Martijn Leijten

Megaprojects and Contested Information

Abstract Good information is a key to good decision-making on large infrastructure projects. Decision-making is information-sensitive and empirical research shows that a lack of information may result in poor decision-making. The solution seems clear: more, better and timelier information. This recommendation is too simple because much information is ‘contested’. This article deals with three issues related to information and large infrastructure projects. First, the concept of contested knowledge is introduced. The stronger the different interests of the main actors, the stronger the incentives will be to make information more contested and devalue it. Second, if the contested character of information is denied, what are the implications for decision-making? If information is contested and actors look for objective information, the role of information will be devalued rather than strengthened. Finally, what strategies can cope with the contested character of information? The result of these strategies is negotiated knowledge rather than objective knowledge.

Gaming the future of an urban network

Abstract Scenario and gaming techniques have a number of complementary characteristics. In this article, the design and evaluation of a gaming–scenario experiment for the exploration of development planning in an urban network in the Netherlands is presented. Two gaming sessions were held using two long-term scenarios (2030) as varying contexts. The combined gaming–scenario approach made it possible to evaluate the impact of external future developments and trends on the administrative and spatial development. Evaluation results of the gaming experiment indicate that the gaming–scenario approach generated new and critical insights on development planning and the future of the urban network. Through the game, the principal, the game leaders but most of all the stakeholder-participants experienced and realized that the management of development planning in urban networks is a very difficult task and is full of pitfalls.

Management Characteristics of Mega-Projects

In this paper, the authors discuss the most common pitfalls that mangers of mega-projects can make and ways to avoid them. Projects may be unmanageable (in terms of time and money) as a result of a challenging design or a complex social system, or impoverished as a result of a safe design to prevent this unmanageability. In addition, the paper focuses on the characteristics of the technical and social complexity, and how projects can be managed to avoid these pitfalls. This leads to the central question whether the manager should be mainly involved with the substance of the project or rather the process that should lead to its completion.

Privatising Railroads: The Problematic Involvement of the Private Sector in Two Dutch Railway Projects

This article provides a comparative analysis of the Dutch government’s attempts to involve private parties in two national railroad mega-projects: the Betuwe Line (a transit line for goods connecting the Rotterdam harbour to the German rail network — costing 4.8 billion euros) and the HSL-Zuid (a high speed line between the Belgian border and Amsterdam — costing 6.8 billion euros). These projects are currently under construction. To date, the government has not succeeded in privatising the Betuwe Line. Although the privatisation of the HSL-Zuid has been realised, it has proven difficult to keep under control. The two projects are compared in terms of the motives for privatisation, the strategies adopted, and the results achieved. Explanations are sought for the extent to which the strategies were successful. Generic lessons are drawn from the two projects.

Competing Values in the Management of Innovative Projects: The Case of the RandstadRail Project

Large engineering projects without late delivery, cost overruns or technical problems seem to be rare (Flyvbjerg et al., 2003). Illustrations of this statement are abundant worldwide (e.g. the French Superphenix project, the German Transrapid project, the Channel Tunnel, Denver International Airport, Boston’s Central Artery Tunnel (Dempsey et al., 1997; Bell, 1998; Altshuler and Luberoff, 2003; Flyvbjerg et al., 2003). The political and societal environments of these projects all ask for safe delivery on time and within a budget. A variety of project management tools have been developed to meet such expectations. However, these projects also have innovative elements, providing situations that implementers (e.g. managers, engineers, operators) of the projects have not met before. These elements require room for improvisation and interaction between implementers, which most project management tools typically do not provide.

Asset management for the Dutch railway infrastructure

Asset management has conquered a prominent position in infrastructure operation and maintenance over the past few years. In this paper, we will describe the way asset management has been applied in the organization of ProRail, the Dutch railway infrastructure manager. The paper shows that asset management has strongly improved the efficiency, both in terms of financial management and capacity, of the railway infrastructure. However, it also imposes considerable challenges on the asset managers and their organization. The ability to properly deal with these challenges determines whether ProRail as asset manager will be able to seize the opportunities asset management offers.

The Urban Network Game: A Simulation of the Future of Joint City Interests

In a thriving, densely populated and urbanized country like the Netherlands, space is at a premium. With the steady economic growth of the 1990s and the construction and expansion of homes, business parks and infrastructure, the available space and the environment are coming under increasing pressure. Major changes are also taking place on an administrative level in the Netherlands. In some cases, influential new joint ventures are formed between public, private, and social parties (Frieling 2000). The social and administrative dynamic, and the tension that this creates in relation to spatial quality requirements, is turning into a major challenge for spatial policy. Numerous advisory bodies and policymakers are therefore advocating a spatial development policy (WRR 1998) or development planning (VROM 2001, 2002). Development planning is the opposite of admittance planning and provides increased scope for the initiatives and investments of local governments and private and social parties. Instead of passively resisting activities and exhibiting too little flexibility, governments must aim at actively entering into partnerships with other governments, the business sector, and social organizations. Together, they must develop and realize interrelated, creative concepts, projects, and programs (WRR 1998; Healey 2000;Teisman 1997;VROM Council 2001). According to the Netherlands’ Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning, and the Environment (VROM 2002), development planning requires:

New Public Management and the new features of strategic behaviour

During the 1980s and 1990s New Public Management (NPM) (Hood, 1991;Osborne and Gaebler, 1992; Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2004) appeared as are action to the government management policies of the previous decades that were viewed as having become too ‘self-centred’. Governments were accused of focusing too much on political objectives rather than meeting the needs of citizens. According to proponents of NPM, government bodies and state-owned companies were not sufficiently customer oriented, and were not innovative and were inefficient. In their view, government bodies should provide better service to citizens in efficient and innovative ways. In doing so, they should use private enterprise as an example. NPM supporters claimed that private companies are aware that their survival depends on their ability to meet the needs of their customers. Competition and self-interest stimulate companies to do this efficiently. NPM aims at introducing arrangements that enable and stimulate competition and/or give more room for pursuing self-interest. These criticisms also applied, with the necessary modifications, to public transportation companies, including railway, tram and underground rail companies. These companies were also accused of being insufficiently customer-oriented, inefficient and lacking innovation.

Managing complex transport infrastructure projects in an institutionally fragmented setting

Complex construction projects face a dilemma: perspectives and interests of clients and project managers may diverge and even be contradictive. This dilemma is especially manifest in the management of the performance benchmarks time, cost, scope and quality. Administrators hold to pre-established benchmarks, while project managers have an interest in relaxing them, in order to be able to realize the project. When these two contradictory interests are not reconsolidated, either the benchmarks are not met, or they will be traded off in an uncontrolled way, which even may lead to project failure. This management trap is best to be avoided when designing the contract between client and contractors and the drawing up of the terms of reference. Due to the complexity that characterizes a lot of public projects, this is not always possible. With RandstadRail as example, we will show in this paper what problems may occur in these situations and how they can be dealt with.