Mega-Projects Should Be Based on Triple Overlap, Not Blind Approval
This article argues that mega-projects should not be approved without thorough scrutiny, but rather based on a "triple overlap" of considerations. The author, Jejeong Im, uses the metaphor of a spotlight to illuminate the need for careful evaluation. The concept of "triple overlap" suggests that projects must satisfy three distinct but interconnected criteria to be deemed successful and justifiable. This approach contrasts with a "묻따말" (mutdajmal) mentality, which implies unquestioning acceptance or blind faith. The piece advocates for a more rigorous and analytical framework when considering large-scale undertakings. By emphasizing the need for multiple points of convergence, the author aims to encourage a more responsible and evidence-based decision-making process for significant public and private investments. The spotlight metaphor further underscores the importance of transparency and detailed examination in the evaluation of these projects.
The call for a "triple overlap" in mega-project evaluation suggests a move away from potentially opaque or politically motivated decision-making towards a more structured, multi-faceted assessment framework. This approach aims to mitigate risks associated with large-scale investments by ensuring alignment across diverse stakeholder interests and objective performance metrics. Such a system could enhance accountability and reduce the likelihood of project failures or cost overruns, which often stem from incomplete due diligence or a lack of consensus on core objectives. By demanding a convergence of criteria, the proposal encourages a proactive identification of potential conflicts and synergies, thereby fostering more sustainable and beneficial outcomes in the long term, particularly as resource constraints and environmental considerations become increasingly critical.
AI-generated to prompt reflection — not editorial opinion, not advice, not a statement of fact. How this works.