In recent years, the development considerations within transport planning have started to examine needs from a more comprehensive perspective in order to shift the focus of planning away from favoring automobile travel. New approaches are emerging around the world to face the challenges we are confronted with, such as urbanization, dispersion of community structures, change in population structure, aging, climate change, and tightening budgets. Therefore, this thesis is aiming to gain more insight on new approaches in transport planning by comparing emerging systems in Sweden and in Finland. The comparison is focused on the renewed procedures at the early stages of transport planning; the methods to conduct multi-modal studies through collaborative decision-making processes in both countries. Thus, in this thesis the renewed preliminary transport planning in Finland and the Swedish method of Strategic Choice of Measures are compared based on implications from practice. The main purpose is to learn from practice and therefore, the data for comparison is based on conducted test cases that aim to develop the emerging planning processes in both countries. In Sweden, the preliminary version of the new planning method, developed by the Swedish Transport Administration, was tested with six cases during 2011. KTH was commissioned to conduct a study to examine the collaborative planning of involved actors in each of these cases, and the cases together. Thus, in the Swedish context, the data for comparison will be collected from the earlier study conducted by a KTH researcher John Odhage. In the Finnish context, a case study will be carried out for the data collection. The chosen case consists of a pilot study initiated in Finland in 2012 for the purpose of collecting ideas for the development of a renewed preliminary planning process. In general, both countries approaches aim at creating efficient procedures that would contribute to cost-efficiency and sustainable development as well as fulfilling other aims of the transport policy of each country.  The focus of the comparison is on the critical aspects of multi-modal studies and three features of a collaborative process; the choice of actors, the problem formulation, and the process management. The comparison is carried out based on theoretical implications and the experiences from practice are scrutinized against the ideal approach of each country. It has become apparent that three clearly distinctive differences between the approaches can be pointed out: the role of the transport administration, the creation of a steering committee, and creation of a concept for process guidance. In addition, the four-step principle is the multi-modal tool used in both countries approaches to generate alternative measures to transport related issues. The basic idea of the principle is in the first place to influence land use, transport demand, and choice of travel mode, and secondly to examine if the use of existing transport system can be optimized prior to construction. However, based on the experiences from practice, it seems that in both countries processes the focus of generating alternative measures is leaning more against minor or large new investments. Thus, the search for complementary measures to achieve considerable cost-savings and more importantly, sustainable development, is perceived challenging.