Abstract
Transportation infrastructure projects organize mobility and land-use development across metropolitan areas. As such, they are typically undertaken by states, regional governments, or public authorities overseen by higher-level governments. But since these projects have localized implications, city governments have an interest in shaping project planning. I examine case studies of six rail transit projects in France and the United States to understand the regional politics of infrastructure investment. I show that even when deprived de jure jurisdiction over planning, local governments harness the broadly shared view of their democratic legitimacy to exert de facto power over matters affecting them. Localities increase their power through inter-municipal alliances composed of cities whose residents hold contrasting ideological viewpoints. These alliances are founded on mutual deference, which means an agreement to support—or at least not oppose—the perspectives of neighboring localities if doing so does not threaten a locality's own needs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
