Next Article in Journal
A Study of the Energy Efficiency Management in Green Standard for Energy and Environmental Design (G-SEED)-Certified Apartments in South Korea
Next Article in Special Issue
Erratum: Ho, P.; Yang, X. Conflict over Mining in Rural China: A Comprehensive Survey of Intentions and Strategies for Environmental Activism. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1669
Previous Article in Journal
Financial Infrastructure and Access to Finance for European SMEs
Previous Article in Special Issue
Understanding Land Use and Rural Development in the National Scheme of Village Relocation and Urbanization in China: A Case Study of Two Villages in Jiangsu Province
Article Menu
Issue 10 (October) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sustainability 2018, 10(10), 3401; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103401

Planning Modes for Major Transportation Infrastructure Projects (MTIPs): Comparing China and Germany

1
Department of Land Management, Zhejiang University, Yuhangtang Road, 866, Hangzhou 310058, China
2
Faculty of Law and Economics & Institute of Botany and Landscape Ecology, University of Greifswald, Soldmannstr. 15, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 29 July 2018 / Revised: 16 September 2018 / Accepted: 18 September 2018 / Published: 25 September 2018
Full-Text   |   PDF [1919 KB, uploaded 25 September 2018]   |  

Abstract

Because major transportation infrastructure projects (MTIPs) have significant effects for a sustainable development, the planning modes used for these projects have been a popular topic among scholars and policy makers. However, detailed descriptions and comparisons of planning modes in different countries are still rare. Therefore, this paper first provides a simple analytical framework based on the elements of the planning goal, the planning process, the planning result and the evaluation criteria. Focusing on the hierarchic mode adopted in China, and the democratic participatory mode adopted in Germany, the governance practices used in MTIP planning are clearly shown. Furthermore, by using two airport cases, this paper compares the differences between China and Germany in the realms of preparation, review, coordination, final approval, and planning performance. The main conclusions are: (1) The analytical approach presented in this paper provides an appropriate standard for describing and comparing planning modes for MTIPs; (2) the planning modes in the two countries each have advantages and disadvantages, reflecting the trade-off between ex ante and ex post costs; (3) the comparison between China and Germany may be instructive for both of these countries and for other countries in terms of improving their planning performance in the future. View Full-Text
Keywords: MTIP planning; mode comparison; China; Germany; airport cases MTIP planning; mode comparison; China; Germany; airport cases
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhou, T.; Tan, R.; Sedlin, T. Planning Modes for Major Transportation Infrastructure Projects (MTIPs): Comparing China and Germany. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3401.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top