Gagne de la cryptomonnaie GRATUITE en 5 clics et aide institut numérique à propager la connaissance universitaire >> CLIQUEZ ICI <<

E-b Analysis

Non classé

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

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.

Page suivante : E -c Discussion of the Results

Retour au menu : LE GRAND PARIS How would this project generate an economic growth?