their function. One can think of ruins, thus, as representing the afterlife of
infrastructure.
In many countries, large projects often get jammed during their implementation.
Even when they are finally finished, large infrastructure projects may be hampered
by legal challenges, causing undue delays. Unfortunately, these delays are
unpredictable. Once initiated, a project may finally be completed, abandoned, or
demolished. Very often, legal challenges arise from the appropriation of private land
under eminent domain to erect infrastructure. For such occurrences, the courts will
deliver a “stay order,” forbidding construction until the legal problem is resolved.
When many parties claim being affected by such land appropriation, the procedure
can last an unpredictably long time before clearing the courts.
However, legal challenges do not alone justify that so many projects get either
demolished or eventually abandoned. Lack of capital afflicts infrastructure projects
in many of the poorer countries. The municipality or regional state may begin
construction with eager enthusiasm, but as, gradually, the money runs out, the
project lies in suspension until a subsequent tranche of funds is released. This
waiting for funds carries its own uncertainties. For example, a project may lose
impetus because the politician in support of or the government in favour of that
specific infrastructure loses office in the next election.
Of course, there may be other kinds of monetary constraints. The politicians (and
bureaucrats) who sanction the authorization of government funds for the infrastructure project typically keep a significant portion for themselves. If the construction
company has already paid off the amount requested, and, following an election, the
government (and officials) changes, the company may be reluctant at funding a new
set of politicians. This may establish conflict between the construction company and
the authorizing agency. The intensity and duration of this skirmish are unpredictable,
although both parties have no interest in stopping the flow of resources for the
project.
Instead of visualizing an infrastructure as incomplete, or during the construction
process, as if nearing completion, we should be more open about the end, both from
empirical and philosophical perspectives. Some countries, regularly hear about projects which had started but were never completed. Delays on infrastructure projects
can be for short or long periods of time before the projects are completed. Alternatively, the projects may suffer suspension through abandonment, or they can be
overturned through active demolition.
Gupta (2018) details the case of Narita Airport, the largest international access
into and out of Japan. From the start, it got caught up in controversy and has still not
reached the intended capacity as planned in the 1960s. As existing imperial land was
available for the construction, the airport location was chosen without any consultation with the potentially affected communities. However, when additional land had
to be acquired, a dynamic opposition movement grew up, rising to armed conflict,
land occupation, and the construction of structures to hamper runway construction.
Eventually militants seized the control tower and destroyed most of the equipment
inside. The airport, initially planned to start operations in 1972 with five runways,
was finally inaugurated in 1978 with a single runway and high security all through.
7.9 From Inception to Oblivion
215
infrastructure.
In many countries, large projects often get jammed during their implementation.
Even when they are finally finished, large infrastructure projects may be hampered
by legal challenges, causing undue delays. Unfortunately, these delays are
unpredictable. Once initiated, a project may finally be completed, abandoned, or
demolished. Very often, legal challenges arise from the appropriation of private land
under eminent domain to erect infrastructure. For such occurrences, the courts will
deliver a “stay order,” forbidding construction until the legal problem is resolved.
When many parties claim being affected by such land appropriation, the procedure
can last an unpredictably long time before clearing the courts.
However, legal challenges do not alone justify that so many projects get either
demolished or eventually abandoned. Lack of capital afflicts infrastructure projects
in many of the poorer countries. The municipality or regional state may begin
construction with eager enthusiasm, but as, gradually, the money runs out, the
project lies in suspension until a subsequent tranche of funds is released. This
waiting for funds carries its own uncertainties. For example, a project may lose
impetus because the politician in support of or the government in favour of that
specific infrastructure loses office in the next election.
Of course, there may be other kinds of monetary constraints. The politicians (and
bureaucrats) who sanction the authorization of government funds for the infrastructure project typically keep a significant portion for themselves. If the construction
company has already paid off the amount requested, and, following an election, the
government (and officials) changes, the company may be reluctant at funding a new
set of politicians. This may establish conflict between the construction company and
the authorizing agency. The intensity and duration of this skirmish are unpredictable,
although both parties have no interest in stopping the flow of resources for the
project.
Instead of visualizing an infrastructure as incomplete, or during the construction
process, as if nearing completion, we should be more open about the end, both from
empirical and philosophical perspectives. Some countries, regularly hear about projects which had started but were never completed. Delays on infrastructure projects
can be for short or long periods of time before the projects are completed. Alternatively, the projects may suffer suspension through abandonment, or they can be
overturned through active demolition.
Gupta (2018) details the case of Narita Airport, the largest international access
into and out of Japan. From the start, it got caught up in controversy and has still not
reached the intended capacity as planned in the 1960s. As existing imperial land was
available for the construction, the airport location was chosen without any consultation with the potentially affected communities. However, when additional land had
to be acquired, a dynamic opposition movement grew up, rising to armed conflict,
land occupation, and the construction of structures to hamper runway construction.
Eventually militants seized the control tower and destroyed most of the equipment
inside. The airport, initially planned to start operations in 1972 with five runways,
was finally inaugurated in 1978 with a single runway and high security all through.
7.9 From Inception to Oblivion
215