E-Analysis and discussions of the results
E -a Methodology
In order to test the four hypotheses a questionnaire has been
sent to different persons in order to execute a qualitative research. Seven
persons have accepted to answer to these questions; thanks to these
professional answers it will be interesting to compare them to the previous
academic findings.
The questionnaire is composed by eight questions which embrace
the entire project of the Greater Paris. The seven profiles selected are really
different from each others as the Grand Paris project is large, this multitude
of profiles permitted to have answers from specialists about all the subjects :
transports impact, business development, IT development or green economic
growth.
Indeed as we just mentioned, their profiles are varied:
Roxanne Dugenetay (City planner), Jean-Paul Chapon (Writer of «Paris est
sa banlieue»), Thierry Galeron (Director of Champagne-Ardenne station),
Florent Riveron (Environmental engineer), Georges Meitg (Director of Relay H
transports - Paris Ile-de-France), Laurent Bach (Researcher of the University
of Strasbourg) and Anthony Crenn (Project manager of Paris
Métropole).
C-b Analysis
Our first hypothesis concerns the economic model of the
Greater Paris («The greater Paris is not part of the European economic
modal»). Indeed we analyzed that possible consequences because of the
economic model of the Grand Paris project (Keynesian structure), that the
region could not have economic benefits from this investment because of the
liberalism structure of the European Union.
Indeed every European company will be able to apply for a tender,
and then externalize the eventual economic growth.
According to Roxanne Dugenetay, city planner of the Grand Lyon
agglomeration, there are not reasons to not see the region to benefit from
investment. Indeed the investment should attract more population in Paris which
will increase the house values on a middle/long term time, and this phenomenon
will occur an en economic with no matter regarding the economic structure.
George Meitg, Director of the Relay H transport business unit,
is also convinced by the future economic growth engenders by the Grand Paris,
with no matter what the macroeconomic situation is. Indeed, from his
professional opinion, this creation of fifty-eight stations represents a
potential of fifty-eight new shops openings. This will clearly permit an
economic growth to the company, and so also to the region, with no outflow of
capital.
From an economist point of view, Laurent Bach high-lighted the
main threat for the region concerning this issue: the suppliers. Indeed as we
have previously seen in the academic researches, a foreign supplier could
seriously reduce the expected growth. Nevertheless Laurent Bach also assumed
that this investment will certainly be an impulsion for many companies to
develop new competences, and so generate an economic growth.
According to five of the respondents, the Greater Paris will
also impact the productivity of the firms. The reasoning of it would be an
increase of the quality of life in the region, will certainly create a positive
impact on the productivity, which will also generate a long term economic
growth. Laurent Bach thinks that this higher-quality of life due to the
transport improvement will not be strong enough to see a real improve of the
workers. Anthony Crenn high-lights a threat: the automatic line will obviously
not concern the entire Parisian agglomeration, it is then important to be
careful about the companies not located on this new layout, as they could lose
some competitiveness compare to the others companies.
Our first hypothesis is undermined by this qualitative
research. Indeed, according to academic evidences, we had shown the
inefficiency of such an investment on the economic growth because of an outflow
of capital. The professional's answers have shown that they did believe in an
economic growth, with any kind of economic infrastructure. Moreover even if the
official constructor of the automatic line is still unknown, the French group
RATP-Alstom is well positioned to win the tender.
The second hypothesis is «Transport investments
will be the main improvements on the economy».
After the academic
researches, we concluded that transports construction will be the main impact
to
the Greater Paris not only because of the large amount of
investment, but essentially due to the economic impact engenders by connecting
faster the different economic clusters.
If all the respondents see the good impact of the transports
on the economy, most of them do not see it as the essential investment. Indeed,
as Thierry Galeron mentioned the transports do not create any economic growth
alone. Any transit investment would not create an economic, as a single
transport investment would be totally ineffective. Roxanne Dugenetay also
rejected this statement of «transport investment as the main economic
improvement». Indeed in the interview, Roxanne Dugenetay qualifies the
transports as a «secondary function» or «support function»
to the economy, and considers this investment similar at the French economic
development of the sixties-seventies period.
However Roxanne Dugenetay and JP Chapon understand the reasons
of this important investment in a first time. Indeed JP Chapon mentioned the
existing transport infrastructures as disastrous. Nevertheless Roxanne
Dugenetay mentioned the major impact from the public transports. Indeed, the
public transports are correlated to the expected demographic growth expected to
increase the economic growth; second impact would be the sustainability and the
reduction of the car use; third impact the new location implantation choice of
the companies thanks to the new train services.
Laurent Bach does not consider the transport project as the
main economic improvement. Indeed, to create economic growth the project should
have focused more precisely on scientific researches. Even if the Greater Paris
is not only reduced to a simple tube line creation, the major investment will
concern the transit and not the R&D which could have been the main economic
improvement.
Florent Riveron has another critical view point on this issue.
Even if he considers the public transport project as the main economic
improvement of the region, he considers that the Grand Paris should have been
more focus on renovation of existing infrastructures, in order to have solid
basis before the creation of new infrastructures. Delay the construction of the
automatic line could have permitted to reduce the price of it.
Georges Meitg seemed to be the most optimistic concerning this
transport project. Indeed, even he did not consider it as a single solution to
improve the economic situation, he high-lights the good development of
Marne-La-Vallée due to the RER A and the companies attracted because of
it.
Anthony Crenn confirmed this general idea to consider
transports not as the main economic impact of the region as it cannot be
considered as a single solution. It cannot be considered as the main
improvement but rather as a solution to enable this regional economic
growth.
Our second hypothesis is not confirmed by the respondents.
Even if all the respondents see the major impacts of the transports, no one
qualified it as the main economic improvement. Indeed they consider it as a
«simple» boost to the economy.
The third hypothesis discussed «The Greater Paris
project is a generator for the Green economy», was concluded in the
theoretical part by «No, we cannot see a real green cluster creation
through the project of the Greater Paris».
Florentin Riveron considers the Greater Paris has being
totally part of a green economic growth. By referencing of the new ways of
construction presented during the Grand Paris exhibition, Florentin Riveron
sees real opportunities for companies to develop new competences, new materials
to be adapted to the future legal constraints of construction in Paris
Ile-de-France. He justifies this argument by its own professional observations.
Indeed being Environmental engineer in the city of Orléans, he has
experienced a strong growth concerning the new use of specific materials being
more sustainable for the environment. By comparison of the two cities sizes, he
assumed that the demand in Paris will logically generate as much offers and
imagines it as «very strong in the near future».
Thierry Galeron sees a development of a green cluster because
of the new transport utilization. Indeed, with the new transport project,
people will drastically reduce the use of cars, which will benefits to the city
environment. He thinks that these new habits could eventually push people to
change their behaviors to transport themselves, being more eco-friendly minded.
This general conscious will be certainly follow by the creation of new Green
companies proposing new ideas, solutions, matching perfectly with this new
frame of mind. Laurent Bach consolidates this statement by saying that this new
transport infrastructure will engender the use of eco-friendly materials, and
so the creation of specialized companies bringing solutions to maintain this
transit system.
According to the respondents, the answer to the hypothesis 3
«The Greater Paris project is not a generator for the Green economy»
would be no. Indeed according to this qualitative research, the respondents
considered it as a generator for the green economy. Our hypothesis 3 is not
verified by the respondents.
Our fourth and last hy pothesis «Greater Paris:
incubator of IT and R&D», was confirmed by academic researches, by
showing the impact of the Paris-Saclay, but also by the use of new technologies
in the automatic line.
One of the main arguments to assume this statement would be
the proximity between universities and firms. Roxanne Dugenetay considers it as
one of the main arguments in the development of R&D through the Greater
Paris project. This investment has to give a strong innovative image to the
entire territory, in order to attract scientists and companies. According to
her, Paris-Saclay has to become the showcase of the Scientific French
know-how.
Florent Riveron qualifies this project as
«excellent» for the competitiveness of the French IT and R&D.
According to him, the location is ideal as famous universities are present in
this area. Because of the future correlation between this science park and the
future transport infrastructure, this area should become really competitive
regarding the number of patents created.
Anthony Crenn considers this project as audacious, and hopes
it will be able to compete with the Silicon Valley. Nevertheless, the
difference of size, and the lack of attractiveness at the moment are the
principal challenge.
This is argument is also shared by JP Chapon, who considers
that this science park should not have the only argument to be located at only
30 minutes from Paris. It is essential to gather schools and companies to
create a real competitive center, and to obtain this result, it will be
essential to transform the actual place into a modern science center thanks to
the Grand Paris investment.
Laurent Bach insists also on the future governance of
Paris-Saclay which will be according to him a determinant point in the future
success of this science park. Indeed considering new building as enough to
enhance the production of R&D. Concerning the only development of IT due to
the Greater Paris, as previously seen, Laurent Bach confirms the idea that the
creation of a new automatic line could enhance the creation of companies to
support the good functioning of the transports.
To conclude this last hypothesis test «Greater Paris:
incubator of IT and R&D», we can conclude that this hypothesis is
approved by the academic researches and the qualitative survey. Through the
investment in Paris-Saclay and the creation of the automatic line, we can
consider the Grand Paris as an incubator of IT and R&D.
| 
