The controversial discourse on speed in the case of HS2

Abstract

This paper discusses the framing of mega transport projects based on research into High Speed Two, a high-speed rail project in the UK. It shows how a dominant narrative of speed reflects closed decision making and narrow appraisal criteria. This is problematic due to declining trust in the ability of public institutions to calculate the benefits of these costly projects. Using discourse analysis the paper identifies categories that form a powerful narrative around the project excluding other policy options. Alternative frames established within civil society are also identified. These offer a reframing of the project that could reduce the environmental and social costs and increase regeneration and connectivity benefits. However, they are excluded by the current decision-making process. This argument has implications for route design, for the democratic process and the quality of decisions. The paper concludes that sensitivity to the framing of issues is important if there is to be greater dialogue between expert and local knowledge systems as a means of building trust in the technical decision making of major infrastructure projects.