Abstract

The innovation of the bicycle street allows missing links in cycling networks to be developed in places where financial or spatial constraints present challenges to implementing separated cycling facilities. Two separate cases in the Netherlands demonstrate that when the intent is to use the innovation to resolve spatial constraints, the goal of reaching consensus between different stakeholders involved with a collaborative governance process can lead to a result in which the user practices necessary to make the innovation a success are not sufficiently protected. These cases show how collaborative governance processes in transportation planning can lead to innovations being implemented in ways that fail to support the group that they are intended to benefit. This argument is supported by drawing on two different bodies of literature: 1) collaborative governance literature that describes the movement to increase the legitimacy of government supported projects through substantial stakeholder involvement; and 2) strategic niche management literature that describes the role that established user practices play in the upscaling potential of innovations. These literatures are connected through the evaluation technique of Strategic Policy Niche Management (SPNM), which has been used to apply strategic niche management principles to innovations in transportation policy. The article uses the concept of SPNM to illustrate the need for understanding the connection between citizens in collaborative governance and users in innovation development. This relationship is illustrated by examining the history of a transportation innovation, the bicycle street, with a particular focus on how its development in Germany and Belgium as a means to provide bicycle infrastructure at low cost differs from its introduction in the Netherlands, where it has been used as a compromise solution between different user groups. The history of the bicycle street and its uses in different contexts is followed by a detailed case study on the contested implementation of a bicycle street in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. This specific case reveals what can happen when an innovative project is undertaken with a focus on consensus among potentially impacted stakeholders and does not give increased weight to the needs of the users of the innovation. The innovation may develop sufficient support to be implemented but may not be sufficiently attuned to user practices to meet the needs of its intended user group, creating an obstacle to future upscaling. The article concludes with a discussion of how adopting specific regulations for bicycle streets could resolve this issue, preventing bicycle streets from being implemented in places where other options would better serve cyclists.

Highlights

  • This article examines the effect of local collaborative government processes on the implementation of transportation innovations

  • This argument is supported by drawing on two different bodies of literature: 1) collaborative governance literature that describes the movement to increase the legitimacy of government supported projects through substantial stakeholder involvement; and 2) strategic niche management literature that describes the role that established user practices play in the upscaling potential of innovations

  • Collaborative governance literature describes how meaningful citizen participation in decision making can lead to successful policy outcomes (Ansell and Gash, 2008; Thomas and Perry, 2006)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This article examines the effect of local collaborative government processes on the implementation of transportation innovations It does this through a focus on a particular innovation designed to support the growth of cycling as part of a sustainable transportation system: the bicycle street. Scholars in Science and Technology Studies (STS) argue this inclusion is of fundamental importance because of the key role that users play in shaping technology (Oudshoorn and Pinch, 2003) This is relevant for innovations related to cycling, as actual users and users as mediated through advocacy organizations have shaped local and regional cycling cultures (Oldenziel et al, 2016) and where the participation from people who cycle is needed to counter the projected users imagined by transportation engineers that often undervalue

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.