The “Grand Paris” transport
project: beliefs, dead ends, and
governance problems
J.P. Orfeuil
Université Paris Est
Rsa second seminar
Governing metropolitan regions, 2013
1
1982-2007
A decentralization process
• This process leads to give the responsibility of
local and regional networks (investment,
operations) to local / regional authorities
• They will « do the job »: restriction of the
access of the car to the central city (Paris
municipality), land use planning and new
transport investment in a long term view
(region Sdrif)
• Dominance of « environmental justification »
2
2007: the government diagnosis
The (new) central government opposes the
regional land use project: insufficient
consideration for areas of major economic
importance such as La Defense, Saclay, Airport
links
The capital region, a world city, is viewed as
loosing international influence in relation to a
lack of ambition and insufficient consideration
for the “metropolitan idea”
3
2007
Some support on the government diagnosis:
• From experts on the metropolitan dimension
(a too “localist” project; Ascher, Davezies, …)
• From residents, due to lack of progress in the
quality of service of the current PT system
4
The principle of the regional
project
• A careful (and long) working out with
multiple stakeholders, including every
municipality, attention paid to every
detail, but global ambition unclear.
• A result which is hardly readable
5
The image of the planned PT
by the region: unreadable
6
Exemple
(several such pages)
7
The principle of the
government project:
No concertation at all. A small staff working in
secret during 6 months
Immediate perception of the ambition,
guaranteed emotional reaction,
Associated with a remarkable story telling
Esthetics
No need to go through rationality process
Evaluation through seduction more than through
public participation
8
The first version of the government project
(Grand Huit) in the media: clear and
ambitious.
9
(Portzamparc)
10
With a remarkable story telling
• A quick transport network (150 km) opening
the opportunities of urban development and
serving current or future clusters
“No more than 30 mn between 2 points of the
region”!
• Financed by private money (on the growth of
the land values)
• Contracts for operations not necessarily to
“historic operators”
• A development through a specific company, the
11
“Greater Paris company”
And, following the “Flyjvberg”
rule
“Underestimated costs + overestimated
benefits
=
project approval”
A great fantasy on these topics, without any
reference to an independent evaluation
12
Which will prove to be a fairy tale
very soon
• A million more jobs in relation to the project:
no evidence…
• Private funding: it will be marginal only, new
taxes (mainly on companies) will be the solution
• The monopoly of RATP historical operator will
be guaranteed by law
13
A tight commitment of the
government
• A ministry dedicated to the project
• Who tries (and succeeds) to get the
agreement of local authorities in the back
of the regional one
• A specific law
• And specific resources, given that the
recuperation of land values growths
proves to be a mirage
14
At the end of 2010, a large public debate on
the regional (Arc express) and government
projects (Reseau de transport du Grand
Paris.
2 key “messages” from the public
• 1 We want a current system which works
This is the first priority
• 2 Agree with each other
(region+government) on a common new
project
15
The answer of the authorities
Tha authorities speak of a compromize, a
synthesis, but actually the “gentlement
agreement” named “Grand Paris
Express” is an addition à the projects.
16
The final political agreement between the
government and the regional authority:
adding everything because the only key
issue for policy makers is not to lose face.
• Yes, the existing network will be improved
• Yes, the “Grand Paris” network will be built
For a total of 32,4 billion euros from now to 2025
With a usage fee for the operator which will not
exceed 0,8 % of the total investment value
17
The map of the historical
agreement(january 2011)
18
The map as in may 2011
19
Where are we now?The project
is kept, but…
The end of the fairy tale: no government
money…
And a (first) reevaluation of costs by 50 %
(Auzannet report)
Impossible to realize the project in 2025 as
anticipated…
20
Where are we now?
• Every local authority tries to save the parts of
the project for which it is the more concerned
• (not to lose face again)
• Nor “Paris metropole”, a federative structure,
nor the region are in a position to define the
priorities
• Even some “technical solutions”, such as the
adaptation of the supply to the predicted
demand, are rejected, for reasons of “dignity”
21
Have we progressed in infrastructure
appraisal?
We keep the myth of infrastructures as always
supporting the economic development
(in that case Spain should be the best European
economy)
without any reference to the funding structure
(the current system needs 6 billion euros to
support operation each year) and more
generally to the infostructure (for example a
unique fare in the Paris region versus the
Oyster card in London produce quite different
economic effects)
22
Have we progressed in our knowledge of
what is a metropolitan area ?
Speed (if by PT)
remains considered as globally positive, even
though we know better and better that it has
both positive and negative effects: it
contributes to concentration effects on jobs,
unbalanced development , segregation, etc.
23
Have we progressed in our knowledge of
what is a metropolitan area ?
If we consider that a metropolitan area is a
place where interdependences between
territories and between sectors (lodging,
economic activities, urban renewal, etc.)
are higher than elsewhere, then a speed
policy should be designed in order to
achieve the aims to in these domains, and
for that aim the faster and cheaper is not
necessarily the better
24
An example to end: fare
structure and compact city
project
25
Fare structures in favor of long
commuting
30
25
20
15
Coût / km
10
5
0
2z
3z
4z
5z
6z
26
Public support to long distance commuting
2 zones: around 800 euros / year
6 zones: environ 5200 euros / year
Yes, in France, there is such a thing as free lunch!
Can we promote “compact city that way?
27
Thanks for your attention.
28