Contested discourses of a mixed-use megaproject: Cornubia, Durban

Sutherland, Catherine; Sim, Vicky; Scott, Dianne

doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.06.009

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings show a generally positive attitude, although the interviews with key informants also revealed concerns, fears and negative issues during the planning and construction stages. This underlines the contested nature of megaproject development (Sutherland et al 2015;De Bruijn, Leijten 2007;Strauch et al 2015;Shatkin 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Megaprojects – An Anatomy of Perception

Delphine

Witte

Spit

2019

disP - The Planning Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For decades, megaprojects have been on the agendas of policymakers worldwide. The positive effects are often illustrated at the national or regional level, whereas the negative impacts are mostly felt at the local level, which is something that most literature on megaprojects neglects. Therefore, the following research focused on local people (residents and communities) to gain a deeper understanding of their perceptions of megaprojects, using the Suramadu Bridge in Indonesia as a case study. The research question was: "What are the perceptions of local people regarding the balance between the negative and the positive effects of megaprojects, and what factors affect their perceptions?" To answer this, both a survey and indepth interviews were carried out. There were two main findings. Firstly, and interestingly, the vast majority of the respondents were supportive of the project, mainly for emotional reasons and because of their cultural background. However, certain groups reported experiencing the negative externalities of the project, which shows how contested megaprojects are in the eyes of local people. Secondly, an exploratory factor analysis revealed that there are three factors underlying people's perceptions, namely immaterial benefits, material benefits and specific employment opportunities. The strongest factor turned out to be, again surprisingly, immaterial benefits, implying that people may perceive a different reality caused by the project, involving intangible aspects such as pride and a new identity. We suggest that including people's perceptions in megaproject studies can contribute to more inclusive megaproject development processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Research shows that megaprojects are often contested in nature (Sutherland et al 2015;De Bruijn, Leijten 2007;Strauch et al 2015;Shatkin 2014). Stakeholders perceive a megaproject differently based on their expectations of and experiences with the project.…”

Section: Bringing People Back Into Megaproject Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Megaprojects – An Anatomy of Perception

Delphine

Witte

Spit

2019

disP - The Planning Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, compensation for unattained but promised project returns for private investors are part of a growing controversy around Chinese investments on the continent in particular (Brautigam, ; Redação, ; Agência de Informação de Moçambique, ). Such projects across the global South are also criticized because they so often aggravate extant inequalities, as the improvements they bring privilege existing powerful groups (McFarlane and Rutherford, ; Sutherland et al ., ), precisely as they do in Maputo.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…See the Africa50 website for further details: http://www.africa50.com/about-us/faq/ existing powerful groups (McFarlane and Rutherford, 2008;Sutherland et al, 2015), precisely as they do in Maputo.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sisyphean Dilemmas of Development: Contrasting Urban Infrastructure and Fiscal Policy Trends in Maputo, Mozambique

Carolini

2017

Int J Urban Regional Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In sub‐Saharan African (SSA) cities like Maputo, land commodification is predictably fueled by plans for aspirational infrastructure serving elites. What is rather more peculiar, however, is the way in which the promotion of some fiscal policy reforms can also inadvertently support land commodification and the uneven development it (re)produces. This article describes how efforts to host both democratic fiscal reforms (via localized exercises like participatory budgeting) and to tap into international capital circuits to stir economic development (via aspirational infrastructure and urban redevelopment plans) can produce a Sisyphean dilemma. While gains in ordinary infrastructure investments (e.g. wells, water pumps) were achieved democratically in Maputo's KaTembe district with the participatory budget, these material (and political) improvements have been rendered irrelevant by better funded aspirational infrastructure projects for KaTembe (e.g. bridges, high‐rise residential buildings, tourist facilities) supported by more opaque decisions made by the national government without residential input. Given the wide embrace of participatory budgeting in contexts of weak democracy across SSA cities and elsewhere, Maputo's experience serves as a timely alert of the risks run when this popular exercise is prematurely promoted, especially when wider‐scaled property tax reforms could better redress uneven and undemocratic urban development.

show abstract

“…A fruitful implication resulting from this research is the need to incorporate, to a greater extent, the real value behind a megaproject by including the impact of perception making on perceived externalities. The practice of bridging pro-growth and pro-poor is not without problems (Sutherland, Sim, and Scott 2015), but this study offers some useful lessons in reshaping this reality. It offers a conceptual framework to capture a real-life situation of society caused by megaproject investment, in relation to the debate between entrepreneurial strategy and general public exclusion (Qian 2011).…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the perception gap? When top-down built megaprojects meet bottom-up perceptions: a case study of Suramadu bridge, Indonesia

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For the last few decades, the development of mega-infrastructure projects has been high on the agendas of policymakers in Southeast Asia. Despite the potential benefits of such projects, there are also inevitable societal impacts that often lead to protests by local people. In general, most literature on megaprojects focuses solely on managing projects, with limited coverage of local people's perceptions. This article, however, offers an analytical approach to perception making, adopted from psychology theories, which is then elaborated upon in a quantitative and qualitative empirical setting using the Suramadu cable-stayed bridge in Indonesia as a case study. Our main argument is that perceptions about megaprojects can change as a result of long-term, high-level exposure to such projects. The results imply the need for megaproject development to take people's perceptions into account to bridge the gap between topdown expected benefits and bottom-up acceptance or rejection by those outside the central power.

show abstract

Contested discourses of a mixed-use megaproject: Cornubia, Durban

Cited by 20 publications

References 12 publications

Megaprojects – An Anatomy of Perception

Megaprojects – An Anatomy of Perception

Sisyphean Dilemmas of Development: Contrasting Urban Infrastructure and Fiscal Policy Trends in Maputo, Mozambique

Bridging the perception gap? When top-down built megaprojects meet bottom-up perceptions: a case study of Suramadu bridge, Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About