News

\r\n The old traders’ adage “better to travel than arrive” has been true in 2017. Last year wa...
\r\n President Donald Trump signed on 28 March 2017 an executive order to unravel former President B...
\r\n According to some scientists, the fingerprint of human-caused climate change has been found on ...
\r\n Australia’s federal government has announced it will ratify and implement the OPCAT Treaty, O...
\r\n Nurses and teachers are among those bearing the brunt of a debt crisis rooted in the mistaken b...

Follow us

Articles

ARE BIG INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS CASTLES IN THE AIR OR BRIDGES TO NOWHERE?

The big debate about whether infrastructure spending is a good or bad thing continues to haunt us into the 21-century. Infrastructure spending brings on many positives while bringing on negatives at the same time. We like to say that it improves economic efficiency in the large scale, however it often ruins the area in which the new structures are being built. They say that often the cost is short term, but the benefits are long term, yet political leaders face all the upfront heat and none of the aftermath benefit backlash.

While private investors often fund projects the private sector only gets involved in large scale trends such as the 1840’s railway mania. This leaves the state to fend for their own projects. Private investors often push too far with one foot into the political field completing projects that fail despite ruthless power. Such as Robert Moses’s idea for public transport to the JFK airport.

So how do we solve the “bridge to nowhere problem”? Maybe we just have to accept the fact that there will be a certain degree of unhappiness and delay with no infrastructure delivery. If the political heat soon disappears we can get rid of the problem of plans that fail to respond to changing economics.

The gLAWcal Team

LIBEAC project

Wednesday, 18 January 2017

(Source: Economist)