California has been planning a high-speed rail line for years, but construction is progressing very slowly and only a few sections have been completed; Spain, however, has one of the most extensive high-speed rail networks in the world and continues to open new sections. Excessive regulation, institutional obstacles, and the way politicians respond to local interests explain why so much is being built in Spain and so little in the United States.
In the book AbundanceIn their article, journalists Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson describe how many US states, especially those governed by Democrats, face enormous difficulties in moving projects forward. Housing in cities like San Francisco, wind and solar farms in Pennsylvania, high-speed rail—everything gets bogged down by complex administrative processes, endless reports, and constant litigation. This leads to delays of several years in essential projects, with accumulating social and economic costs.
This type of local rejection is what is known as the phenomenon nimby, not in my backyardEveryone wants affordable housing, clean energy, or efficient transportation, but when a project directly impacts its immediate surroundings, opposition arises. The costs are immediate and visible; the benefits are diffuse and collective. Thus, socially useful initiatives can be stalled, despite their widespread need.
In Catalonia, this is also happening. For example, housing construction is growing far below what is needed, at a rate that doesn't meet existing demand. Although the causes are varied, many municipalities are slowing down construction, arguing that it's necessary to preserve the landscape, maintain the capacity of local infrastructure, or foster community cohesion. These are all visible advantages for the municipality itself. But the repercussions affect the entire urban area: prices remain high, commutes within the city are longer, and mobility is reduced, impacting the quality of life and competitiveness of the entire region.
Renewable energy also faces obstacles related to land protection. Large-scale wind and solar farms often encounter stringent regulations and resistance from local communities concerned about the landscape or environmental impact. This causes many projects to progress more slowly than necessary to meet climate goals. In both housing and renewables, local interests can hinder initiatives that benefit society. Those who need more housing or clean energy often lack a voice, while actors with blocking power are more visible and influential. The result: limited supply and a slower transition to sustainable and efficient models.
However, in large infrastructure projects, the situation is almost the opposite. High-speed rail is the clearest example. The logic is one of territorial universalism: every region must have a connection, even if demand is limited. The local benefits are obvious, but the overall costs are shared among all taxpayers. This allows for investment in large projects, but it also generates extensive networks with uneven returns and fewer resources available for basic services like commuter rail, creating tension between spending and actual need.
If in the nimby The benefits are general and the costs concentrated; in infrastructure projects like high-speed rail, the benefits are local and the costs general. The effects are symmetrical but inverse: in the US they cause gridlock, in Spain we overbuild. Both situations have a considerable social cost and show how institutional incentives condition the capacity to respond to collective needs.
The problem isn't simply building more or less, but establishing mechanisms that align local and collective interests. In the US, neighborhood vetoes can paralyze necessary projects; in Spain, the political distribution of spending and territorial logic can favor inefficient or partisan decisions. In a world that demands affordable housing, clean energy, and efficient infrastructure, the goal isn't just to spend more, but to better organize decision-making. However, as Klein and Thompson conclude, abundance exists on paper; institutional and political obstacles prevent it from translating into real housing, energy, and infrastructure.
