When plans are paused: Legal, spatial and governance dimensions of urban plans suspension in the Municipality of Centar - Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia

This paper examines how institutions operate in processes of urban planning in the Republic of North Macedonia from 2010 to the present, using the Municipality of Centar in Skopje as a case study. Planning takes place within a defined institutional context, where institutions serve as the mechanism for transforming factual realities into legally binding frameworks. The primary aim of the research is to analyse the transformation of institutions, with particular emphasis on how such transformations lead to interventions in institutional design and the introduction of new instruments into the planning process. Special attention is given to the roles institutions play in decision-making on urban planning matters, as well as on the mechanisms employed to introduce new planning instruments. The analysis is centered on two interrelated case studies that pursue the same planning objective but operate at different levels of governance - the implementation of decisions on the non-implementation of plans in the Municipality of Centar - Skopje, and the introduction of the suspension of urban plans as a new instrument under the Law on Urban Planning. By examining the local-level implementation of the new instrument alongside the parallel procedures for adopting new detailed urban plans, the study identifies the following results: (a) an imprecise application of legal regulations; (b) a slow and insufficiently effective institutional level of operation and (c) the influence of external factors and interest groups. With regard to the introduction of the new planning instrument at the national level ? the suspension of plans ? the findings reveal: (a) a lack of precise methodology and criteria; (b) the absence of prescribed mechanisms and methodologies for conducting the suspension procedure; (c) negative consequences for the course of the suspension process arising from the existing institutional framework; and (d) the new instrument?s insufficient development and limited functionality.