• Nicklas Døssing Lassen
  • Emil Hedegaard Larsen
4. term, Urban Design (cand.tech.), Master (Master Programme)
This master thesis is written with the aim of understanding the perceptions of the third Limfjord connection. It is a megaproject that is ideal to investigate as it has gathered a large degree of public scrutiny for many decades without any resolution and it is possibly the most contested infrastructure project in danish history. The case has many actors with vested interest that have contrasting viewpoints and we believe that by understanding their vastly different perceptions, a pattern might be revealed that can help decision-makers alleviate problems in future megaprojects. We conducted nine semi-structured interviews with supporters and opposition actors of Egholm motorway who have different roles and job descriptions to understand their perceptions of what issues have led to the continuous delay and conflict between parties of the third Limfjord connection. The informants range from local residents to politicians. We have made a theoretical framework inspired by literature on megaprojects, and supplemented it with mobility justice, public participation, and NIMBY. The theoretical framework is used to understand how actors’ perceptions align with conventional problems of megaprojects, and it also serves as a way to systematise the empirical data. Besides that, the theoretical framework is split into eight different categories that also form our analytical chapters. The analysis is constructed to show the contrasting viewpoints of the informants, and identifying the issues. The findings suggest that the discourse in North Jutland is that owning a car grants freedom, thus other solutions are not prioritised. The opposition, however, values the nature on Egholm or other mobility solutions above the freedom gained from this. Both parties, however, agree that sustainability is important, and that other modes of transportation methods are preferable for the future. Furthermore, we found that the supporting parties have more trust in institutions and the work they do, which is in direct contrast to the opposition. They prefer to inform themselves, which empowers them to be critical of the institutional work. The supporters generally believe that the process has been democratic as the people that support the solution has continuously been reelected, and the opposition thinks of democracy as being able to impact the final solution through participatory processes. Lastly, the opposition thinks that the decision-makers have been impartial, since, e.g. the politicians feel that the local businesses in Aalborg deserve an Egholm connection as they have paid a specific building tax for too long without benefit. In the end even with all the problems, it has been difficult for all actors involved to clarify who is responsible for what. This means it is impossible to hold anyone accountable.
Publication date31 May 2022
Number of pages91
ID: 471714201