{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024704618689581095, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008592910848549946, 'mean_word_length': 5.472222222222222, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Exposing weaknesses in interactive planning: the remarkable return of comprehensive policy analysis in The Netherlands

Decision-making on transport infrastructure projects in the Netherlands has been facing a remarkable wind of change in recent years. In the 1990s, academics and practitioners in policy analysis, public policy and planning all claimed that the traditional policy analysis methods were obsolete, yet they have experienced a sudden resurgence since 2000 in the form of OEEI (Overview of Economic Effects of Infrastructure), a refined application of cost-benefit analysis (CBA). This paper delves into why this new version of CBA has become so politically successful despite predictions made to the contrary. In addition, it focuses on whether this resurgence may lead to ‘econocracy’ (conceptual hegemony by economists and their ideologies and methods over other approaches), and, if so, how this can be prevented.