IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i6p3124-3144d36459.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the Geographies of Transport and Cultural Heritage: Comparing Two Urban Development Programs in Oslo

Author

Listed:
  • Anders Tønnesen

    (Institute of Transport Economics, Gaustadalléen 21, 0349 Oslo, Norway
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Kari Larsen

    (Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research, Storgata 2, 0105 Oslo, Norway
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Joar Skrede

    (Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research, Storgata 2, 0105 Oslo, Norway
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Vibeke Nenseth

    (Institute of Transport Economics, Gaustadalléen 21, 0349 Oslo, Norway
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

This paper elaborates on how policies and strategies for sustainable urban development can be understood and shows how development programs can be strategically important and flexible tools in the creation of the modern city. We examine two typical contemporary cases for urban development, inner city/waterfront and modernistic suburbs, using the two areas of transport and cultural heritage as prisms to explore divergences or convergences between the two programs, and ask: How come two urban development programs within the same city turn out so differently? By comparing these programs, urban development trends relating to entrepreneurialism are highlighted. There are clear differences between the two programs under study, and the paper tries to grasp their internal logic in order to shed light on their strengths and weaknesses. While the city center program has much to do with realizing the commercial potential of the area and strengthening sustainable transport through large-scale changes in infrastructure, such means seem to be outside the scope of the suburban program. Meanwhile, cultural heritage is interwoven with entrepreneurial projection-strategies in the city center, whereas heritage sites and projects are used more as a means for social cohesion in the suburb. The paper concludes that the programs vary in the two policy fields in accordance with the institutionalized and anticipated potential of the urban areas in question.

Suggested Citation

  • Anders Tønnesen & Kari Larsen & Joar Skrede & Vibeke Nenseth, 2014. "Understanding the Geographies of Transport and Cultural Heritage: Comparing Two Urban Development Programs in Oslo," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-21, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:6:p:3124-3144:d:36459
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/6/3124/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/6/3124/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roger Andersson & Sako Musterd, 2005. "Area‐Based Policies: A Critical Appraisal," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 96(4), pages 377-389, September.
    2. Marichela Sepe, 2013. "Urban history and cultural resources in urban regeneration: a case of creative waterfront renewal," Planning Perspectives, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(4), pages 595-613, October.
    3. Moshe Givoni & James Macmillen & David Banister & Eran Feitelson, 2013. "From Policy Measures to Policy Packages," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, January.
    4. Banister, David, 2008. "The sustainable mobility paradigm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 73-80, March.
    5. Banister, David, 2011. "Cities, mobility and climate change," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1538-1546.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Piotr Prus & Marek Sikora, 2021. "The Impact of Transport Infrastructure on the Sustainable Development of the Region—Case Study," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Amr, Alia'a, 2020. "Pattern recognition and transformational growth adjustments alongside ring roads: Descriptive mapping from four case studies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tønnesen, Anders & Krogstad, Julie Runde & Christiansen, Petter & Isaksson, Karolina, 2019. "National goals and tools to fulfil them: A study of opportunities and pitfalls in Norwegian metagovernance of urban mobility," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 35-44.
    2. Regmi, Madan B., 2024. "Governance of urban mobility policies and plans in Asian cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 108-121.
    3. Tammaru, Tiit & Sevtsuk, Andres & Witlox, Frank, 2023. "Towards an equity-centred model of sustainable mobility: Integrating inequality and segregation challenges in the green mobility transition," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    4. Romanika Okraszewska & Aleksandra Romanowska & Marcin Wołek & Jacek Oskarbski & Krystian Birr & Kazimierz Jamroz, 2018. "Integration of a Multilevel Transport System Model into Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, February.
    5. Banister, David, 2011. "The trilogy of distance, speed and time," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 950-959.
    6. Geels, Frank W., 2012. "A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 471-482.
    7. Maurici Ruiz-Pérez & Joana Maria Seguí-Pons, 2020. "Transport Mode Choice for Residents in a Tourist Destination: The Long Road to Sustainability (the Case of Mallorca, Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-31, November.
    8. Dorsa Alipour & Hussein Dia, 2023. "A Systematic Review of the Role of Land Use, Transport, and Energy-Environment Integration in Shaping Sustainable Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    9. Marc Dijk & Moshe Givoni & Karen Diederiks, 2018. "Piling up or Packaging Policies? An Ex-Post Analysis of Modal Shift in Four Cities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, May.
    10. Malene Freudendal-Pedersen & Sven Kesselring & Eriketti Servou, 2019. "What is Smart for the Future City? Mobilities and Automation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Vale, David S., 2013. "Does commuting time tolerance impede sustainable urban mobility? Analysing the impacts on commuting behaviour as a result of workplace relocation to a mixed-use centre in Lisbon," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 38-48.
    12. Gössling, Stefan & Cohen, Scott, 2014. "Why sustainable transport policies will fail: EU climate policy in the light of transport taboos," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 197-207.
    13. Camilleri, Rosalie & Attard, Maria & Hickman, Robin, 2022. "Understanding barriers to modal shift in Malta: A practice-theoretical perspective of everyday mobility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    14. Francesco Filippi, 2022. "A Paradigm Shift for a Transition to Sustainable Urban Transport," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-27, March.
    15. Schwanen, Tim & Banister, David & Anable, Jillian, 2012. "Rethinking habits and their role in behaviour change: the case of low-carbon mobility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 522-532.
    16. Carlos Javier de las Heras-Rosas & Juan Herrera, 2019. "Towards Sustainable Mobility through a Change in Values. Evidence in 12 European Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-23, August.
    17. Kinigadner, Julia & Büttner, Benjamin, 2021. "How accessibility instruments contribute to a low carbon mobility transition: Lessons from planning practice in the Munich region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 157-167.
    18. Jens Schippl & Annika Arnold, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Views on Multimodal Urban Mobility Futures: A Matter of Policy Interventions or Just the Logical Result of Digitalization?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-16, April.
    19. Xiaoshu Cao & Huiling Chen & Feiwen Liang & Wulin Wang, 2018. "Measurement and Spatial Differentiation Characteristics of Transit Equity: A Case Study of Guangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    20. Kfir Noy & Moshe Givoni, 2018. "Is ‘Smart Mobility’ Sustainable? Examining the Views and Beliefs of Transport’s Technological Entrepreneurs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:6:p:3124-3144:d:36459. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.