Building public policy on shifting sands: the case of the National Asset Management Agency

Over the last thirty years, there has been an increased demand for better management of public sector organisations (PSOs). This requires that they are answerable for the inputs that they are given but also for what they achieve with these inputs (Hood 1991; Hood 1995). It is suggested that this will improve the management of the organisation through better planning and control, and the achievement of greater accountability (Smith 1995). However, such a rational approach with clear goals and the means to measure achievement can cause difficulties for many PSOs. These difficulties include the distinctive nature of the public sector due to the political environment within which the public sector manager operates (Stewart and Walsh 1992) and the fact that PSOs will have many stakeholders, each of whom will have their own specific objectives based on their own perspective (Boyle 1995). This can
result in goal ambiguity which means that there is leeway in interpreting the results of the PSO. The National Asset Management Agency (NAMA) was set up to bring stability to the financial system by buying loans from the banks (which were in most cases, non-performing loans). The intention was to cleanse the banks of these loans so that they could return to their normal business of taking deposits and making loans. However, the legislation, also gave NAMA a wide range of other responsibilities including responsibility for facilitating credit in the economy and protecting the interests of taxpayers. In more recent times, NAMA has been given responsibility for building social housing. This wide-range of activities is a clear example of a PSO being given multiple goals which may conflict and is therefore likely to lead to goal ambiguity. This makes it very difficult to evaluate NAMA’s performance as they are attempting to meet numerous goals at the same time and also highlights the complexity of policy making in the public sector. The purpose of this paper is to examine how NAMA dealt with goal ambiguity. This will be done through a thematic analysis of its annual reports over the last five years. The paper’s will contribute to the ongoing debate about the evaluation of PSOs and the complex environment within which they operate which makes evaluation difficult as they are
answerable to multiple stakeholders who have different objectives and different criteria for measuring success.

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.

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.

BIM for sustainable whole-of-life transport infrastructure asset management

The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) showed that, in 2004, owners and operations managers bore two thirds of the total industry cost burden from inadequate interoperability in construction projects from inception to operation, amounting to USD10.6 billion. Building Information Modelling (BIM) and similar tools were identified by Engineers Australia in 2005 as potential instruments to significantly reduce this sum, which in Australia could amount to total industry-wide cost burden of AUD12 billion. Public sector road authorities in Australia have a key responsibility in driving initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the construction and operations of transport infrastructure. However, as previous research has shown the Environmental Impact Assessment process, typically used for project approvals and permitting based on project designs available at the consent stage, lacks Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that include long-term impact factors and transfer of information throughout the project life cycle. In the building construction industry, BIM is widely used to model sustainability KPIs such as energy consumption, and integrated with facility management systems. This paper proposes that a similar use of BIM in early design phases of transport infrastructure could provide: (i) productivity gains through improved interoperability and documentation; (ii) the opportunity to carry out detailed cost-benefit analyses leading to significant operational cost savings; (iii) coordinated planning of street and highway lighting with other energy and environmental considerations; iv) measurable KPIs that include long-term impact factors which are transferable throughout the project life cycle; and (v) the opportunity for integrating design documentation with sustainability whole-of-life targets.

Asset management policies and guidelines of different states in Australia : a comparative analysis

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare the asset management policies and practices of six Australian states – New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania – to improve understanding of the policy context to best shape policy focus and guidelines. Australian state-wide asset management policies and guidelines are an emergent policy domain, generating a substantial body of knowledge. However, these documents are spread across the layers of government and are therefore largely fragmented and lack coherency. Design/methodology/approach The comparative study is based on the thematic mapping technique using the Leximancer software. Findings Asset management policies and guidelines of New South Wales and Victoria have more interconnected themes as compared to other states in Australia. Moreover, based on the findings, New South Wales has covered most of the key concepts in relation to asset management; the remaining five states are yet to develop a comprehensive and integrated approach to asset management policies and guidelines. Research limitations/implications This review and its findings have provided a number of directions on which government policies can now be better constructed and assessed. In doing so, the paper contributes to a coherent way forward to satisfy national emergent and ongoing asset management challenges. This paper outlines a rigorous analytical methodology to inform specific policy changes. Originality/value This paper provides a basis for further research focused on analyzing the context and processes of asset management guidelines and policies.

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.

Roadway safety hardware asset management systems case studies /

"HRDS-06/10-05(1M)E"--P. [4] of cover.

The politics of establishing catchment management agencies in South Africa: the case of the Breede-Overberg Catchment Management Agency

We reflect on the politics of establishing catchment management agencies in South Africa with a specific focus on the Breede-Overberg Catchment Management Agency (BOCMA), which was recently replaced by the Breede-Gouritz Catchment Management Agency (BGCMA). We do so by applying the framework of adaptive comanagement and its institutional prescriptions: collaboration, experimentation, and a bioregional approach. We start by introducing the history of this catchment management agency (CMA) and then describe the establishment of CMAs in South Africa in general and that of BOCMA in particular. We follow the framework for rule types and types of river basin organizations set out by the editors of this special feature with reference to adaptive comanagement where applicable. We then discuss the politics and strategies involved in the introduction of the CMA concept to the National Water Act and the latest developments around these institutions in South Africa. This is followed by reflections on what can be surmised about BOCMA’s democratic functioning and performance to date. We conclude by reflecting on the future of operations of the new BGCMA and CMAs in South Africa in general. While our research shows that BOCMA’s establishment process has featured several elements of adaptive comanagement and its institutional prescriptions, it remains to be seen to what extent it is possible to continue implementing this concept when further developing and operationalizing the BGCMA and the country’s other CMAs.