Joseph S. Szyliowicz

Getting realistic about megaproject planning: The case of the new Denver International Airport

Megaprojects continue to play a prominent role in promoting economic development, and have proliferated rapidly worldwide. But, as they have grown larger in number, size, and complexity, their planning, implementation and ultimate success become increasingly problematic. Most encounter unexpected difficulties and seldom achieve their original objectives. This article addresses the reasons for this state of affairs by focusing upon the relevance of the Rational model of decision making to the case of the new Denver International Airport. It traces its evolution and considers the extent to which the Rational model explains the major events. It concludes that this model has only limited explanatory power because it does not incorporate political elements which play a major role in megaprojects. The Rational model can be successfully applied to an entire project only where the political system permits a powerful agency to design and implement the project. This condition is rarely met in democratic societies, especially in the U.S. Furthermore, its applicability is limited by the new environment in which planning takes place, an environment that is marked by the emergence of new actors and increasing turbulence and uncertainty. Accordingly, recognition of the role of power suggests that the utility of the Rational model is limited and that alternative planning approaches that emphasize consensus building and flexibility need to be developed for megaproject planning.

Revisiting transportation planning and decision making theory: The case of Denver International Airport

Current approaches to transportation planning have yielded, at best, inconsistent results. Numerous projects, based on the traditional rational-comprehensive model, have failed to achieve their original objectives. Although scholars have, for decades, identified the weaknesses of this model and proposed new alternatives, it continues to dominate transportation planning. The case of Denver International Airport illustrates its weaknesses and the need to adopt more flexible alternative approaches that incorporate elements of robustness, corrigibility, hedging and resilience. For airport planning specifically, the new, highly volatile environment created by deregulation and increased public sensitivities needs to be recognized and new guidelines incorporating findings such as these should be designed and promulgated by the FAA.

Aviation Security: Promise or Reality?

This article analyzes the state of aviation security, beginning with the characteristics of the air transportation system that complicate the achievement of a high level of security. It analyzes the situation that existed prior to 9/11 and then evaluates the changes that have occurred since. It concludes that no overall systematic program has yet been put in place to deal with the threats that terrorism poses to the various elements of aviation. It also argues that aviation security, indeed homeland security, requires incorporating antiterrorism into foreign policy and ongoing attempts to deal with the underlying factors that promote terrorism.‐

Elite Recruitment in Turkey: The Role of the Mülkiye

The study of elites, or “whos who, when, and how,” as Professor Rustow has described this field, has long been a topic of concern to scholars in a wide variety of disciplines. Social and political philosophers dating back to Aristotle and including such diverse figures as Marx, Pareto, and Mosca have written about the relationships between elites and the social order, and a host of social scientists and historians have carried out detailed analyses of the social background of highlevel decision-makers in various societies

ASSESSING INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AT STATE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION

We assessed the practice of freight and passenger intermodal planning at seven state departments of transportation Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas through analyses of previous studies, long- and short-range plans, organisational structures, surveys, and interviews. Results indicate that these states have altered their organisational structures and have produced plans that increasingly reflect an intermodal orientation, but that Florida and Louisiana were rated somewhat higher. Specific intermodal projects, public participation, and coordination among agencies tended to be rated more highly, while funding for and state DOT attitudes toward transit, bicycle/pedestrian, and intermodal connectors were rated much lower.

Political Participation and Modernization in Turkey

HE TRANSITION in Turkey from a one-party system to a multi-party system in 1950 was universally hailed as a great achievement. To many observers it appeared as evidence that a modernizing oligarchy could provide the necessary underpinnings for the creation of a democratic society and that democracy could evolve from dictatorship. These high expectations were rudely dashed by the army coup of May 1960 and indeed to some extent by the policies of the government in the years preceding the revolution. Turkey, which had appeared as a model for development within a nontotalitarian framework, now seemed to have lost its initial drive and momentum, apparently to be diverted from its course of economic development and modernization. The example of Turkey is particularly instructive because the past few years have witnessed an outstanding phenomenon, the proliferation of new states throughout the world. All of them are attempting to create viable polities and to modernize their societies as rapidly as possible, and they face many of the same problems that previously confronted the elites of the Ottoman Empire, and later, of the Turkish Republic. One of the most critical problems is the rate and manner in which certain groups, especially the peasantry, are politicized and inducted into the national political system. The creation of a modern society entails a closing of the gap which exists between the modern and the traditional sectors a complicated task involving the disruption of the peasantrys traditional way of life, and thus one which would probably engender considerable opposition to the policies of the modernizing elite. Accordingly, the regime may temporarily ignore the rural mass and concentrate its energies and resources upon mobilizing the urban elements in order to gain time and to obtain new sources of support. Such a policy will lead to the establishment of an enclave of modernity within the society and may be camouflaged by expressions of concern for the villagers welfare and by the introduction of various programs which are either not applied or to which sufficient resources are not allocated. But at best, such a policy merely postpones the problem of modernizing and integrating the peasantry and may, in fact, aggravate it by increasing the disparity between the rural and the urban sectors. This was essentially the result of the policy followed by the Turkish elite led by Mustapha Kemal Atatiirk. Political modernization in Turkey, as elsewhere, is reflected in the continual and progressive enlargement of the number of groups and social strata which were gradually mobilized and inducted into the mainstream of the national life. One group, however, the peasantry, was left relatively isolated and did not play a significant role in the nations affairs until after World War II when the establishment of a multi-party system meant that the competing political parties would be forced to appeal for rural support.

Students and politics in Turkey

Like their colleagues in many other countries, Turkish students have vividly demonstrated their ability to influence national policies and developments on many occasions. The best-known example came in 1960 when the demonstrations staged by the students at Istanbul and Ankara Universities on April 28-29 proved to be the spark which provoked the revolution of May 27, 1960, but the history of student involvement in politics can be traced back for many decades. Thus Turkey presents a fertile field for the study of the role of students in politics. Its tradition of student activism provides a historical perspective which, though often lacking in the new States of Asia and Africa, is vital if one is to go beyond the ad hoc research which has recently so often characterized the study of students in developing countries. Furthermore, Turkey possesses a second tradition, one of modernization, which renders the Turkish case of particular interest to students of development. For at least forty years the government has made determined attempts to modernize the society, the economy, and the polity, and Turkey has already faced many of the problems and difficulties that confront the new States of Asia and Africa today in their attempts at nation-building and modernization.