Author(s)

F. Cavallaro & F. Maino

Abstract

The construction of new major transport infrastructures generates different and conflicting positions. In traditional decision-making processes, actors take decisions following a rigid and hierarchical framework, with the illusion of greater rapidity and lower costs. The technical argumentation is assumed as the most suitable one and different points of view are conceived against the public interest. Consequently, a conflict of polarized positions occurs, difficult to be managed. This paper, using the concepts of \“framing” and \“boundary object”, tries to redefine the approach conceptually. The different points of view, apparently irreconcilable, are considered useful ground to develop shared decisions. Contrasts, if considered before their radicalization, can be seen as a fertile generation of shared solutions and not as a criticism. The case study of the Brenner HS/HC railway line has been chosen to illustrate this approach. Keywords: conflicts, transport infrastructures, boundary objects, Brenner HS/HC railway line.

Keywords

conflicts, transport infrastructures, boundary objects, Brenner HS/HC railway line.