Exploring the role of the state in the depoliticisation of UK transport policy

Abstract

This paper responds to calls for greater empirical investigation of the interrelationships between depoliticisation and repoliticisation processes. It does so by applying the ‘three faces’ (governmental, societal and discursive) organising perspective to a longitudinal analysis of transport policy in the UK. This case is important because acceptance of the current dominant policy solution ‐ infrastructure spending ‐ appears to have come full circle over a 30-year period. The research finds that today’s focus on infrastructure is enabled through intersecting and reinforcing depoliticisation processes, supporting the ‘three faces’ perspective. However, the paper also highlights the need for greater recognition of the state as a meta-governor of depoliticisation and the need for clarity on which aspect of a policy solution or problem (or the connections between them) is being depoliticised and repoliticised to better elucidate politicisation processes.

The political economy of socio-technical transitions: A relational view of the state and bus system decarbonization in the United Kingdom

“…This is seen to necessitate accommodating these increases through enlarged road capacity or facilitation of the low-emission vehicle uptake by the general population. Successful economic growth is then predicated on growing (low carbon) travel demand [56]. Such transport-growth discourses have been coupled with a shift in the control of transport infrastructure from DfT to the Treasury, as well as the establishment of agencies like the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (works across the Treasury and Cabinet Office as a centre of excellence for project delivery) and the National Infrastructure Commission.…”

“…Such transport-growth discourses have been coupled with a shift in the control of transport infrastructure from DfT to the Treasury, as well as the establishment of agencies like the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (works across the Treasury and Cabinet Office as a centre of excellence for project delivery) and the National Infrastructure Commission. The latter is a non-ministerial department charged with advising the central government on UK-wide infrastructure needs [56].…”

“…In addition, on the top of seeking guidance from the arm's-length National Infrastructure Commission the central government converted the agency responsible for motorways and major road construction and maintenance to a government-owned company. The new company, Highways England, receives a funding settlement for five years which has over-doubled its capital programme, while its activities are overseen by a regulator (the Office of Road and Rail) [56].…”

Public transport governance

“…The study of shifts in the forms, locations, and capacities of governance should be complemented with analyses that consider issues such as the role of informal institutions, political steering, actors' agency, power relations, and framing in political decision-making. Whereas in other disciplines, especially in the social sciences, these topics have long been in the agenda (see Allison, 1971;Emirbayer & Mische, 1998;Sabatier, 1991), only recently have they become more salient in PT (see Isaksson & Heikkinen, 2018;Reardon & Marsden, 2020). Therefore, there are clear opportunities for extending (not replacing) current research approaches by engaging with and benefiting from the insights produced by other disciplines in the social sciences.…”

De-politicising and re-politicising transport infrastructure futures

“…As new transport technologies and mobility platforms promise a future centred around sharing and automation, the infrastructure to support these new futures, demands further critical attention (Currie, 2018). Calls from within transport studies to critically assess the political assemblages influencing policy formulation and planning governance (Marsden and Reardon, 2017), are in part driven by concerns about the practices, policies and processes employed by government and other actors working in the transport sector to de-politicise transport policy (Reardon and Marsden, 2020: p. 16). Similar debates surround the planning for future transport infrastructure.…”