{"id":4011,"date":"2024-09-18T18:06:19","date_gmt":"2024-09-18T16:06:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/datamobility.it\/magazine\/faced-with-our-choices\/"},"modified":"2025-12-10T16:38:20","modified_gmt":"2025-12-10T15:38:20","slug":"faced-with-our-choices","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/datamobility.it\/en\/magazine\/faced-with-our-choices\/","title":{"rendered":"Faced with our choices<\/strong>

"},"content":{"rendered":"

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ custom_margin=”0px||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||||false|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” custom_margin=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_image src=”https:\/\/datamobility.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/ponte-stretto-messina-sindaco-banana-tav.jpg” title_text=”ponte-stretto-messina-sindaco-banana-tav” force_fullwidth=”on” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_margin=”||10px||false|false” custom_padding=”||0px||false|false”][\/et_pb_image][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font_size=”14px” custom_margin=”0px|0px|30px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” sticky_enabled=”0″ locked=”off”]<\/p>\n

GO-Mobility<\/strong><\/h3>\n

[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” custom_margin=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n

Faced with our choices<\/strong><\/h1>\n

[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” custom_margin=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” custom_padding=”0px|0px|0px|0px|false|false” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n

Data and decision-making processes: a long story short<\/h3>\n

[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n

Behind every big<\/i> decision, there is big <\/i>data to support it; or at least there should be. Until recently, there was virtually no debate in this field, but in recent years, the world of transport planning has been embracing a new paradigm that recognizes the design and infrastructure of transport systems as decision-making processes<\/b>, subject to specific phases, dynamics, and syndromes. In the opening speech of our annual Data Mobility<\/a> event, Prof. Ennio Cascetta revealed the mechanisms, but also the pitfalls, behind big decisions and how data and quantitative methods<\/b> can work to improve them and guide the outcome towards what really matters: the consensus <\/b>of the populations that benefit from or suffer the effects of these decisions.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

1. Faced with our choices<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Transport decisions involve various actors\u2014especially public decision-makers<\/b>, but increasingly also private decision-makers<\/b>\u2014at different territorial scales and for different objectives. There are decisions that have a decade-long impact, such as strategic<\/b> ones: infrastructure plans, urban sustainable mobility plans, industrial plans concerning, for example, the purchase of rolling stock. These are decisions that affect entire territories or companies for several years. Projects<\/b> are of a different kind, involving more limited tactical and operational choices, such as the definition of individual interventions.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

All these decisions, from plans to mobility projects, are affected in practice by many errors<\/b>: failures, risks, syndromes, and cognitive biases. But what is the nature of these errors?<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

2. A system affected by planning fallacies<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

As the professor explains, the world of transport is a complex system in which decision-makers <\/b>and stakeholders operate with different<\/b>, sometimes conflicting, objectives. It is for this reason that decision-making processes in this area are defined in the literature as wicked<\/i>: \u2018malignant\u2019.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Over the decades, evidence of design and planning errors has accumulated to such an extent that a dedicated strand of literature has emerged: \u2018planning fallacies\u2019. Through the study of decisions made on road and rail infrastructure projects in various parts of the world, a recurring series of errors affecting this sector has been analyzed and identified. For example, there has been a systematic tendency to overestimate demand<\/b>, underestimate costs<\/b>, and underestimate timelines, <\/b>especially in railway projects: an \u201cerror\u201d linked to the desire to demonstrate the necessity<\/b> of the project (at the expense of the community).<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

3. The most common syndromes<\/b><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The most common are DAD syndrome and Penelope syndrome.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The \u2018DAD syndrome<\/b>\u2019 (Decide, Announce, Defend) describes an authoritarian, top-down approach to decision-making. The process begins with a small circle of leaders making a decision autonomously (Decide<\/b>), without involving or consulting members of the organization or stakeholders. Only once the decision has been consolidated does the announcement follow (Announce)<\/b>, which is often one-way, with leaders communicating the decision without allowing room for counterarguments or meaningful discussion. At that point, leaders prepare to defend the decision against any criticism or resistance (Defend<\/b>).<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The approach is defensive and reactive: leaders seek to convince others of the validity of the decision, rather than incorporating feedback or suggestions. This method can lead to various problems, including a lack of involvement and acceptance by the rest of the people concerned and potential internal conflicts. A famous example of this syndrome is what happened with the Turin-Lyon high-speed rail link<\/b>. But we need only look at the capital itself to find other more recent examples, starting with the protests against the quadrupling of the railway line<\/b> between Capannelle and Casilina in the Appia Antica Regional Park or the TVA tram<\/b> in the historic center (Termini-Vaticano-Aurelio line).<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

News of conflicts relating to opposition to infrastructure projects decided with a DAD approach (TAV Turin-Lyon<\/a>; railway works<\/a> in the Appia Antica Regional Park; the tram in the historic center<\/a> of Rome)<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The Penelope syndrome<\/b>, on the other hand, takes its name from the famous character in Homer’s Odyssey, who wove a web by day and unraveled it by night to avoid making a decision about her suitors. This syndrome refers to projects that are never completed because, often due to changes in administration (public or corporate), the decision-making process is cyclically questioned and restarted from scratch. Everything that has been done or chosen by the previous administration is questioned without solid justification, continually postponing<\/b> the decision and changing<\/b> content, objectives, and plans. A fitting example of this type of syndrome can be found in the bridge over the Strait of Messina<\/b>, but also in the long-standing issue of the railway ring <\/b>of Rome<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

An article from the blog \u201cAbitare a Roma\u201d (Living in Rome)<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

4. From syndromes to consequences: dissent<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

These syndromes, Cascetta continues, lead to the creation of different types of \u201cconsensus barriers.\u201d The most famous is NIMBY<\/b> (Not in My Backyard<\/i>), which expresses opposition to the construction of works near one’s residence or local community, even though in theory their importance is recognized (great initiative, but do it somewhere else<\/i>). But there are more acute versions: the BANANA<\/b> syndrome, or Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything<\/i>, expresses total opposition <\/b>to the project itself. Not only do people not want anything to be changed \u2018in their backyard\u2019, but anywhere<\/i>.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

One example in this field is road pricing: a theoretically desirable tool, but one that has only been implemented in a very few cities, including Milan, and even then only in a small portion of the territory. It is a policy that has been proposed in hundreds of cities, but is systematically blocked because there is not enough consensus to implement it: suffice it to say that in Rome, it has been<\/a> supposed to be implemented since 2017.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

All these failures are partly due to the wrong<\/b> way of making decisions.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

5. Recognizing the disease: cognitive biases<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

We all make decisions all the time without being aware of it: these are biases<\/i> cognitive<\/b>, which form the basis of entire disciplines. Cascetta states: “Man is not a rational animal, he is an animal that <\/em>rationalizes<\/em><\/b>: we are full of biases. It is only afterwards that we try to compare and analyze the alternatives and arrive at an informed solution.”<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In psychology and behavioral economics, in fact, researchers have long been studying how to exploit cognitive biases to make better choices: we discussed this here<\/a>). This is known as nudging, <\/b>i.e., techniques that aim to influence people’s decisions in a subtle and non-coercive<\/b> way, steering them towards choices that are considered better for the individuals themselves or for society. A practical and widespread example of nudging is the positioning of healthier foods at eye level in school canteens or supermarkets, to steer<\/b> people towards healthier food consumption.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Nudging techniques implemented in Tesco<\/a> stores<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In the field of public engagement<\/b>, for example, a bias called the Ikea Effect<\/b> is used:<\/a> if you participate personally in the construction of something, you will develop an emotional bond<\/b> with it that increases its value and importance. Involving people in the decision-making process means creating a sense of belonging<\/b>, making them more likely to support the project or final decision.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The Ikea Effect, illustrated and explained in Howie Mann’s blog<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In the field of decision-making processes, over 200 types of bias have been identified, 50 of which are now well established. These include:<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n