IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cjrecs/v18y2025i2p359-370..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What killed HS2? Explaining the loss of political support for the UK’s high-speed rail megaproject

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Durrant

Abstract

Through the case of a hegemonic discourse formed around the UK’s cancelled mega-transport project High-Speed Two (HS2), this paper analyses the circumstances of its abandonment. The acquisition and loss of symbolic power are explained through different master and meta narratives. Mechanisms are identified through which HS2 became an ‘empty signifier’ temporarily filled with symbolic value, standing for different policy aspirations to rebalance the UK’s economy. Political speeches and the construction of narratives show how meta narratives around the project shifted and its symbolic value ebbed away to the point the project symbolised failure as opposed to ambition. Thus, when rising costs altered the ratio of costs to benefits, this narrative of failure was available to legitimate HS2’s cancellation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Durrant, 2025. "What killed HS2? Explaining the loss of political support for the UK’s high-speed rail megaproject," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 18(2), pages 359-370.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cjrecs:v:18:y:2025:i:2:p:359-370.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cjres/rsaf005
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cjrecs:v:18:y:2025:i:2:p:359-370.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/cjres .

    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.