Making Believe: Institutional and Discursive Barriers to Sustainable Transport in Two Australian Cities

The main focus of this paper is the complex of 'storylines' justifying transport infrastructure policy. We use the term 'discourse network' to describe the specific set of storylines and arguments that coordinate action in a particular policy domain. The 'knots' in the network are the related discursive threads of argument, the 'nodes' are institutional structures binding people together, sometimes in particular places, for close communication. Our empirical frame compares the transport policy domains of Australia's two largest cities, Sydney and Melbourne, in the past four decades. We find that transport storylines in both cities--whilst hardly conducive to sustainability--have by no means constituted a unified ideology. The evidence is that discourse networks in both contexts have been loosely woven nets comprised of strands of part truth, part fiction and quasi-arguments generated from different professional sources with different and in some ways conflicting ideologies. There are significant variations in the knots of storylines found in Sydney and Melbourne, particularly as they confront the opposing discourse of sustainability.

[1]  ROAD TRAFFIC GROWTH AND THE DYNAMICS OF SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT POLICIES , 1996 .

[2]  B. Latour.  Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[3]  Ulrich Beck,et al.  The reinvention of politics : rethinking modernity in the global social order , 1999 .

[4]  William R. Black,et al.  Socio-economic barriers to sustainable transport , 2000 .

[5]  G. Vigar.  The Politics of Mobility: Transport, the Environment, and Public Policy , 2002 .

[6]  P. Mees.  A Very Public Solution: Transport in the Dispersed City , 2000 .

[7]  Tore Langmyhr.  The Rhetorical Side of Transport Planning , 2000 .

[8]  N. Low.  Ecosocialisation and Environmental Planning: A Polanyian Approach , 2002 .

[9]  N. Low.  What made it Happen? Mapping The Teain of Power in Urban Development , 1997 .

[10]  D. Wood.  Trunk roads and the generation of traffic , 1994 .

[11]  B. Davies,et al.  Positioning: The Discursive Production of Selves , 1990 .

[12]  Transport Investment and Urban Regeneration in a Provincial City: Sheffield, 1992–96 , 1999 .

[13]  William R. Black,et al.  An unpopular essay on transportation , 2001 .

[14]  R T Underwood.  The Victorian transport study , 1982 .

[15]  J. Whitelegg.  TRANSPORT IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: TIME TO DECIDE. IN: MAKING URBAN TRANSPORT SUSTAINABLE , 2003 .

[16]  B. Gleeson,et al.  Making Urban Transport Sustainable , 2003 .

[17]  Bryan Cartledge,et al.  Transport and the environment. , 1995, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[18]  Julian Barnes.  Something to Declare , 2002 .

[19]  R. D. Jessop,et al.  A neo-gramscian approach to the regulation of urban regimes. , 1997 .

[20]  Brendan Gleeson,et al.  Ecosocialization or Countermodernization? Reviewing the Shifting ‘Storylines’ of Transport Planning , 2001 .

[21]  Roy Bhaskar,et al.  Reclaiming Reality: A Critical Introduction to Contemporary Philosophy , 1989 .

[22]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[23]  Luigi Mazza,et al.  Urban Sustainability: discourses, networks and policy tools' , 1997 .

[24]  Simon Pemberton,et al.  Institutional governance, scale and transport policy – lessons from Tyne and Wear , 2000 .

[25]  Brendan Gleeson,et al.  Reflexive Modernization: The Re-enlightenment of Planning? , 2000 .