Allport, R J (2011) Improving decision-making for major urban rail projects. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 164(2), pp. 61-70. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
This paper considers how 'metros' - projects that carry a mass ridership rapidly should be developed to deliver predictable success. These projects are particularly important because large cities that are not poor often turn to metros as the centre-piece of their sustainable development and because of their high opportunity cost. Yet often they do not deliver success and then confidence is undermined. The author, having spent his career developing metro projects in Singapore, Bangkok, Manila, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Bogotá, Lahore, Budapest, China, London and Nottingham, became convinced that this was a major problem. Research was undertaken to identify what could be done to improve things - not theoretically but practically. This paper summarises the findings of the author's PhD thesis of the same title. The research was based on case studies of nine newly-opened metros in Asia and the UK. An understanding was developed that appeared to explain the causes of poor success. Practical approaches were developed and a change agenda formulated that could improve success. This agenda appears to provide a resource for effecting improvements that is richer and more comprehensive than previous approaches.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | infrastructure planning; management; research & development |
| Index terms: | case study, Jakarta, Asia, career, Singapore, China, railway construction, decision-making, sustainable development, London, infrastructure planning, Manila |
| Subjects: | civil engineering, strategic project management, data collection methods, professional development, regions and continents, decision analysis, health safety and environment, Geography |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Information Management, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here