A framework for strategic infrastructure asset management

The concept of asset management is not a new but an evolving idea that has been attracting attention of many organisations operating and/or owning some kind of infrastructure assets. The term asset management have been used widely with fundamental differences in interpretation and usage. Regardless of the context of the usage of the term, asset management implies the process of optimising return by scrutinising performance and making key strategic decisions throughout all phases of an assets lifecycle (Sarfi and Tao, 2004). Hence, asset management is a philosophy and discipline through which organisations are enabled to more effectively deploy their resources to provide higher levels of customer service and reliability while balancing financial objectives. In Australia, asset management made its way into the public works in 1993 when the Australian Accounting Standard Board issued the Australian Accounting Standard 27 – AAS27. Standard AAS27 required government agencies to capitalise and depreciate assets rather than expense them against earnings. This development has indirectly forced organisations managing infrastructure assets to consider the useful life and cost effectiveness of asset investments. The Australian State Treasuries and the Australian National Audit Office was the first organisation to formalise the concepts and principles of asset management in Australia in which they defined asset management as “ a systematic, structured process covering the whole life of an asset”(Australian National Audit Office, 1996). This initiative led other Government bodies and industry sectors to develop, refine and apply the concept of asset management in the management of their respective infrastructure assets. Hence, it can be argued that the concept of asset management has emerged as a separate and recognised field of management during the late 1990s. In comparison to other disciplines such as construction, facilities, maintenance, project management, economics, finance, to name a few, asset management is a relatively new discipline and is clearly a contemporary topic. The primary contributors to the literature in asset management are largely government organisations and industry practitioners. These contributions take the form of guidelines and reports on the best practice of asset management. More recently, some of these best practices have been made to become a standard such as the PAS 55 (IAM, 2004, IAM, 2008b) in UK. As such, current literature in this field tends to lack well-grounded theories. To-date, while receiving relatively more interest and attention from empirical researchers, the advancement of this field, particularly in terms of the volume of academic and theoretical development is at best moderate. A plausible reason for the lack of advancement is that many researchers and practitioners are still unaware of, or unimpressed by, the contribution that asset management can make to the performance of infrastructure asset. This paper seeks to explore the practices of organisations that manage infrastructure assets to develop a framework of strategic infrastructure asset management processes. It will begin by examining the development of asset management. This is followed by the discussion on the method to be adopted for this paper. Next, is the discussion of the result form case studies. It first describes the goals of infrastructure asset management and how they can support the broader business goals. Following this, a set of core processes that can support the achievement of business goals are provided. These core processes are synthesised based on the practices of asset managers in the case study organisations.

Strategic infrastructure asset management: the way forward

Organisations owning and managing infrastructure asset are constantly striving to obtain the greatest lifetime value from their infrastructure assets. Many such organisations have adopted the concept of “asset management” with the aim of improving the performance of their infrastructure assets. This paper evaluates the adoption of asset management to improve performance in the context of organisations managing infrastructure assets. Relevant previous research studies on main barriers to the adoption of asset management are reviewed. Analysis of these findings, together with deductive reasoning, leads to the development of the proposed improvement strategies. Three issues were identified as barrier to the advancement of the concept of asset management. They are (1) lack of recognition, (2) fragmentation; and (3) growing complexity. To overcome these issues, this paper suggests that the organisations manage infrastructure assets must (1) adopt a more strategic approach in the management of infrastructure assets, (2) develop a framework of strategic infrastructure asset management processes, and (3) identify the core capabilities needed in the management of infrastructure assets. This paper presents the direction for further research to advance the concept of asset management in the management of infrastructure asset.

Infrastructure asset management: The challenges and approaches

Infrastructure organisations such as airport, seaport, rail and road are operating in an increasingly challenging business environment as a result of globalisation, privatisation and deregulation. These organisations must ensure that their main resource i.e. their infrastructure assets are well managed in order to support their business operations. Brisbane Airport is used as a case study to understand the challenges faced in the management of infrastructure assets as well as the approaches used to overcome them. The findings can be useful in helping asset managers to identify the resources they should seek to manipulate in order to make improvement to their activities and contribute to the overall performance of their organisation.

Capability for infrastructure asset capacity management

Infrastructure capacity management is the process of ensuring optimal provision of infrastructure assets to support business operations. Effectiveness in this process will enable infrastructure asset owners and its stakeholders to receive full value on their investment. Management research has shown that an organisation can only achieve business value when it has the right capabilities. This paradigm can also be applied to infrastructure capacity management. With competing needs for limited organisation resources, the challenge for infrastructure organisations is to identify and invest their limited resources to develop the right capabilities in the management of their infrastructure capacity. Using a multiple case study approach, the challenges faced in the management of infrastructure asset capacity and the approaches that can be adopted to overcome these challenges were explored. Conceptualising the approaches adopted by the case participants, the findings suggest that infrastructure organisations must strengthen their stakeholder connectivity capability in order to effectively manage the capacity of their infrastructure assets.

Infrastructure asset : developing maintenance management capability

Purpose Maintenance management is a core process in infrastructure asset management. Infrastructure organisations must constantly strive to ensure the effectiveness of this process in order to obtain the greatest lifetime value from their infrastructure assets. This paper aims to investigate how infrastructure organisations can enhance the effectiveness of their maintenance management process. Approach This study utilised multiple case studies as the research approach. The case organisations were asked to identify the challenges faced in the maintenance process and the approaches they have adopted to overcome these challenges. Analysis of these findings, together with deductive reasoning, leads to the development of the proposed capability needed for effective maintenance management process. Findings The case studies reveal that maintenance management process is a core process in ensuring that infrastructure assets are optimally and functionally available to support business operations. However, the main challenge is the lack of skilled and experienced personnel to understand and anticipate maintenance requirement. A second challenge is the reduced window of time available to carry out inspection and maintenance works. To overcome these challenges, the case organisations have invested in technologies. However, technologies available to facilitate this process are complex and constantly changing. Consequently, there is a need for infrastructure organizations to develop their technological absorptive capability, i.e. the ability to embrace and capitalize on new technologies to enhance their maintenance management process. Originality/Value This paper is original in that it provides empirical evidence to identify technological absorptive capability as core to improving the maintenance management process. The findings are valuable because it sheds light on where infrastructure organisation, regardless of whether they are privately or publicly owned, should channel their scarce resources. The development of the core capability will ensure that the maintenance process can contribute value to their organisation.

A capability model to improve infrastructure asset performance

Infrastructure organizations are operating in an increasingly challenging business environment as a result of globalization, privatization and deregulation. In an external business environment that is constantly changing, extant literature on strategic management advocates the need to focus on factors internal to the organization such as resources and capabilities to sustain their performance. Specifically, they need to develop dynamic capabilities in order to survive and prosper under conditions of change. The aim of this paper is to explore the dynamic capabilities needed in the management of transport infrastructure assets using a multiple case study research strategy. This paper produced a number of findings. First, the empirical evidence showed that the core infrastructure asset management processes are capacity management, options evaluation, procurement & delivery, maintenance management, and asset information management. Second, the study identified five dynamic capabilities namely stakeholder connectivity, cross-functional, relational, technology absorptive and integrated information capability as central to executing the strategic infrastructure asset management processes well. These findings culminate in the development of a capability model to improve the performance of infrastructure assets in an increasingly dynamic business environment.

Infrastructure transitions toward sustainability : a complex adaptive systems perspective

To ensure infrastructure assets are procured and maintained by government on behalf of citizens, appropriate policy and institutional architecture is needed, particularly if a fundamental shift to more sustainable infrastructure is the goal. The shift in recent years from competitive and resource-intensive procurement to more collaborative and sustainable approaches to infrastructure governance is considered a major transition in infrastructure procurement systems. In order to better understand this transition in infrastructure procurement arrangements, the concept of emergence from Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) theory is offered as a key construct. Emergence holds that micro interactions can result in emergent macro order. Applying the concept of emergence to infrastructure procurement, this research examines how interaction of agents in individual projects can result in different industry structural characteristics. The paper concludes that CAS theory, and particularly the concept of ‘emergence’, provides a useful construct to understand infrastructure procurement dynamics and progress towards sustainability.

Sharia-compliant financing in Indonesia infrastructure projects

As the adoption of project financing is gaining momentum, there is a concurrent need of innovation in project financing scheme in order to accelerate infrastructure assets provision in Indonesia. As the largest Muslim population in the world, sharia-compliant financing offers tremendous potential as a source for infrastructure financing for Indonesia. To realize this potential, there is a need of a framework to guide its adoption. Hence this paper discusses the potential implementation of Islamic finance to fund infrastructure projects in Indonesia. Through comparative analysis, this paper illustrates how Islamic principles can be incorporated into Indonesian infrastructure project financing.

Learning routines used by firms during construction of infrastructure projects using the alliance procurement method

Collaborative contracting has emerged over the past 15 years as an innovative project delivery framework that is particularly suited to infrastructure projects. Australia leads the world in the development of project and program alliance approaches to collaborative delivery. These approaches are considered to promise superior project results. However, very little is known about the learning routines that are most widely used in support of collaborative projects in general and alliance projects in particular. The literature on absorptive capacity and dynamic capabilities indicates that such learning enhances project performance. The learning routines employed at corporate level during the operation of collaborative infrastructure projects in Australia were examined through a large survey conducted in 2013. This paper presents a descriptive summary of the preliminary findings. The survey captured the experiences of 320 practitioners of collaborative construction projects, including public and private sector clients, contractors, consultants and suppliers (three per cent of projects were located in New Zealand, but for brevity’s sake the sample is referred to as Australian). The majority of projects identified used alliances (78.6%); whilst 9% used Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) contracts and 2.7% used Early Tender Involvement contracts, which are ‘slimmer’ types of collaborative contract. The remaining 9.7% of respondents used traditional contracts that employed some collaborative elements. The majority of projects were delivered for public sector clients (86.3%), and/or clients experienced with asset procurement (89.6%). All of the projects delivered infrastructure assets; one third in the road sector, one third in the water sector, one fifth in the rail sector, and the rest spread across energy, building and mining. Learning routines were explored within three interconnected phases: knowledge exploration, transformation and exploitation. The results show that explorative and exploitative learning routines were applied to a similar extent. Transformative routines were applied to a relatively low extent. It was also found that the most highly applied routine is ‘regularly applying new knowledge to collaborative projects’; and the least popular routine was ‘staff incentives to encourage information sharing about collaborative projects’. Future research planned by the authors will examine the impact of these routines on project performance.

Sustainability outcomes of infrastructure sustainability rating schemes for road projects

The construction and operation of infrastructure assets can have significant impact on society and the region. Using a sustainability assessment framework can be an effective means to build sustainability aspects into the design, construction and operation of infrastructure assets. The conventional evaluation processes and procedures for infrastructure projects do not necessarily measure the qualitative/quantitative effectiveness of all aspects of sustainability: environment, social wellbeing and economy. As a result, a few infrastructure sustainability rating schemes have been developed with a view to assess the level of sustainability attained in the infrastructure projects. These include: Infrastructure Sustainability (Australia); CEEQUAL (UK); and Envision (USA). In addition, road sector specific sustainability rating schemes such as Greenroads (USA) and Invest (Australia) have also been developed. These schemes address several aspects of sustainability with varying emphasis (weightings) on areas such as: use of resources; emission, pollution and waste; ecology; people and place; management and governance; and innovation. The attainment of sustainability of an infrastructure project depends largely on addressing the whole-of-life environmental issues. This study has analysed the rating schemes’ coverage of different environmental components for the road infrastructure under the five phases of a project: material, construction, use, maintenance and end-of-life. This is based on a comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) system boundary. The findings indicate that there is a need for the schemes to consider key (high impact) life cycle environmental components such as traffic congestion during construction, rolling resistance due to surface roughness and structural stiffness of the pavement, albedo, lighting, and end-of-life management (recycling) to deliver sustainable road projects.

Sustainability in infrastructure asset management

The expectation to integrate sustainability aspects (social, environmental, and economic success) into the design, delivery, and operation of infrastructure assets is growing rapidly and globally. There are now several tools and frameworks available to benchmark and measure sustainable performance of infrastructure projects and assets. This paper briefly describes the infrastructure sustainability (IS) rating tool developed by the Australian Green Infrastructure Council (AGIC) that was launched in February 2012. This tool evaluates sustainability initiatives and potential environmental, social, and economic impacts of infrastructure projects and assets. The rating tool provides the following benefits to industry: a common national language for sustainability; a vehicle for consistent application and evaluation of sustainability in tendering processes; assists in scoping whole-of-life sustainability risks, enabling smarter solutions that reduce risks and costs; fosters resource efficiency and waste reduction, reducing costs; fosters innovation and continuous improvement in sustainability outcomes; and builds an organization’s credentials and reputation in its approach to sustainability. The infrastructure types covered by this tool include transport, energy, water, and communication. The key themes of sustainability evaluation will be briefly presented in this paper, and they include management and governance; use of resources; emissions, pollution, and waste; ecology; people and place; and innovation.

A Microdata Analysis Approach to Transport Infrastructure Maintenance

Maintenance of transport infrastructure assets is widely advocated as the key in minimizing current and future costs of the transportation network. While effective maintenance decisions are often a result of engineering skills and practical knowledge, efficient decisions must also account for the net result over an asset's life-cycle. One essential aspect in the long term perspective of transport infrastructure maintenance is to proactively estimate maintenance needs. In dealing with immediate maintenance actions, support tools that can prioritize potential maintenance candidates are important to obtain an efficient maintenance strategy. This dissertation consists of five individual research papers presenting a microdata analysis approach to transport infrastructure maintenance. Microdata analysis is a multidisciplinary field in which large quantities of data is collected, analyzed, and interpreted to improve decision-making. Increased access to transport infrastructure data enables a deeper understanding of causal effects and a possibility to make predictions of future outcomes. The microdata analysis approach covers the complete process from data collection to actual decisions and is therefore well suited for the task of improving efficiency in transport infrastructure maintenance. Statistical modeling was the selected analysis method in this dissertation and provided solutions to the different problems presented in each of the five papers. In Paper I, a time-to-event model was used to estimate remaining road pavement lifetimes in Sweden. In Paper II, an extension of the model in Paper I assessed the impact of latent variables on road lifetimes; displaying the sections in a road network that are weaker due to e.g. subsoil conditions or undetected heavy traffic. The study in Paper III incorporated a probabilistic parametric distribution as a representation of road lifetimes into an equation for the marginal cost of road wear. Differentiated road wear marginal costs for heavy and light vehicles are an important information basis for decisions regarding vehicle miles traveled (VMT) taxation policies. In Paper IV, a distribution based clustering method was used to distinguish between road segments that are deteriorating and road segments that have a stationary road condition. Within railway networks, temporary speed restrictions are often imposed because of maintenance and must be addressed in order to keep punctuality. The study in Paper V evaluated the empirical effect on running time of speed restrictions on a Norwegian railway line using a generalized linear mixed model.

Nation & internation practices in decision support tools in road asset management

This document provides a review of international and national practices in investment decision support tools in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying analytic frameworks, evaluation methodologies and criteria adopted by current tools. Emphasis was also given to how current approaches support Triple Bottom Line decision-making. Benefit Cost Analysis and Multiple Criteria Analysis are principle methodologies in supporting decision-making in Road Asset Management. The complexity of the applications shows significant differences in international practices. There is continuing discussion amongst practitioners and researchers regarding to which one is more appropriate in supporting decision-making. It is suggested that the two approaches should be regarded as complementary instead of competitive means. Multiple Criteria Analysis may be particularly helpful in early stages of project development, say strategic planning. Benefit Cost Analysis is used most widely for project prioritisation and selecting the final project from amongst a set of alternatives. Benefit Cost Analysis approach is useful tool for investment decision-making from an economic perspective. An extension of the approach, which includes social and environmental externalities, is currently used in supporting Triple Bottom Line decision-making in the road sector. However, efforts should be given to several issues in the applications. First of all, there is a need to reach a degree of commonality on considering social and environmental externalities, which may be achieved by aggregating the best practices. At different decision-making level, the detail of consideration of the externalities should be different. It is intended to develop a generic framework to coordinate the range of existing practices. The standard framework will also be helpful in reducing double counting, which appears in some current practices. Cautions should also be given to the methods of determining the value of social and environmental externalities. A number of methods, such as market price, resource costs and Willingness to Pay, are found in the review. The use of unreasonable monetisation methods in some cases has discredited Benefit Cost Analysis in the eyes of decision makers and the public. Some social externalities, such as employment and regional economic impacts, are generally omitted in current practices. This is due to the lack of information and credible models. It may be appropriate to consider these externalities in qualitative forms in a Multiple Criteria Analysis. Consensus has been reached in considering noise and air pollution in international practices. However, Australia practices generally omitted these externalities. Equity is an important consideration in Road Asset Management. The considerations are either between regions, or social groups, such as income, age, gender, disable, etc. In current practice, there is not a well developed quantitative measure for equity issues. More research is needed to target this issue. Although Multiple Criteria Analysis has been used for decades, there is not a generally accepted framework in the choice of modelling methods and various externalities. The result is that different analysts are unlikely to reach consistent conclusions about a policy measure. In current practices, some favour using methods which are able to prioritise alternatives, such as Goal Programming, Goal Achievement Matrix, Analytic Hierarchy Process. The others just present various impacts to decision-makers to characterise the projects. Weighting and scoring system are critical in most Multiple Criteria Analysis. However, the processes of assessing weights and scores were criticised as highly arbitrary and subjective. It is essential that the process should be as transparent as possible. Obtaining weights and scores by consulting local communities is a common practice, but is likely to result in bias towards local interests. Interactive approach has the advantage in helping decision-makers elaborating their preferences. However, computation burden may result in lose of interests of decision-makers during the solution process of a large-scale problem, say a large state road network. Current practices tend to use cardinal or ordinal scales in measure in non-monetised externalities. Distorted valuations can occur where variables measured in physical units, are converted to scales. For example, decibels of noise converts to a scale of -4 to +4 with a linear transformation, the difference between 3 and 4 represents a far greater increase in discomfort to people than the increase from 0 to 1. It is suggested to assign different weights to individual score. Due to overlapped goals, the problem of double counting also appears in some of Multiple Criteria Analysis. The situation can be improved by carefully selecting and defining investment goals and criteria. Other issues, such as the treatment of time effect, incorporating risk and uncertainty, have been given scant attention in current practices. This report suggested establishing a common analytic framework to deal with these issues.

Strategy for the development of investment decision-making framework for road asset management for queensland department of main roads

The aim of this project is to develop a systematic investment decision-making framework for infrastructure asset management by incorporation economic justification, social and environmental consideration in the decision-making process. This project assesses the factors that are expected to provide significant impacts on the variability of expenditures. A procedure for assessing risk and reliability for project investment appraisals will be developed. The project investigates public perception, social and environmental impacts on road infrastructure investment. This research will contribute to the debate about how important social and environmental issues should be incorporated into the investment decision-making process for infrastructure asset management.

International practices in investment decision making in road sector

This document provides the findings of an international review of investment decision-making practices in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying the strategic objectives of agencies in road asset management, establishing and understanding criteria different organisations adopted and ascertaining the exact methodologies used by different countries and international organisations. Road assets are powerful drivers of economic development and social equity. They also have significant impacts on the natural and man-made environment. The traditional definition of asset management is “A systematic process of maintaining, upgrading and operating physical assets cost effectively. It combines engineering principles with sound business practices and economic theory and it provides tools to facilitate a more organised, logical approach to decision-making” (US Dept. of Transportation, 1999). In recent years, the concept has been broadened to cover the complexity of decision making, based on a wider variety of policy considerations as well as social and environmental issues rather than is covered by Benefit-Cost analysis and pure technical considerations. Current international practices are summarised in table 2. It was evident that Engineering-economic analysis methods are well advanced to support decision-making. A range of tools available supports performance predicting of road assets and associated cost/benefit in technical context. The need for considering triple plus one bottom line of social, environmental and economic as well as political factors in decision-making is well understood by road agencies around the world. The techniques used to incorporate these however, are limited. Most countries adopt a scoring method, a goal achievement matrix or information collected from surveys. The greater uncertainty associated with these non-quantitative factors has generally not been taken into consideration. There is a gap between the capacities of the decision-making support systems and the requirements from decision-makers to make more rational and transparent decisions. The challenges faced in developing an integrated decision making framework are both procedural and conceptual. In operational terms, the framework should be easy to be understood and employed. In philosophical terms, the framework should be able to deal with challenging issues, such as uncertainty, time frame, network effects, model changes, while integrating cost and non-cost values into the evaluation. The choice of evaluation techniques depends on the feature of the problem at hand, on the aims of the analysis, and on the underlying information base At different management levels, the complexity in considering social, environmental, economic and political factor in decision-making is different. At higher the strategic planning level, more non-cost factors are involved. The complexity also varies based on the scope of the investment proposals. Road agencies traditionally place less emphasis on evaluation of maintenance works. In some cases, social equity, safety, environmental issues have been used in maintenance project selection. However, there is not a common base for the applications.