Is biggest best? A comparative analysis of the financial viability of the Brisbane City Council

Structural reform through forced mergers has been a dominant feature of Australian local government for decades. Advocates of compulsory consolidation contend that larger municipalities perform better across a wide range of attributes, including financial sustainability. While empirical scholars of local government have invested considerable effort into investigating these claims, no-one has yet examined the performance of Brisbane City Council against other local authorities, despite the fact that it is by far the largest council in Australia. This paper seeks to remedy this neglect by comparing Brisbane with Sydney City Council, an average of six south east Queensland councils and an average of ten metropolitan New South Wales councils against four measures of financial performance over the period 2008 to 2011.

Financial viability appraisals for site-specific planning decisions in England

In England, appraisals of the financial viability of development schemes have become an integral part of planning policy-making, initially in determining the amount of planning obligations that might be obtained via legal agreements (known as Section 106 agreements) and latterly as a basis for establishing charging schedules for the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Local planning authorities set these policies on an area-wide basis but ultimately development proposals require consent on a site-by-site basis. It is at this site-specific level that issues of viability are hotly contested. This paper examines case documents, proofs of evidence and decisions from a sample of planning disputes in order to address major issues within development viability, the application of the models and the distribution of the development gain between the developer, landowner and community. The results have specific application to viability assessment in England and should impact on future policy and practice guidance in this field. They also have relevance to other countries that incorporate assessments of economic viability in their planning systems.

Cost shifting, hospital financial viability, and accessibility of hospital care : Task Force report to the Council.

Cover title.

Huambo Microbiology Laboratory : economical and financial viability

Mestrado em Finanças

Incorporating sustainability measures in life-cycle financial decision making for highway construction

Public awareness and the nature of highway construction works demand that sustainability measures are first on the development agenda. However, in the current economic climate, individual volition and enthusiasm for such high capital investments do not present as strong cases for decision making as the financial pictures of pursuing sustainability. Some stakeholders consider sustainability to be extra work that costs additional money. Though, stakeholders realised its importance in infrastructure development. They are keen to identify the available alternatives and financial implications on a lifecycle basis. Highway infrastructure development is a complex rocess which requires expertise and tools to evaluate investment options, such as environmentally sustainable features for road and highway development. Life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is a valuable approach for investment decision making for construction works. However, LCCA applications in highway development are still limited. Current models, for example focus on economic issues alone and do not deal with sustainability factors, which are more difficult to quantify and encapsulate in estimation modules. This paper reports the research which identifies sustainability related factors in highway construction projects, in quantitative and qualitative forms of a multi-criteria analysis. These factors are then incorporated into past and proven LCCA models to produce a new long term decision support model. The research via questionnaire, model building, analytical hierarchy processes (AHP) and case studies have identified, evaluated and then processed highway sustainability related cost elements. These cost elements need to be verified by industry before being integrated for further development of the model. Then the Australian construction industry will have a practical tool to evaluate investment decisions which provide an optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

Managing financial implications for sustainable highway infrastructure delivery

Highway construction works have significant bearings on all aspects of sustainability. As they typically involve huge capital funds, stakeholders tend to place all interests on the financial justifications of the project, especially when embedding sustainability principles and practices may demand significant initial investment. Increasing public awareness and government policies demand that infrastructure projects respond to environmental challenges and people start to realise the negative consequences of not to pursue sustainability. Stakeholders are now keen to identify sustainable alternatives and financial implications of including them on a whole lifecycle basis. Therefore tools that aid the evaluation of investment options, such as provision of environmentally sustainable features in roads and highways, are highly desirable. Life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is generally recognised as a valuable approach for investment decision making for construction works. However to date it has limited application because the current LCCA models tend to focus on economic issues alone and are not able to deal with sustainability factors. This paper reports a research on identifying sustainability related factors in highway construction projects, in quantitative and qualitative forms of a multi-criteria analysis. These factors are then incorporated into existing LCCA models to produce a new sustainability based LCCA model with cost elements specific to sustainability measures. This presents highway project stakeholders a practical tool to evaluate investment decisions and reach an optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

Developing financial decision support for highway infrastructure sustainability

The development of highway infrastructure typically requires major capital input over a long period. This often causes serious financial constraints for investors. The push for sustainability has added new dimensions to the complexity in the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the cost front. This makes the determination of long-term viability even more a precarious exercise. Life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA) is generally recognised as a valuable tool for the assessment of financial decisions on construction works. However to date, existing LCCA models are deficient in dealing with sustainability factors, particularly for infrastructure projects due to their inherent focus on the economic issues alone. This research probed into the major challenges of implementing sustainability in highway infrastructure development in terms of financial concerns and obligations. Using results of research through literature review, questionnaire survey of industry stakeholders and semi-structured interview of senior practitioners involved in highway infrastructure development, the research identified the relative importance of cost components relating to sustainability measures and on such basis, developed ways of improving existing LCCA models to incorporate sustainability commitments into long-term financial management. On such a platform, a decision support model incorporated Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process and LCCA for the evaluation of the specific cost components most concerned by infrastructure stakeholders. Two real highway infrastructure projects in Australia were then used for testing, application and validation, before the decision support model was finalised. Improved industry understanding and tools such as the developed model will lead to positive sustainability deliverables while ensuring financial viability over the lifecycle of highway infrastructure projects.

Reforming Cooperative Credit Structure in India for Financial Inclusion

In the drive for financial inclusion in India, cooperative banks assume prime importance as they are much more accessible to the rural poor than commercial banks. While more accessible, cooperative banks' financial health is rather poor and, therefore, might not be able to serve the needy in a sustained manner. A committee led by Prof. Vaidyanathan has outlined a revival package for cooperatives. Besides suggesting an infusion of funds, it called for the adherence to certain stringent norms to ensure the financial viability. The recommendations provided in the committee’s report are under various stages of implementation in India. The book examines the progress of this reform drive in Bihar, a state in Eastern India. It discusses the background for appointing the committee and its recommendations and also presents the findings of a field study conducted in this regard. The findings inform further policy suggestions which are of general interest to the drive for financial inclusion also in other countries.

Inside the black box: unravelling the development viability appraisal process

Over the last decade issues related to the financial viability of development have become increasingly important to the English planning system. As part of a wider shift towards the compartmentalisation of planning tasks, expert consultants are required to quantify, in an attempt to rationalise, planning decisions in terms of economic ‘viability’. Often with a particular focus on planning obligations, the results of development viability modelling have emerged as a key part of the evidence base used in site-specific negotiations and in planning policy formation. Focussing on the role of clients and other stakeholders, this paper investigates how development viability is tested in practice. It draws together literature on the role of calculative practices in policy formation, client feedback and influence in real estate appraisals and stakeholder engagement and consultation in the planning literature to critically evaluate the role of clients and other interest groups in influencing the production and use of development viability appraisal models. The paper draws upon semi-structured interviews with the main producers of development viability appraisals to conclude that, whilst appraisals have the potential to be biased by client and stakeholder interests, there are important controlling influences on potential opportunistic behaviour. One such control is local authorities’ weak understanding of development viability appraisal techniques which limits their capacity to question the outputs of appraisal models. However, this also is of concern given that viability is now a central feature of the town planning system.

Governing calculative practices: An investigation of development viability modelling in the English planning system

Over the last decade the English planning system has placed greater emphasis on the financial viability of development. ‘Calculative’ practices have been used to quantify and capture land value uplifts. Development viability appraisal (DVA) has become a key part of the evidence base used in planning decision-making and informs both ‘site-specific’ negotiations about the level of land value capture for individual schemes and ‘area-wide’ planning policy formation. This paper investigates how implementation of DVA is governed in planning policy formation. It is argued that the increased use of DVA raises important questions about how planning decisions are made and operationalised, not least because DVA is often poorly understood by some key stakeholders. The paper uses the concept of governance to thematically analyse semi-structured interviews conducted with the producers of DVAs and considers key procedural issues including (in)consistencies in appraisal practices, levels of stakeholder consultation and the potential for client and producer bias. Whilst stakeholder consultation is shown to be integral to the appraisal process in order to improve the quality of the appraisals and to legitimise the outputs, participation is restricted to industry experts and excludes some interest groups, including local communities. It is concluded that, largely because of its recent adoption and knowledge asymmetries between local planning authorities and appraisers, DVA is a weakly governed process characterised by emerging and contested guidance and is therefore ‘up for grabs’.

Developing a life-cycle costing analysis model for sustainability enhancement in road infrastructure project

With increasing pressure to provide environmentally responsible infrastructure products and services, stakeholders are putting significant foci on the early identification of financial viability and outcome of infrastructure projects. Traditionally, there has been an imbalance between sustainable measures and project budget. On one hand, the industry tends to employ the first-cost mentality and approach to developing infrastructure projects. On the other, environmental experts and technology innovators often push for the ultimately green products and systems without much of a concern for cost. This situation is being quickly changed as the industry is under pressure to continue to return profit, while better adapting to current and emerging global issues of sustainability. For the infrastructure sector to contribute to sustainable development, it will need to increase value and efficiency. Thus, there is a great need for tools that will enable decision makers evaluate competing initiatives and identify the most sustainable approaches to procuring infrastructure projects. In order to ensure that these objectives are achieved, the concept of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA) will play significant roles in the economics of an infrastructure project. Recently, a few research initiatives have applied the LCCA models for road infrastructure that focused on the traditional economics of a project. There is little coverage of life-cycle costing as a method to evaluate the criteria and assess the economic implications of pursuing sustainability in road infrastructure projects. To rectify this problem, this paper reviews the theoretical basis of previous LCCA models before discussing their inability to determinate the sustainability indicators in road infrastructure project. It then introduces an on-going research aimed at developing a new model to integrate the various new cost elements based on the sustainability indicators with the traditional and proven LCCA approach. It is expected that the research will generate a working model for sustainability based life-cycle cost analysis.

Measuring costs of sustainability issues in highway infrastructure : perception of stakeholders in Australia

With increasing pressure to deliver environmentally friendly and socially responsible highway infrastructure projects, stakeholders are also putting significant focus on the early identification of financial viability and outcomes for these projects. Infrastructure development typically requires major capital input, which may cause serious financial constraints for investors. The push for sustainability has added new dimensions to the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the cost front. Comprehensive analysis of the cost implications of implementing place sustainable measures in highway infrastructure throughout its lifespan is highly desirable and will become an essential part of the highway development process and a primary concern for decision makers. This paper discusses an ongoing research which seeks to identify cost elements and issues related to sustainable measures for highway infrastructure projects. Through life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA), financial implications of pursuing sustainability, which are highly concerned by the construction stakeholders, have been assessed to aid the decision making when contemplating the design, development and operation of highway infrastructure. An extensive literature review and evaluation of project reports from previous Australian highway projects was first conducted to reveal all potential cost elements. This provided the foundation for a questionnaire survey, which helped identify those specific issues and related costs that project stakeholders consider to be most critical in the Australian industry context. Through the survey, three key stakeholders in highway infrastructure development, namely consultants, contractors and government agencies, provided their views on the specific selection and priority ranking of the various categories. Findings of the survey are being integrated into proven LCCA models for further enhancement. A new LCCA model will be developed to assist the stakeholders to evaluate costs and investment decisions and reach optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

100% pure New Zealand

Tourism New Zealand (TNZ) is the national tourism office responsible for coordinating international marketing of New Zealand as a tourism destination (see www.newzealand.com ). Typical of most destination marketing organisations (DMO), TNZ is funded by government to work with the private sector in an effort to improve the financial viability of the tourism industry. A competitive tourism industry can provide a number of economic and socio-cultural benefits to a community, such as increased job opportunities and lower unemployment, new amenities and attractions, and revival of indigenous culture.

Importance of sustainability-related cost components in highway infrastructure : perspective of stakeholders in Australia

Highway infrastructure development typically requires major capital input. Unless planned properly, such requirements can cause serious financial constraints for investors. The push for sustainability adds a new dimension to the complexity of evaluating highway projects. Finding environmentally and socially responsible solutions for highway construction will improve its potential for acceptance by the society and in many instances the infrastructure's life span. Even so, the prediction and determination of a project's long-term financial viability can be a precarious exercise. Existing studies in this area have not indicated details of how to identify and deal with costs incurred in pursuing sustainability measures in highway infrastructure. This paper provides insights into the major challenges of implementing sustainability in highway project development in terms of financial concerns and obligations. It discusses the results from recent research through a literature study and a questionnaire survey of key industry stakeholders involved in highway infrastructure development. The research identified critical cost components relating to sustainability measures based on perspectives of industry stakeholders. All stakeholders believe sustainability related costs are an integral part of the decision making. However, the importance rating of these costs is relative to each stakeholder's core business objectives. This will influence the way these cost components are dealt with during the evaluation of highway investment alternatives and financial implications. This research encourages positive thinking among the highway infrastructure practitioners about sustainability. It calls for the construction industry to maximise sustainability deliverables while ensuring financial viability over the life cycle of highway infrastructure projects.