IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mst/wpaper/200909.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multi-level governance of large transport infrastructures: efficiency or transparency?

Author

Abstract

The present paper analyses the Multi-level Governance issue for large transport infrastructures relevant at European level. The focus is put on the activities occurring before the infrastructure implementation, which are identified as the decision making-process. This is commonly a long and complex procedure involving a variety of stakeholders at different levels and a variety of corresponding interests and objectives. This procedure should ensure that the effects the project will generate are assessed taking into account all the stakeholders concerned (transparency) and, at the same time, it should avoid paralysis or delays caused by excessive discussions (efficiency). Five major transport projects have been examined to investigate the main features of the decision-making process, to capture the differences occurring between projects belonging to different countries and to understand how the process may influence the project’s economic performance. All selected projects have both a supranational and national relevance, because they have been included in a Master Plan at national level, but are also part of the Trans-European Transport Network. Evidence from selected cases highlighted that projects belonging to the same country follow very similar processes. This is particularly evident in the German and French cases, where national standard procedures are established in advance by the transport planning authority. When country-specific decision-making processes exist, these tend to ensure that the project-financing decision is taken when all the project’s promoters have been consulted and when the requested information and analyses have been undertaken and submitted. This tendency can, however, lead to a lengthening of the process and delays in the infrastructure’s implementation, which have a negative effect on the investment cost. On the contrary, in the case of projects belonging to two or more countries, no homogeneous procedure is followed and the duplication of tasks and entities (in order to have all countries controlling the process) makes the project management rather difficult.

Suggested Citation

  • Davide Sartori, 2008. "Multi-level governance of large transport infrastructures: efficiency or transparency?," Working Papers 200909, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:mst:wpaper:200909
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.csilmilano.com/docs/WP09_2009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ales S. Berk & Dejan Podhraski, 2018. "Superiority of Monte Carlo simulation in valuing real options within public–private partnerships," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(1), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Gabriel M. Ahlfeldt & Arne Feddersen, 2010. "From periphery to core: economic adjustments to high speed rail," Working Papers 2010/38, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multi-level Governance; decision-making process; transport;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • H54 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Infrastructures
    • I30 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General

    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:mst:wpaper:200909. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csilmit.html .

    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: Marinella Manghina (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csilmit.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.