Saakjans, Kaufmann and Hersperger recast building regulation as a comparative epistemic object rather than a technical residue of planning systems. Their central proposition is that rules governing height, density, volume, outlook, coherence, development capacity and hazard prevention embody distinct normative priorities and can therefore be analysed as a structured geography of governmental intentions. Drawing on an expert survey covering thirty European countries, the study identifies height and density as the most strongly prioritised regulatory domains and shows that efficiency is generally privileged over equity. Methodologically, the paper converts heterogeneous local regulations into a comparative analytical framework, making otherwise dispersed planning cultures commensurable without reducing them to a single legal model. Its theoretical contribution is to connect the morphology of regulation with the objectives that justify it. The wider bridge is to comparative institutionalism and urban political economy: rules do not merely delimit buildings; they encode how states and municipalities distribute spatial capacity, risk, value and access.
URBANISM MEETS ART