Font Size: 

Traditionally the role of transport models in infrastructure project appraisal has been conceptualized as neutral means of analyses, providing objective decision support as a base for rational decision-making. This view has however been contested by authors arguing that transport models are frequently deliberately manipulated in order to increase likelihood of project approval. This article aims to contribute to the debate on power and transport modelling. Most of the previous studies which have engaged with power and transport modelling have only investigated one aspect of power, focusing on strategic misrepresentation and lies (e.g. Bent Flyvbjerg, John F. Kain and Don H. Pickrell). When studying the exercise of power it is however important to recognize that power is not a single entity, but rather consists of a diversity of force relations which interact in complex manners. In order to account for the diverse and subtle mechanisms through which power and politics can shape the conduct of transport modelling, this article develops a conceptual framework, based on a pluralistic and productive definition of power. The conceptual framework will be based on Mark Haugaard’s typology of seven forms of power creation (Haugaard 2003). This framework attempts to combine aspects from various schools of power in a commensurable manner, drawing from among others Giddens, Lukes, Clegg, Foucault, Banchrach & Baratz, Barnes, Parson and Arendt. The framework mainly revolves around how power creation is conditioned upon the constitution and acceptance of social order but also incorporates coercive aspects of power. The framework will be tested on one or more transport infrastructure projects, for which the influence of power on the spatial representations and knowledge claims produced by transport models, are scrutinized.