Conclusions

James Fowler ()
Additional contact information
James Fowler: University of Essex

Chapter Chapter 6 in Hustlers, Traitors, Patriots and Politicians, 2023, pp 147-162 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract In conclusion this chapter suggests that we should approach transport history and transport planning from a new, less rational but more political, individual and realistic perspective. The history of London’s transport shows that unification in the form that it eventually emerged in was not inevitable. In fact, its final structure was in many ways a last-minute development. Nevertheless, before that form could take shape a very long and graduated, but very important, process of legitimisation had to occur first. Thus, London Transport was never entirely a monopoly, not did it only concern London. It could have been created earlier, but its final shape was superior to what had been previously proposed. Hence, the path to amalgamation was long, but worthwhile. Looking forward, today’s Transport for London—after a long period of unchallenged hegemony—is embroiled in another battle over legitimacy. To win, its needs to remember that rational planning and the greater good are not the only arguments it needs to make.

Date: 2023
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palscp:978-3-031-39296-2_6

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9783031392962

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-39296-2_6

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Studies in Economic History from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().