首页> 外文期刊>Transportation Research Procedia >The changing decision-making narratives in 25 years of TEN-T policies
【24h】

The changing decision-making narratives in 25 years of TEN-T policies

机译:TEN-T政策25年以来不断变化的决策叙事

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

This paper reviews changes in the role and practice of planners in the last 25 years of European policy on the Trans-European Network for Transport (TEN-T)., aiming at describing the role of technicians in the decision-making process, and their contribution to the consolidation of collaborative and transparent planning practices. The review highlights the driving forces that have use technical considerations to merely create a self-justifying narrative of a process dominated by the institutional stakeholders. The key aspects examined include (1) the respective roles of institutional decision makers (at EU and national levels), other stakeholders and the public; (2) the technical tools mobilized in the process; and (4) the evolution of the prevailing narratives, their rationale, the factual evidence behind them, and their capacity to build up consensus and to empower or to alienate key stakeholders. The TEN-T process was effectively captured by a coalition of EC and national transport services, as a means to claim more resources for transport infrastructure expansion. The coalition was backed by most of the transport stakeholders, in spite of some minor criticisms (on modal distribution….), as a way to get access to public funding. The academic criticism has not resulted in any changes (although has produced some self-justifying reports from the EC); legal and institutional "windows" to strengthen the planning process have not resulted in more collaborative practices or enhanced review practices.
机译:本文回顾了欧洲跨运输网络(TEN-T)在过去25年中规划者的角色和实践的变化,旨在描述技术人员在决策过程中的作用及其为巩固协作和透明的计划实践做出的贡献。审查重点介绍了使用技术上的考虑因素来驱动由机构利益相关者主导的过程的自我证明的驱动力。研究的主要方面包括:(1)机构决策者(在欧盟和国家层面),其他利益相关者和公众的各自作用; (2)在此过程中动员的技术工具; (4)主流叙事的演变,其理论依据,背后的事实证据,以及它们建立共识并赋予主要利益相关者权力或使其疏远的能力。欧盟和国家运输服务联盟有效地捕获了TEN-T流程,以此作为争取更多资源以扩大运输基础设施的手段。尽管有一些轻微的批评(关于模式分配……),联盟还是得到了大多数运输利益相关者的支持,以此作为获得公共资金的一种方式。学术上的批评并没有带来任何改变(尽管从欧共体产生了一些自辩的报告);加强规划过程的法律和机构“窗口”并未带来更多的协作实践或增强的审查实践。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号