the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 04 May 2026
Regional development in the context of major infrastructure projects: participatory processes, governance challenges, and patterns for success
Abstract. This article addresses questions of institutional anchoring, coordination and participatory approaches with a comparative, case-based examination of regional development practices in selected large-scale infrastructure projects. It draws on four case studies – the expansion of Frankfurt Airport, the decommissioning of the Asse II mine in Germany, the Swiss sectoral plan procedure for deep geological repositories, and the Swedish repository siting process – as exemplary constellations of how regional development is institutionally and procedurally designed in practice. The case studies are used to abstract typical instruments, actor constellations, and modes of interaction between formal planning, participation, and informal regional development approaches. Based on a cross-case synthesis, the article identifies recurring challenges and patterns of success.
- Preprint
(712 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 12 Aug 2026)
- RC1: 'Comment on sand-2026-8', Olaf Kühne, 11 May 2026 reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on sand-2026-8', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Jul 2026
reply
For author
I have read this paper with interest. It explores the relationships between participatory approaches to infrastructure planning and regional development processes. It uses four case studies of large infrastructure projects in Germany, Switzerland and Sweden as empirical examples.
The paper is well-written and easy to read. It is a rather ‘dry’ and pedestrian read, but that is probably due to the topic rather than the style of writing. I found the four empirical case studies straightforward to understand and the analysis and conclusions drawn from them seemed sound and defensible.
Is the discussion (on pp.2-3) of the various ways of defining and conceptualising a region necessary? There are two definitional discussions – first what is a region and then what is regional development? If the first discussion is retained, then it is worth distinguishing between regions and sub-national geographical units and regions as supranational units. Some writers (especially in North America) use regions to imply continental scale units. (Middle East Region, central and Eastern European region etc).
The paper references a review of the literature on participatory regional development (p.6, line 151), and it might be more helpful to have a bit more detail on what that literature has to say.
Overall, with minor modifications, I would be comfortable with seeing the paper published. (Some minor detailed text edits follow below).
Detailed text comments
p.1, line 12: delete “as it draws on four case studies constellations”.
p.3, line 85: delete “Here,”
p.4, line 96: replace “paragraphs” with “section”
p.4, line 100: avoid 1-sentence paragraphs. Run this sentence on with the following paragraph
p.4, line 104: (2015), [insert comma]
p.5, line 141: “socio-psychological factors” or “social factors” (rather than mental factors)?
p.6, line 166: avoid 1-sentence paragraphs. Run this sentence on with the following paragraph
p.8, line 231: “sustainable local development” reads oddly here. What is meant? Local sustainability projects?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/sand-2026-8-RC2
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 117 | 29 | 12 | 158 | 15 | 15 |
- HTML: 117
- PDF: 29
- XML: 12
- Total: 158
- BibTeX: 15
- EndNote: 15
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
The manuscript addresses a relevant topic. I consider the approach to this topic, which utilizes various concepts of region, to be innovative and instructive. The connection to the topic of procedural justice appears substantial. The case studies are characterized by a wealth of material.
In addition to these positive aspects, however, the manuscript should be revised in several respects prior to publication:
· Given that it includes only four case studies, the manuscript cannot live up to the claim of “patterns for success.”
· The logic of comparison among the four cases should be clarified.
· It would be advisable to link the hypotheses more systematically to the case findings.
· Participation should not only be considered as a resource for acceptance or development, but also as a conflict-laden democratic practice. Such a framing would give the article greater depth.
· Furthermore, it should be made clearer which statements apply specifically to final repository processes and which apply more generally to large infrastructure projects.
With these adjustments, I believe the manuscript is ready for publication.