Transportplaneringen har länge präglats av rationella metoder och verktyg, vilka anses ha svårt att hantera de sociala dimensionerna av hållbar utveckling (Thoresson 2014, s.23-24). Transportsystemet påverkar emellertid förutsättningarna för samhällets möjligheter till socialt hållbar utveckling (Stren & Polèse, 2000, s.28-29). År 2010 bildades Trafikverket genom sammanslagning av tidigare separerade verk för att skapa förutsättningar för en mer integrerad och långsiktigt hållbar transportplanering (Ingo, 2013, s.114). För att bidra till den långsiktigt hållbara transportplaneringen införde Trafikverket (2015a, s.3) år 2013 ett nytt steg i planprocessen: Åtgärdsvalsstudier (ÅVS), där förslag för vilken typ av åtgärd som kan lösa transportproblem utreds (Trafikverket, 2015a, s.8-9).I relation till ovanstående utveckling ställer vi i denna uppsats frågan: Hur integreras sociala dimensioner i den svenska transportplaneringen? Studien har avgränsats till att behandla processen för åtgärdsvalsstudier. Empiri har samlats in genom en fallstudie bestående av intervjuer med en arbetsgrupp för en pågående åtgärdsvalsstudie. Dessa intervjuer har kompletterats med ett samtal med en fokusgrupp, bestående av konsulter som arbetar med åtgärdsvalsstudier och redovisar deras erfarenheter av hur sociala dimensioner behandlas i åtgärdsvalsstudier. Denna empiri ställs i förhållande till teori om social hållbarhet och transportplanering. Resultatet av uppsatsen belyser problematik som finns med den rationella kunskapssynens sätt att behandla sociala dimensioner av hållbarhet. Detta då rationella processer inom transportplaneringen har svårigheter att identifiera grupper i samhället, vilket är ett kriterium för social rättvisa och social hållbarhet (jfr. Fainstein, 2000; Stren & Polèse, 2000, s.15-16). Dessutom har de rationella metoderna och den rationella kunskapssynens svårigheter i att kunna integrera kvalitativa värden av sociala dimensioner. Det framkommer även att ÅVS-processen präglas av förhandlingsplanering, vilket möjliggör att önskade åtgärder kan rationaliseras av de som bjuds in till dialog. I relation till förhandlingsplaneringen begränsas medborgarnas delaktighet och insyn, vilket äventyrar de demokratiska idealen och skapar en obalans i vem som får komma till tals. / Transport planning has for a long time been characterised by rational methods and tools that have had a hard time handling the social dimensions of sustainable development (Thoresson, 2014, p.23-24). However, the transport system influences the conditions of societies possibilities for sustainable development (Stren & Polèse, 2000, p.28-29). In 2010, Trafikverket (The Swedish Transport Administration) was formed by merging several separate administrations, to create the possibility for a more integrated and long term solution for transport planning (Ingo, 2013, p.114). In 2013, Trafikverket (2015a, p.3) introduced a new step in the planning process, as a means of contributing to the new long term sustainable transport planning: Åtgärdsvalsstudier (ÅVS), where in they would study different suggestions of intervention that could be used to solve transport problems (Trafikverket, 2015a, p.8-9).In relation to the above mentioned development, we will pose the following question in this paper: how are social dimensions incorporated within Swedish transportplanning? This paper has been limited to only treat the process of ÅVS. During the study we have done a case study including interviews with a team working on a ongoing ÅVS. A conversation with a focus group consisting of consultants working with ÅVS has also taken place. This empirical study has been compared to theories of social sustainability and transport planning. The result of the paper highlights the problems of discussing social dimensions within the rational perception of knowledge. This is because the rational processes used within transport planning make it difficult to identify groups in the society, which is neccesary for social justice and social sustainability (jfr. Fainstein, 2000; Stren & Polèse, 2000, s.15-16)”. In addition to this, the rational perception of knowledge and rational methodology creates difficulties in integrating qualitative values of social dimensions. It also appears that the ÅVS-process is characterised by negotiation planning, which makes it possible for people invited to the process to influence the interventions according to their own preferences. Linked with the negotiation planning is however the limitation it puts on the citizen participation and insight, which jeopardises the democratic ideals and creates an imbalance in who gets to have a say.

The purpose of this study is to empirically investigate the occurrence of Step 1 measures ofthe “four step principle” and the role of Strategic Choice of Measures (SCM) as it pertains tothe development of a sustainable transport system. The “four step principle” has been a partof Swedish transport planning for the last two decades with the purpose of modernising it. Byimplementing SCM the “four step principle” was supposed to take a central role in planning.SCM was supposed to offer an earlier and more open process to make strategic, nationaltransport planning more efficient and enable new perspectives in the process. However, newperspectives are few and far between and it is questionable how sustainable the measuressuggested in SCM processes actually are. The step-wise examination of the “four stepprinciple” seldom leads to suggestions where Step 1 measures are a considerable part, andit is even unclear what Step 1 actually is. Going beyond the SCM process it is questionable ifthe Measure data bank (Åtgärdsbanken), where all SCM-recommended measures aresupposed to be registered, works as a data and knowledge management database.This thesis steps in at that point.The goal of this report is to explain what Step 1 actuallyrepresents, how this is expressed in the SCM methodology and what the output of the SCMprocess is. By text analysis of documents from 150 SCM processes with possible Step 1measures an examination is made of what Step 1 represents and how Swedish TransportAdministration and other participants in SCM processes reach the measures suggested.What kind of so called primary Step 1 measures that are generated in the SCM process isalso within the scope of this report. In addition a more detailed investigation of patterns isperformed for SCM processes that generate primary Step 1 measures, pertaining to thedelimitation and actor setup in SCM:s. This is done in order to answer questions surroundingthe process of generating measures in SCM is concerned, and also to attempt to answer thecriticism that has been brought forth concerning the SCM process.The main conclusion of this report is that there are clear flaws in the SCM process. Theseshortcomings and flaws include difficulties in classifying measures, that particularly Step 1measures are packaged without individual effect evaluation, and that the process at largelacks the “rethink” perspective which the SCM process aims at. Looking at the primary Step1 measures generated, they are characterised as having a time scope connected to otherplanning processes, a limited, local geographical expanse, and as being multi-modal. Theresearch shows a contrast in that certain primary Step 1 measures occur at particulargeographical delimitations. Two common conditions for the generation of primary Step 1measures are the exclusion of Step 4 in the generation of measures, and packeting of Step1 measures for ease of handling. When investigating the SCM process the criticism that isbrought forth towards it shows signs of being legitimate. At the same time it is clear the theMeasure data bank does not function correctly as a data and knowledge management bankand improvements are needed for it to serve its intended purpose.Keywords: “four step principle”, Strategic Choice of Measures, sustainable transport,transport planning, Measure data bank, actor, Step 1, Primary Step 1 measure, instrument.