Incrementalism as a concept of iterative improvement in government project development no longer a legitimate public administration theory

As an advocate, my experience with trying to do "new things" in government, is that you only get one chance to do it right.  That there isn't enough social, organizational, community, and financial capital to take up the issue again--to expand it, improve it, etc.

DC streetcar advocates are holding a community event to advocate for expansion of the streetcar to Ward 7, which DC Council recently defunded.  

A perfect example is the DC streetcar.  It took 13 years to make it operational after planning first started--by contrast it took Seattle four years, and they've since expanded.  

And for the most part, DC City Councilmembers aren't interested in putting out the money to expand it to make it more useful.  Ironically, originally there were supposed to be multiple lines.  

Even though transit usage is much reduced in DC post-covid, I don't think DC elected officials understand how central transit is to the city's competitive advantage and identity.  That even so, transit (and sustainable mobility) is what distinguishes DC from the suburbs and that you need more of it to continue to differentiate DC as a place to choose to live and conduct business.

Or the Norfolk light rail.  It was supposed to go to Virginia Beach, but with opposition they cut that part from the project, expecting that once the system started operating, there'd be a clamoring to expand ("As light rail nears in Norfolk, Virginia Beach begins to reconsider previous decisions to not participate," 2009).  Nope, in 2015, plans to move forward were scuttled, seemingly forever ("Virginia Beach was right to reject light rail extension," Norfolk Virginian-Pilot).  And as a result, the Norfolk light rail is pretty much a failure, with ridership less than a DC bus line.

I remember arguing with a past director of the DC Historic Preservation Office, who was trying to get the city to approve the concept of "conservation districts" as opposed to historic districts.  Historic districts have a lot more protection, CDs, minimal.  She argued that a CD could transition to an HD.  I said communities don't have the energy (various types of "capital") to go through such a process twice. Let alone the city the energy to approve the concept.  She didn't last long.  Etc.

There are many such examples in government.

Another one is the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail, which doesn't include Bergen County.  It was conceptualized as a waterfront adjacent line connecting Hudson and Bergen Counties in New Jersey.

It opened in 2001 and was completed in 2011, serving Hudson County only, and a recent proposal to finally extend it to Bergen has been further delayed ("Three decades later, the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail line still has no Bergen spur. How come?," North Jersey Herald).  

So for 12 years, and now longer, no Bergen County section.

Incrementalism is a public administration theory proposed in the 1950s by Charles Lindblom.  I think though that I'm arguing something slightly different.  

He said that incremental project development is much more likely than the creation and implementation of big projects based on a formal rational decision making process.  From Encyclopedia Brittanica:

Incrementalism was first developed in the 1950s by the American political scientist Charles E. Lindblom in response to the then-prevalent conception of policy making as a process of rational analysis culminating in a value-maximizing decision. Incrementalism emphasizes the plurality of actors involved in the policy-making process and predicts that policy makers will build on past policies, focusing on incremental rather than wholesale changes. Incrementalism has been fruitfully applied to explain domestic policy making, foreign policy making, and public budgeting. 

Lindblom regarded rational decision making as an unattainable ideal. To function properly, rational-comprehensive decision making must satisfy two conditions that are unlikely to be met for most issues: agreement on objectives and a knowledge base sufficient to permit accurate prediction of consequences associated with available alternatives.

From that standpoint he's right. Incremental versus a beautiful, complete, big concept.  That hasn't changed.

What I'm arguing that the concept of incrementalism in government as iterative improvement is flawed because in reality you don't get second chances to improve or extend projects.  They take so long anyway.  Therefore, try to do it right and "the best" from the outset.  The likelihood of your getting the opportunity to fix, improve, extend is minimal.

Another example is the Suburban Maryland Purple Line light rail.  I first read about the concept in a cover story in the Washington City Paper in 1987!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It will open a section, finally, in 2027.  40 YEARS LATER!!!!

The section of the Purple Line that will open in 2027 is from Bethesda to New Carrollton.

But there is zero planning, zero planning, on extending it further, either west to Tysons in Virginia on the north, or further west in Maryland and to Alexandria, Virginia on the south.

And another failure in planning is failure to leverage such additions to the transit network to further improve and extend the existing network.

-- "Codifying the complementary transit network improvements and planning initiatives recommended in the Purple Line writings," 2022

And Maryland just announced a massive plan to rebuild the American Legion Bridge, connecting Maryland and Virginia, with zero plans for transit! ("Maryland pursues publicly funding Beltway relief project," Washington Post, "American Legion Bridge would be even more congested without transit, study says," Fairfax Now).

Wow.

So examples when what I call "Transformational Projects Action Planning" actually happen, such as in Bilbao ("Why can't the "Bilbao Effect" be reproduced? | Bilbao as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning," 2017), are beyond remarkable.