Link to thesis - Concept - NTNU

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Impact Analysis of Railway Projects in a Flexibility Perspective 561Figure 1.Norwegian rail network and location of studied projects (in grey). The relative size andlocation of the new built rail lines are only indicativeintegrated projects were decided upon at one point. Actual construction wasdivided into sections, but each section did not require new approval by parliament.Projects that were decided upon section by section did require a newapproval before each new section was funded. A distinction between the plannedFigure 2.Model for the planning and execution of railway investment projects, and how the studiedprojects fit into the model
562 N. O. E. Olsson et al.and actual approach has parallels to the distinction between a rational/analyticalmodel and a ‘muddling through’ model, as discussed by Mackie and Nellthorp(2003) in a transport appraisal context. In the following, the results for each of thestudied projects are presented.Table 2 shows a comparison between the forecast and actual outcomes ofselected variables. Negative values for travel time means that travel time isshorter than planned, while negative values for punctuality means that punctualityis lower than planned, meaning that more trains are delayed. Costs areadjusted for inflation. The first cost estimates presented to the Norwegian parliamentare used as references.The forecasts for the Vestfold line are related to the initial plans of an integratedproject. Compared with the cost estimates of the individual sections, the Vestfoldline had a 33% cost overrun.In a similar way, Table 3 shows the difference between the situation before andafter the investments, not taking the forecasts into account. Negative values fortravel time mean shorter travel time after the investments than before. Positivevalues for the number of trains means increased traffic, and positive values forpunctuality means fewer delays trains. For the number of passengers, a negativevalue means fewer passengers before the investment than after.In the following, the results for each project are presented, along with somebackground of the traffic patterns along each route.Vestfold LineTable 4 shows some selected characteristics for the Vestfold line before and afterthe construction, along with the expected situation after full development of the line.After 1999, only regional trains are run on the Vestfold line. Key customers arelong-distance commuters living in Vestfold who commute to Oslo. The plannedincrease in frequency is to a large extent carried out, even though only 12% of theplanned double track is built. No freight trains have run on the line since 1999,and a more uniform train mix provides increased capacity on the line. A sharpdrop in the number of travellers on the Vestfold line occurred after 2000. Accordingto JBV Utredning (2004), the main reasons include improvements of themotorway running in parallel to the railway, increased competition from motorwaybuses, increased ticket prices along with reduced access to ticket distributionand, finally, relatively poor punctuality.Gardermoen LineThe Gardermoen line was an integrated part of the decision to build Oslo’s newairport Gardermoen. The line runs from central Oslo to the airport. Major parts ofthe railway traffic in the greater Oslo area changed when the Gardermoen lineopened, making it an integrated part of the railway network. The Oslo–Gardermoenline handles not only the Airport Express trains, but also regional, longdistanceand some local trains. The old line, running more or less in parallel to thenew one but taking a longer and slower route, handles mainly local and freighttrains. The number of passengers on Airport Express trains was based on a year2000 forecast of 50% market share for the Airport Express train, and 11.7 millionairline passengers at the airport (Ministry of Transport and Communications,1991–92). In 2000, the Airport Express train had a market share of 33% and the
Page 1 and 2:
ISBN 82-471-8121-5 (printed ver.)IS
Page 3:
Preface and AcknowledgementsThe wor
Page 7 and 8:
Table of ContentsPreface and Acknow
Page 9 and 10:
Paper OverviewThe following papers
Page 11 and 12:
AbstractTraditionally, projects ten
Page 13 and 14:
alternative use. There are indicati
Page 15 and 16:
1. Introduction1. IntroductionThis
Page 17 and 18:
1. IntroductionFlexible projects ar
Page 19 and 20:
1. IntroductionA literature review
Page 21 and 22:
2. Study design2. Study designThe r
Page 23 and 24:
2. Study designInformation Content
Page 25 and 26:
3. Flexibility in different project
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
4. Project stakeholders4. Project s
Page 33 and 34:
4. Project stakeholdersmandatory qu
Page 35 and 36:
4. Project stakeholdersBased on res
Page 37 and 38:
5. Effectiveness and efficiency5. E
Page 39 and 40:
5. Effectiveness and efficiencyconf
Page 41 and 42:
5. Effectiveness and efficiencyDegr
Page 43 and 44:
6. Project flexibility categorisati
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
7. Conclusions7. ConclusionsThis th
Page 51 and 52:
7. ConclusionsProject phasesFlexibi
Page 53 and 54:
7. ConclusionsEnablersThis thesis r
Page 55 and 56:
7. Conclusions16, Figure 17, and Fi
Page 57 and 58:
7. Conclusions4. AbsorptionAbsorpti
Page 59 and 60:
7. ConclusionsThere appears to be a
Page 61 and 62:
ReferencesAbbot, A. & Banerji, K. 2
Page 63 and 64:
Gareis, R. 2004. Maturity of the Pr
Page 65 and 66:
Miller, R. & Lessard, D. 2000. The
Page 67 and 68:
Part 2.
Page 69 and 70: Paper 1.Olsson, N.O.E. 2006. Manage
Page 71 and 72: N.O.E. Olsson / International Journ
Page 79 and 80: Paper 2.Magnussen, O.M. & Olsson, N
Page 81 and 82: 282 O.M. Magnussen, N.O.E. Olsson /
Page 89 and 90: Projects trapped in their freedom:
Page 91 and 92: 1. IntroductionThe purpose of this
Page 93 and 94: project phases: preparation, freezi
Page 95 and 96: establish realistic cost and time f
Page 97 and 98: 4. ResultsIn the following, the emp
Page 99 and 100: lowered the quality but the volume
Page 101 and 102: Percent ofproject onSize of remaini
Page 103 and 104: flexibility is introduced by the us
Page 105 and 106: 100 %First official estimateApprova
Page 107 and 108: ReferencesAndersen, B., Fagerhaug,
Page 109 and 110: Paper 4.Olsson, N.O.E. 2004. ‘Fle
Page 111 and 112: The concept of project flexibilityF
Page 113 and 114: 3. CONCLUSIONSWhat seems to be impl
Page 115 and 116: Paper 5.Olsson, N.O.E. 2006. ‘Imp
Page 117 and 118: 558 N. O. E. Olsson et al.ex-post s
Page 119: 560 N. O. E. Olsson et al.Table 1.O
Page 123 and 124: 564 N. O. E. Olsson et al.Table 3.
Page 125 and 126: 566 N. O. E. Olsson et al.Table 7.S
Page 127 and 128: 568 N. O. E. Olsson et al.with a wi
Page 129 and 130: Paper 6.Henriksen, B., Olsson, N. &
Page 131 and 132: In this paper we use the process an
Page 133 and 134: PROCESS ANALYSIS IN THE PLANNING OF
Page 135 and 136: final framework for expected patien
Page 137 and 138: User involvement also generated exp
Page 139: Paper 7.Olsson, N.O.E. & Samset, K.
Page 155 and 156: Project flexibility and front-end m
Page 157 and 158: uncertainty. External flexibility c
Page 159 and 160: 5.2. Flexibility in decision proces
Page 161 and 162: Degree of redundancySlackPrecisionC
show all

Link to thesis - Concept - NTNU

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?