Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T23:22:31.993Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

RESEARCH ARTICLE: Improving the Road Planning Process: A Case Study of Stakeholder Comments on Two Swedish Road Projects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2005

Kajsa Hylmö
Kajsa Hylmö
Affiliation:
Department of Landscape Planning, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp, Sweden
Get access

Abstract

Two Swedish road projects were studied to find ways to shorten the time spent in the road planning process. The results indicated that the road projects developed very differently. One planning project developed rather smoothly, while the other received an escalating flood of letters. Concerns about the environment and landscape were present in the majority of these letters, pointing to the importance of involving the expertise of landscape planners or environmentalists in the management of road development projects. This article's conclusion stresses the importance of inviting early submission of viewpoints and of responding to people's questions in order to achieve acceptance of a project; it also stresses the significance of keeping communication open with affected sectors of the public from the very beginning of a project.

Type
FEATURES & REVIEWS
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , March 2005 , pp. 44 - 53
Copyright
© 2005 National Association of Environmental Professionals

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Dayton, D. 2002. Evaluating Environmental Impact Statements as Communicative Action. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 16(4):355–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittmar, H. 2000. Interest Based Convening: Toward Participatory Decision Making in Transportation Investment. http://www.transact.org/report. Accessed November 9, 2004.
Emanuelsson, U., C. Bergendorff, B. Carlsson, N. Lewanand, and O. Nordell. 1985. Det Skånska Kulturlandskapet [The Cultural Landscape of Scania]. Bokförlaget Signum, Lund, 248 pp.
Grahn, P. 1991. Om Parkers Betydelse [On the Significance of Parks] (PhD dissertation). Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, Alnarp, 410 pp.
Grahn, P., and U. A. Stigsdotter. 2003. Landscape Planning and Stress. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 2(1):1–18.Google Scholar
Hylmö, K., and E. Skärbäck. In review. What Constitutes a Good Environmental Impact Report: A Case Study of Analysis and Transparency to Build Confidence in Two Road Projects.
McClintock, D., R. Isonand, and R. Armson. 2003. Metaphors for Reflecting on Research Practice: Researching with People. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 46(5):715–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council. 1989. Improving Risk Communication. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 331 pp.
Palm, L., and S. Windahl. 1996. Kommunikation—Teorin i Praktiken [Communication in Theory and Practice]. Konsult Förlaget i Uppsala AB, Uppsala, 98 pp.
Righter, R. W. 2002. Exoskeletal Outer-Space Creations. In Wind Power in View: Energy Landscapes in a Crowded World, M. J. Pasqualetti and R. W. Righter, eds. Academic Press, San Diego.
Schwahn, C. 2002. Landscape and Policy in the North Sea Marshes. In Wind Power in a Changing World, J. M. Pasqualetti, J. Martin, and R. W. Righter, eds. Academic Press, San Diego.
Statistiska Centralbyrån [Statistics Sweden]. 2004. Folkmängd efter Region och Tid [Population by Region and Time]. http://www.ssd.scb.se. Accessed December 7, 2004.
US Department of Energy. 1998. Effective Public Participation under the National Environmental Policy Act. Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance. http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa. Accessed November 9, 2004.
Vägverket [The Swedish Road Administration]. 2001. Vägverkets Författningssamling 2001:18 [The Swedish Road Administration's Ordinance]. Stockholm.
Vägverket [The Swedish Road Administration] Publikation. 2002a. Miljökonsekvensbeskrivning inom Vägsektorn, Del 2 Metodik [Environmental Impact Report within the Road Sector, Part 2 Methods]. Vägverket Publikation, Borlänge.
Vägverket [The Swedish Road Administration] Publikation. 2002b. Miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar inom Vägsektorn, Del 1 Regler och Bestämmelser [Environmental Impact Report within the Road Sector, Part 1 Rules and Regulations]. Vägverket Publikation, Borlänge.
Vägverket Skåne [The Swedish Road Administration, Scania]. 1999. Samrådsmöte med Allmänhet [Stakeholder Meetings with the Public], K. Åkesson, ed. Skåne.
Vägverket Skåne [The Swedish Road Administration, Scania]. 2003a. Utredning av Väg E22 Hörby Norra-Vä [Official Report on Road E22 Hörby Norra-Vä]. http://www.vv.se/regioner/vsk/mapp_region/Investeringar/E22/Horby_va/oversikt.htm. Accessed November 12, 2004.
Vägverket Skåne [The Swedish Road Administration, Scania]. 2003b. Väg 17 Förbifart Marieholm [Väg 17 Past Marieholm]. http://www.vv.se/vag_traf/vagproj/skane/vag17_marieholm/den_nya_vagen.html. Accessed November 12, 2004.
Zang, D. K. 2003. When Should Preferred Alternatives Be Disclosed in Transportation Environmental Impact Statements? Environmental Practice 5(2):146–153.Google Scholar