigouvian principles, but enforcement would be difficult.”

L — Link

“So I’d argue that nature should have recognised interests, if not full ‘rights’ in the human sense. Embedding environmental value into legal systems is vital, but the goal should be practical stewardship rather than symbolic personhood. In that sense, granting rights to nature is less about nature itself, and more about redefining our responsibilities toward it.”

• which part of nature is going to have rights will it only be a certain part ngorogoro crater is converved but areas around it are even more plundered, trade off

Should we conserve nature?

“Right now, we tend to have an anthropocentric view of the world, where nature is valued mainly for the economic or material benefits it provides to humans. While this perspective has driven growth and industrialisation, it has also led to the overexploitation of natural resources and environmental degradation. Conserving nature is important because it recognises that ecosystems have value beyond human use — they sustain the air we breathe, regulate the climate, and support the biodiversity on which all life depends. Moving towards a more sustainable, ecocentric approach means understanding that long-term development cannot come at the expense of the planet’s ecological balance. Protecting nature is not a constraint on progress; it is the foundation for it. Without healthy ecosystems, economic and social systems eventually collapse, so conservation is not just an environmental duty but a prerequisite for human survival and sustainable development.conserving nature can mean that humans leave and go and plunder neighbouring places like the ngorogoro crater are conserved.

However also whih parts of nature do we conserve, what determines whether it should be convserved, nature is finite, land is finite how can we grow sustainably and support growing population when conserve nature.