Understanding Australia’s Antagonistic Politics of Transport

Bibliographic Data

ID21570171
AuthorsJames C Murphy (0000-0001-9994-2134, School of Social & Political Science, The University of Melbourne Faculty of Arts, Melbourne, Australia, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume40
Issue2
Pages93-103
Publication date2022-04-03
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueUrban Policy and Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0811-1146 • E-ISSN: 1476-7244
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/08111146.2022.2067844
OpenAlexW4280544242
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited22

Having observed a litany of transport projects afflicted by community opposition in recent years, Australian scholars are increasingly recognising the contested nature of transport policy. Many have struggled for a satisfying explanation for these contests – how they work; what determines their outcomes. I argue progress in understanding these conflicts requires that we abandon a key theory in contemporary transport policy scholarship: path dependence. Here I put forward an alternative approach that places contestation right the core of our approach to transport politics. I illustrate its potential to explain policy continuity and reversal by way of two Melbournian case-studies

Economics · Geography · Law and economics · Litany · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Public transport · Scholarship · Sociology · Transport Policy · Computer Science · Labor Movements and Unions · Law · Policy Transfer and Learning · Public Policy and Administration Research

Tools

Open DOI