Historical transport policy developments : technical report for Stage 3 city, Paris Île-de-France region: D4.2

The analysis done in CREATE highlights the critical role played by political and institutional conflicts in a context of exacerbated fragmentation and the extent to which a large variety of actors, namely different levels of government, technical agencies, political parties, elite groups and professional networks, compete in order to shape transport governance and the distribution of transport policy resources. This was achieved through continuous institutional reforms, major conflicts and competition strategies, and the development of highly visible policy initiatives and projects.By contrast to other cities under study in WP4, where consensus-seeking strategies account for policy change over time, competition emerges as the main driver for change in the case of the Paris and Ile-de-France region: competition between levels of government, between political parties, between transport companies and between social and economic groups. Together, this accounts for the coexistence over a long period of time of two highly differentiated models of urban and spatial planning in the capital-city region: on the one hand a liveable, sustainable and compact model in which the automobile is integrated in a larger regional sustainable transport system, and on the other hand, a regional growth model which primarily relies on the automobile in order to ensure daily accessibility for commuters to the core metropolitan area. Interestingly, such levels of competition have not led to inertia and the report documents the ways in which demographics and urbanization dynamics were instrumental in triggering various forms of collective action across the region. In terms of transport policy developments and transport behaviours, the evolution of transport policy objectives, resources and tools sheds light on both the “What’s” (substance) and the “How’s” (governance) of transport policy change. On the one hand, it shows how a sustainable approach to transport planning and policy-making progressively emerged at the margins of the transport policy sector, through the diffusion of alternative representations and policy solutions, and by drawing on small-scale innovations. But on the other hand, the evolution of transport policy objectives, resource and tools also highlight how state elites and networks are able to successfully resist bottom-up pressures and maintain, in a number of cases, a state-led approach to transport planning in the capital-city region that prioritizes its role as the national powerhouse. Acknowledging the continued coexistence of both dynamics as well as their interplay over time contributes to better understanding remaining spatial disparities in terms of transport policy developments - a result that echoes the analysis done in WP3 regarding individual/collective choices pertaining to transportation in Paris and the Ile-de-France region. A shift away from the automotive city undoubtedly took place in the Paris Ilede- France region, and the development of stage 3 policies is precisely documented. Yet this result remains ambiguous: this evolution is unevenly spread – both socially and spatially, recent conflicts over specific transport policy initiatives confirmed the permanence of high resistance capacities and the ability of a number of new entrants and old players to draw on new technologies in order to promote car-based forms of mobility