IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/polsoc/v42y2023i2p131-147..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing wickedness in megaprojects: discursive and institutional perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Esposito
  • Andrea Terlizzi

Abstract

Megaprojects are now as important as ever. As a response to the pandemic, the European Union has put forward the Next Generation EU policy, making available a 2021–2027 long-term budget of €1.8 trillion to fund projects with ecological and digital applications in the field of telecommunication, transportation, and energy infrastructures. Similarly, in the United States a $1.9 trillion Covid relief plan is on the way. Also, China has planned to expedite the rollout of 102 infrastructure megaprojects earmarked for the 2021–25 development plan. Despite their importance to policy-makers, megaprojects are often met with criticism and opposition by citizens, and often go off the rails—either with regard to budget or time, or both. This introductory article presents the aim and scope of the themed issue. It positions the problem areas beyond technical issues and connects them to the social and institutional environment within which megaprojects are planned and implemented. Moreover, the article makes the case for conceptualizing megaprojects as wicked policy fields. In doing so, we specify the three defining elements of megaprojects, namely, complexity, uncertainty, and conflict. The article argues that megaproject development cannot be seen as a rational, straightforward process. It is often a non-linear, conflictual process shaped by the collective action of different stakeholder groups (e.g., project managers, policy-makers, and citizens). Driven by divergent interests, sociotechnical imaginaries, as well as behavioral and discursive logics, groups of actors construct and mobilize narratives to influence final decision-making while interacting with the institutional context.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Governing wickedness in megaprojects: discursive and institutional perspectives," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 131-147.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:42:y:2023:i:2:p:131-147.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/polsoc/puad002
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Engwall, Mats, 2003. "No project is an island: linking projects to history and context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 789-808, May.
    2. Paul Cairney, 2012. "Complexity Theory in Political Science and Public Policy," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 10(3), pages 346-358, September.
    3. Philip Haynes, 2018. "Understanding the influence of values in complex systems-based approaches to public policy and management," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 980-996, July.
    4. Natalya Sergeeva & Johan Ninan, 2023. "Comparisons as a discursive tool: shaping megaproject narratives in the United Kingdom," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 197-211.
    5. Adam M. Brewer, 2019. "A Bridge in Flux: Narratives and the Policy Process in the Pacific Northwest," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 36(4), pages 497-522, July.
    6. Pierre-André Hudon & Serghei Floricel, 2023. "The development of large public infrastructure projects: integrating policy and project studies models," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 148-163.
    7. Willem Salet & Luca Bertolini & Mendel Giezen, 2013. "Complexity and Uncertainty: Problem or Asset in Decision Making of Mega Infrastructure Projects?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 1984-2000, November.
    8. Christopher M. Weible & Tanya Heikkila, 2017. "Policy Conflict Framework," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 23-40, March.
    9. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Terlizzi & Nathalie Crutzen, 2022. "Policy narratives and megaprojects: the case of the Lyon-Turin high-speed railway," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 55-79, January.
    10. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Felicetti & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Participatory governance in megaprojects: the Lyon–Turin high-speed railway among structure, agency, and democratic participation," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 259-273.
    11. James G. March, 1978. "Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity, and the Engineering of Choice," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 587-608, Autumn.
    12. Chan Young Park & Seung Heon Han & Kang-Wook Lee & Yong Myoung Lee, 2017. "Analyzing Drivers of Conflict in Energy Infrastructure Projects: Empirical Case Study of Natural Gas Pipeline Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Adrian Little, 2012. "Political Action, Error and Failure: The Epistemological Limits of Complexity," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 60(1), pages 3-19, March.
    14. Andrea Terlizzi, 2021. "Narratives in power and policy design: the case of border management and external migration controls in Italy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 749-781, December.
    15. Prapatpaow Awakul & Stephen Ogunlana, 2002. "The effect of attitudinal differences on interface conflicts in large scale construction projects: a case study," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 365-377.
    16. Melanie Nagel & Keiichi Satoh, 2019. "Protesting iconic megaprojects. A discourse network analysis of the evolution of the conflict over Stuttgart 21," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(8), pages 1681-1700, June.
    17. Josef Wijk & Itay Fischhendler, 2017. "The construction of urgency discourse around mega-projects: the Israeli case," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(3), pages 469-494, September.
    18. Aaron J. Shenhar, 2001. "One Size Does Not Fit All Projects: Exploring Classical Contingency Domains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 394-414, March.
    19. Bernard Cova & Pervez N. Ghauri & Robert Salle, 2002. "Project marketing : Beyond competitive bidding," Post-Print hal-02298023, HAL.
    20. Andrea Migone & Alexander Howlett & Michael Howlett, 2023. "The politics of military megaprojects: discursive struggles in Canadian and Australian naval shipbuilding strategies," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 226-244.
    21. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2014. "What You Should Know About Megaprojects, and Why: An Overview," Papers 1409.0003, arXiv.org.
    22. Ryan J Orr & W Richard Scott, 2008. "Institutional exceptions on global projects: a process model," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(4), pages 562-588, June.
    23. Geert R. Teisman & Erik-Hans Klijn, 2008. "Complexity Theory and Public Management," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 287-297, May.
    24. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld, 2005. "Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 409-421, August.
    25. Philip Haynes, 2008. "Complexity Theory and Evaluation in Public Management," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 401-419, May.
    26. Kathrin Hartmann & Georg Wenzelburger, 2021. "Uncertainty, risk and the use of algorithms in policy decisions: a case study on criminal justice in the USA," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(2), pages 269-287, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alessandro Tinti, 2023. "Scales of justice. Large dams and water rights in the Tigris–Euphrates basin," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 184-196.
    2. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Felicetti & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Participatory governance in megaprojects: the Lyon–Turin high-speed railway among structure, agency, and democratic participation," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 259-273.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yi Yang, 2021. "Critical realism and complexity theory: Building a nonconstructivist systems research framework for effective governance analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 177-183, January.
    2. Jeroen van der Heijden, 2022. "The Value of Systems Thinking for and in Regulatory Governance: An Evidence Synthesis," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, June.
    3. Serghei Floricel & Sorin Piperca & Richard Tee, 2018. "Strategies for Managing the Structural and Dynamic Consequences of Project Complexity," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-17, May.
    4. Fabrizio Coticchia & Marco Di Giulio, 2023. "Nonuse and hypocritical use of strategic narratives in Megaprojects: the case of the Florence high-speed railway," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 164-183.
    5. Chao Yang & Xianyin Meng, 2023. "A Fuzzy-Set Configurational Examination of Governance Capability under Certainty and Uncertainty Conditions: Evidence from the Chinese Provincial Cases of Early COVID-19 Containing Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Hugo Priemus & Marian Bosch-Rekveldt & Mendel Giezen, 2013. "Dealing with the complexity, uncertainties and risk of megaprojects: redundancy, resilience and adaptivity," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 5, pages 83-110, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Andrew Geddes, 2013. "The Transformation of European Migration Governance," KFG Working Papers p0056, Free University Berlin.
    8. Aga, Deribe Assefa, 2016. "Factors affecting the success of development projects : A behavioral perspective," Other publications TiSEM 867ae95e-d53d-4a68-ad46-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Brocke, Jan vom & Zelt, Sarah & Schmiedel, Theresa, 2016. "On the role of context in business process management," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 486-495.
    10. Christensen, Lars Thøger & Morsing, Mette & Thyssen, Ole, 2020. "Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 327-335.
    11. Guangzhong Hu & Yuming Liu & Kai Liu & Xiaoxu Yang, 2023. "Research on Data-Driven Dynamic Decision-Making Mechanism of Mega Infrastructure Project Construction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-25, June.
    12. Schwarting, Rena & Ulbricht, Lena, 2022. "Why Organization Matters in “Algorithmic Discrimination” [Warum Organisationen einen Unterschied bei „algorithmischer Diskriminierung“ machen]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 74(S1), pages 307-330.
    13. Galeazzo, Ambra & Furlan, Andrea & Vinelli, Andrea, 2014. "Understanding environmental-operations integration: The case of pollution prevention projects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 149-160.
    14. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    15. Ricardo Reboredo, 2021. "Disaggregating Development: A Critical Analysis of Sino-African Megaprojects," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 21(1), pages 86-104, April.
    16. Love, Peter E.D. & Ika, Lavagnon A., 2021. "The ‘context’ of transport project cost performance: Insights from contract award to final construction costs," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    17. David Obstfeld, 2012. "Creative Projects: A Less Routine Approach Toward Getting New Things Done," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1571-1592, December.
    18. Paul Cairney & Christopher M. Weible, 2017. "The new policy sciences: combining the cognitive science of choice, multiple theories of context, and basic and applied analysis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 619-627, December.
    19. Tianyu Ma & Jiyong Ding & Zhuofu Wang & Miroslaw J. Skibniewski, 2020. "Governing Government-Project Owner Relationships in Water Megaprojects: a Concession Game Analysis on Allocation of Control Rights," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(13), pages 4003-4018, October.
    20. Pierre-André Hudon & Serghei Floricel, 2023. "The development of large public infrastructure projects: integrating policy and project studies models," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 148-163.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:42:y:2023:i:2:p:131-147.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/policyandsociety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.