International Experiences in Restructuring the Road Sector (1996)

©Antti Talvitie, 1996

International Experiences in Restructuring the Road Sector

Transportation Research Record No. 1558, pp. 99-108, 1996.

Antti Talvitie (aptalvitie(at)gmail.com)

ABSTRACT

The first part of the paper proposes an evolutionary continuum on which a modern and mature Road Administration develops. The paper outlines the five phases that appear necessary in this evolution. These are: (i) the establishment of traditional construction and maintenance organization; (ii) separation of client and producer functions; (iii) separation of client and producer organizations; (iv) corporatization or privatization of the producer organization; and (v) corporatization of the (client) road administration. The second part of the paper addresses the change management process: the framework process and its constituent cores. The framework process is the flow of activities in change management when moving from one organizational phase to another. The core activities are those which the road administration must address in the change process. Both of these are discussed in detail. It is asserted that a quick reorganization of road administrations is neither possible nor desirable. The exact path to be taken depends critically on the initial conditions from which the road administration embarks upon its development path.

Experiential Incrementalism- On the Theory and Technique to Implement Transport Plans and Policies (2006)

©Antti Talvitie, 2006

Experiential Incrementalism- On the Theory and Technique to Implement Transport Plans and Policies

Transportation 33: 83 -110, 2006.

Antti Talvitie (aptalvitie(at)gmail.com)

Consultant

Springfield, Virginia and Helsinki, Finland

ABSTRACT

Experiential Incrementalism: A Theory and Technique to Implement Transport Plans and Policies.

The paper describes an approach to the vexing problem of transport planning and policy. It deals jointly with three questions, which in today’s practice are addressed separately: How are hypotheses about transport problems and alternatives to their solution developed? How can a good plan or policy be identified? What is the process of implementing a transport plan or policy? In doing this the paper has the ambitious objective of proposing a new model and process for transport planning and policy. It is applicable in developed and developing countries and is not restricted to the transport sector.

Model, Process, Technique, and the Good Thing (2008)

©Antti Talvitie, 2008

Model, Process, Technique, and the Good Thing

Transportation, 35: 375-393, 2008

Antti Talvitie (aptalvitie(at)gmail.com)

Helsinki University of Technology (TKK)

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and

Centre for Urban and Regional Studies

ABSTRACT

 The paper unpacks the planning process into its component parts: model, process, technique, and goals –the “good thing”. The paper advances the concept that planning, policy-making, and organizational restructuring can be analyzed under the same framework. Each of the four components is described and reductionist examples are presented to clarify the intention and to illustrate the technique that the transport analyst teams employ in their work. The examples cover both successes and failures. They point toward the enormous scientific task ahead for planning to become meaningful and relevant to the problems of today. Finally, in the frame of the willingness to pay, the paper puts forward a case for an institutional framework for a financially autonomous road administration. Similarly organized, administered, and managed entities are relevant also for other transport modes. 

Public Participation in the Helsinki Crosstown Artery Project (1996)

 

©Antti Talvitie, Tuija Pearson 1996

Public Participation in the Helsinki Crosstown Artery Project

Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 185-199

Antti Talvitie, (aptalvitie(at)gmail.com)

Tuija Pearson

ABSTRACT

The paper reports on citizen participation in the planning of Helsinki Crosstown Artery in the early 1990s. The project had difficult beginnings: there was disagreement on benefits and costs, a broad-based mistrust, and an externally prepared work program which sought to resolve these emotional disagreements using technical information. The citizen participation program consisted of Open Houses preceded by a newsletter, newspaper advertisements, a 1-800 Number hotline, and a responsiveness summary. Additional techniques were used as necessary. The design of the citizen participation program was sound and inexpensive, provided for continuous evaluation, and drove the planning work. Substantial informed consent was created in the project. The main conclusion from the present case study is this: in planning and in public participation emotional issues dominate and can rarely be solved by "rational" studies. The citizen participation technique evolved during the study is transferable and has broad planning implications.

Reasoning-Building Process for Transportation Project Evaluation (2015)

  

© Kronprasert, N. and Talvitie, A.P. (2015)

Paper Submitted for Publication in the Transportation Research Record

Journal of Transportation Research Board

Paper 14-1784

Reasoning-Building Process for Transportation Project Evaluation and Decision-Making: Use of Reasoning Map and Evidence Theory

TRB Record 2453, pp. 11-21 (2015). Washington DC, (with Kronprasert).

Nopadon Kronprasert, Ph.D. (Corresponding Author)

Research Associate

National Research Council

Federal Highway Administration

6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101, USA

Antti P. Talvitie, Ph.D., Professor (em)

Aalto University, Finland

Rakentajanaukio 4, Pl 2100, Espoo, Finland

Email: (aptalvitie(at)gmail.com)

ABSTRACT

Policy-makers of today’s transportation investment projects engage in dialogues and debates in which the reasonableness and clarity are of great value. In the traditional transportation systems planning practices, different stakeholders reason and provide evidence in support of their preferences, but these opinions are often conflicting and rarely consistent. This paper presents a goal-oriented decision-making method for finding a transportation alternative that best achieves the project’s goals and also indicating the level of satisfaction of different stakeholders. The proposed method (i) applies a reasoning map to structure how experts and citizens perceive the alternatives for achieving the project’s goals, and (ii) provides belief measures in evidence theory to what extent the alternatives achieve the goals of different stakeholders.

Use of Reasoning Maps in Evaluation of Transport Alternatives (2015)

© Kronprasert, N. and Talvitie, A.P. (2014)

Use of Reasoning Maps in Evaluation of Transport Alternatives

Springer Science+Business Media,New York, 2014

Nopadon Kronprasert

Antti Talvitie (aptalvitie(at)gmail.com)

ABSTRACT

Selection of a transport alternative is usually a messy process. The traditional approaches consider the relationships as either deterministic or probabilistic, neither of which incorporates the degree of ignorance (i.e., ‘‘I don’t know’’ opinion). Further, different stakeholders seek to justify their preferences with reasoning that suits their agenda. This paper proposes and demonstrates a method that evaluates the validity of the reasoning process and derives the degrees of belief that stated goals are achieved. The paper demonstrates a ‘reasoning map’ method for evaluating transport alternatives, where the analysts accept and employ the notion of ‘‘I don’t know’’ about an issue. The reasoning map depicts the relational chains from the attributes of an action to the stated goals, and recognizes the notion of ‘‘I don’t know’’. This paper uses the theory of evidence to account for ignorance; it calculates the propagation of uncertainties along the reasoning chains. The context chosen for this demonstration is the selection of a public transit mode, personal rapid transit, over Bus, in a commercial complex in Washington DC. The paper has a limited objective and is not  comprehensive evaluation of alternatives. It merely explains how to compute a numerical value for the strength of reasoning, how to deal with analyst’s notion of ‘‘I don’t know,’’ how to interpret the overall reliability of the reasoning process, how to measure the goal achievement of an alternative, and how to find the critical paths linking the planning options to goals. For use in planning practice, consultation of experts and affected citizens and aggregation of their views is needed to develop the reasoning maps.

New Approaches to Ownership, Administration and Management of Low Volume Roads (2004)

© Esko Sirvio and Antti Talvitie (2004)

New Approaches to Ownership, Administration and Management of Low Volume Roads

Paper in WCTRS Conference, Istanbul, 2004. (with Esko Sirvio)

Esko Sirvio

President of Sirway Consulting Ltd.

Antti Talvitie
Consultant to the World Bank

aptalvitie(at)gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Low volume roads normally comprise about 80 percent of the total road network, but serve but 20% of the traffic. This has caused a difficult problem in many countries for owning, administering and managing this large road network whose importance is unquestioned but whose maintenance is neglected. This paper explores the various options for approaching these issues from the perspective that the vision is reached gradually through a process of incremental steps. It is taken for granted that the private sector carries out the supplier functions, the road works whether maintenance, rehabilitation, or construction.