Understanding efforts to (de)legitimize bus rapid transit implementation

Abstract

Protests against various transition projects, including both infrastructure and policy changes, are not uncommon and have been observed in diverse contexts. However, protests specifically against Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) implementation remain understudied. This study examines the local media debate surrounding a BRT project in Örebro, Sweden, with a focus on how proponents and opponents use arguments to either legitimize or delegitimize the project. Drawing on frameworks from previous studies on protests against fuel policies, the analysis reveals several key findings. Although the majority of the articles analyzed are critical of the BRT project, most of the negative coverage comes from a small group of members of the public, many of whom are affiliated with a local protest group, "Trafikupproret i Örebro." Additionally, representatives from opposition political parties frequently appear in the media, often calling for a referendum on the project. The most commonly discussed themes in the media include financial concerns and the potential impact on local traffic. Furthermore, the study identifies recurring protest categories—such as unfairness, inefficiency, lack of trust, and ideological differences—which are common in protests against fuel policies, and finds these same themes present in opposition to the BRT implementation. These results highlight a significant mistrust of technocratic arguments, underscoring the need for proponents of transition projects to devise strategies that build public trust and address sources of protest.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 3 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.