Lecture 4 + Klakegg et al 2016, Heeres et al 2012 Flashcards
Name positive and negative impacts of infrastructure
Negative:
Physical presence requires space
Construction of infra disturbs surrounding environment(barrier, fragmentation, use of natural resources)
Use and maintenance infra has impacts on environment (noise, air, safety, etc.)
Positive:
Connecting function of (transport)infrastructure
Structuring function of (transport)infrastructure
Enabling (auto)mobility, social-economic development (of locations, regions)
Characteristics of Road Infrastructure
- Dominant transport network (use, investments, flexible)
- Highly developed network ( vulnerability paradox)
- Many spatial scales (local, regional, international)
- Different transport modes: walking, biking, cars
- Both persons and freight traffic
- Both individual (car) and collective transport (busses, taxi’s)
- Innovations (infra, vehicles): automatization, electrification, hydrogen
Important benefits and costs
Explain the interactions between the layers concept.
infrastructure creates accessibility, therefore we can have activities. But activities also create a need for more infrastructure.
* Good transport system directly enables accessibility
Why do we need integrated planning?
Road and infra and mobility investments are factors for socio-economic development, but they also have social and environmental impacts. Context is changing: climate change, liveability, technical, societal and spatial tranformation have influence.
We have many uncertainties which makes things complex –> we need resilient, sustainable and cost efficient solutions to this complexity. Integrated planning can give that.
In the transition to more integrated planning we must move from a small scope to an inclusive scope. What does this mean?
Currently things are often looked at from a small scope: every policy domain makes its own policy and strives for its own goals and objectives. We need to look at all these objectives together in an integral way and come up with robust, integrated solutions for multiple problems. Not separate them.
According to Klakegg et al. (2016), what is the primary element that should ‘tame’ the trolls?
a. Improved governance frameworks
b. Improved project management
c. Improved democratic legitimisation
d. Improved project management research
a
Explain how the government has a dominant role traditionally in infrastructure planning.
Much investment, major projects, need for governmental control. –> planning programming budgeting: PPB systems
* policy making
* programming
* budgeting
Need for well-considered intervention.
Structured and staged process of policy making, programming, budgeting
Traditionally rather top-down, technical rational planning process with a dominant role of national government. It’s very sectoral as well.
What is the reason for the planning process being so top-down and centralized with infra planning?
Bc the decision-making on the major highways, railways and waterways is seen as a matter of national interest. Ministers are responsible. Also NIMBY nature of road planning and slow decision-making processes in the past and today still.
Until recently, transport and traffic planning has remained a solitary policy sector in the Netherlands, largely separated from spatial planning sectors. What is the primary reason for this according to Heeres et al. (2012)?
a. The motorways are owned by the national government which solely has the power to commission them
b. The absence of a financial need for integration, with the sector having its own sources of funding
c. Because planning and building motorways involves many strict safety measures
b
Explain how integrated development can be done?
By including other policy fields. Linking up with spatial planning for example.
Link the planning process up with the budgeting system
prevent foreclosure: broad explorative study and participation first.
Explain what Institutional interdependency is and how it happens.
Government is responsible for making the land use plans. People are dependent on them making them and can’t all of a sudden do that themselves.
Explain how functional interrelatedness leads to institutional interdependency.
geographically, funtionally roads are related to other functions like housing, agriculture, economic functions etc… This leads to institutional dependency because government makes the land use plans.
Explain the relationship between infra and spatial development.
Spatial functions create a need for accessibility and thus infrastructure. you also want to provide as many people within a short time frame from A to B. Infrastructure creates a need for mobility. mobility towards spatial functions.
Daily Urban System (city-regions): spatial level where multi-modal transport is most relevant
Socio-economic development of city-regions is enhanced by multi-modal accessibilityE.g.: Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
Also connects to LUTI cycle
Is transit oriented development a solution for all problems?
No! it really depends on the transport and location value. Not all places are centres where a lot of activities happen.
How can TOD lead to ‘cannibalism’?
you need to coordinate developments with each other otherwise devleopments are cannibalizing each other. –> getting in each others’ way leading to undesired outcomes.
Explain the borrowed size thing.
The enhancement of urban network also affects other networks, as networks are part of bigger networks.
What are the main challenges of the urban node Vienna as explained in the case?
city does well regarding socio economic development. however the significant growth leads to a (lack of) logistics oriented develpment: logistic centres/distribution centres, multi-company hubs
Lack of coordinated spatial planning at functional areas - ad hoc urban sprawl.
Robustness and vulnerability of the network.
Multi-level cooperation and governance is needed as well as master planning.
Name overall challenges of Road planning.
Growth of transport
Pressure on the already heavily used infrastructure + ageing infrastructure
Conflicts in use of the same infrastructure by person and freight transport
Conflicts between infrastructure, traffic and other spatial functions
Need for more logistic and cargo hubs and areas
(Inter)national corridors are as strong as the weakest local link
What characterizes integrated planning in the Rhine corridor case.
An integral approach of infrastructure and land use planning
A multi-scalar approach
A robust, multi-modal infrastructure system
An alignment of interests at corridorlevel: comprehensive strategy
And a governance model for corridor planning?Coordinated programming of development (projects)
Explain ‘Linked dimensions’.
Various dimensions are related in a logical way:
Spatial connects to network dimension. These two can create synergies with the time dimension (strategy development and time linkage) and the value dimension: combined value creation and capturing. These are effective towards the institutional dimension as well as the implementation dimension. As the latter two lead to integrated land use and transport infrastructure planning.
Explain how we must ‘connect different worlds’ in order to come up with integrated planning approaches.
All types of activities compete for the same space. Planning, development and management however, take place seperately from each other.
In which area are possibilities for policy integration suitable?
In areas where two interests overlap.
Concluding this lecture. What are the most important points.
More inclusiveness is needed with other policies and sectors to come to sustainable solutions.
Physical network is getting old. Has to be redeveloped. You have multi-modality, links with spatial development
Societal actor network: changing roles of Road authorities and other parties
* Alignment between infra and social networks. Differences in dynamics!
from sectoral technological solutions to inclusive approaches that focus on societal value.
What were the similarities/differences between development between Uk, Netherlands and Norway according to Klakegg (2016)?
- The mandate of the authority responsible for administering the governance framework is
strong in all three countries and, particularly in the UK has been strengthened - Types of projects vary between the countries
- level of complexity is lower in Norway and Netherlands than in UK
- Size of projects: the average size (measured in cost) is significantly smaller in Norway than in
the UK and the Netherlands. - Size of economy matters. What are considered major projects differs in UK, NL and Norway.
- stage of projects: uncertainty based on a projects’ stage.
- duration of projects: differs per country
