Achieving better stewardship of major infrastructure assets through configuration of governance arrangements utilising Stewardship Theory

Major infrastructure assets are often governed by a mix of public and private organizations, each fulfilling a specific and separate role i.e. policy, ownership, operation or maintenance. This mix of entities is a legacy of Public Choice Theory influenced NPM reforms of the late 20th century. The privatization of the public sector has resulted in agency theory based ‘self-interest’ relationships and governance arrangements for major infrastructure assets which emphasize economic efficiency but which do not do not advance non-economic public values and the collective Public Interest. The community is now requiring that governments fulfill their stewardship role of also satisfying non-economic public values such as sustainability and intergenerational responsibility. In the 21st century governance arrangements which minimize individual self-interest alone and look to also pursue the interests of other stakeholders have emerged. Relational contracts, Public-Private Partnerships (PPP’s) and hybrid mixes of organizations from the state, market and network modes (Keast et al 2006) provide options for governance which better meet the interests of contractors, government and the community there is emerging a body of research which extends the consideration of the immediate governance configuration to the metagovernance environment constituted by hierarchy, regulation, industry standards, trust, culture and values. Stewardship theory has reemerged as a valuable aid in the understanding of the features of governance configurations which establish relationships between principal and agent which maximize the agent acting in the interests of the principal, even to the detriment of the agent. This body of literature suggests that an improved stewardship outcome from infrastructure governance configurations can be achieved by the application of the emerging options as to the immediate governance configuration, and the surrounding metagovernance environment. Stewardship theory provides a framework for the design of the relationships within that total governance environment, focusing on the achievement of a better, complete stewardship outcome. This paper explores the directions future research might take in seeking to improve the understanding of the design of the governance of major, critical infrastructure assets.

Sustainable infrastructure assets : capability for infrastructure capacity management

Building for a sustainable environment requires sustainable infrastructure assets. Infrastructure capacity management is the process of ensuring optimal provision of such infrastructure assets. Effectiveness in this process will enable the infrastructure asset owners and its stakeholders to receive full value on their investment. Business 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 limited access to resources, the challenge for infrastructure organisations is to identify and develop core capabilities to enable infrastructure capacity management. This chapter explores the concept of capability and identifies the core capability needed in infrastructure capacity management. Through a case study of the Port of Brisbane, this chapter shows that infrastructure organisations must develop their intelligence gathering capability to effectively manage the capacity of their infrastructure assets.

Effectiveness of constructability concept in the provision of infrastructure assets

The concept of constructability is to use construction knowledge and experience during all phases of a project, particularly in the earliest phases of planning and design. It facilitates project objectives before delivery stage, and decreases unnecessary costs during construction phase. Despite the extensive use, constructability concept fails to address many issues related to Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of construction projects. Extending constructability concept, to include the O&M issues, could lead to the projects that are not fitted for construction purposes only, but also fitted for use. This study reviews the literature of constructability implementation, its benefits and shortcomings during the infrastructure life cycle, as well as the delivery success factors of infrastructure projects. This contributes to the propose need of a model to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of infrastructure project by extending the concept of constructability to include O&M. Development of such a model can facilitate post-occupancy stakeholders’ participation in a constructability program. It will help infrastructure owners eliminate project reworks, and improve O&M effectiveness and efficiency.

Compensation of unmodeled aircraft dynamics in airborne inspection of linear infrastructure assets

Fixed-wing aircraft equipped with downward pointing cameras and/or LiDAR can be used for inspecting approximately piecewise linear assets such as oil-gas pipelines, roads and power-lines. Automatic control of such aircraft is important from a productivity and safety point of view (long periods of precision manual flight at low-altitude is not considered reasonable from a safety perspective). This paper investigates the effect of any unwanted coupling between guidance and autopilot loops (typically caused by unmodeled delays in the aircraft’s response), and the specific impact of any unwanted dynamics on the performance of aircraft undertaking inspection of piecewise linear corridor assets (such as powerlines). Simulation studies and experimental flight tests are used to demonstrate the benefits of a simple compensator in mitigating the unwanted lateral oscillatory behaviour (or coupling) that is caused by unmodeled time constants in the aircraft dynamics.

Investment incentives and valuation of power sector infrastructure assets with increasing interconnection, intermittency and decarbonisation

This dissertation applies a variety of quantitative methods to electricity and carbon market data, utility company accounts data, capital and operating costs to analyse some of the challenges associated with investment in energy assets. In particular, three distinct research topics are analysed within this general theme: the efficiency of interconnector trading, the optimal sizing of intermittent wind facilities and the impact of carbon pricing on the cost of capital for investors are researched in successive sections.

Introducing sustainability assessment to civil infrastructure projects & assets

Civil infrastructure plays a key role in supporting and improving current way of life. However, the assets can have a large impact on the region around them, which are both positive (usually for the purpose they are built) and negative (consequences and unintended effects). There is an increasing trend for society to place an importance on the role of sustainability to ensure that there is a world suitable for future generations. In order to ensure that the world for future generations is in the best possible condition it is increasingly important to look at integrating sustainability outcomes into the way industry operates, including the infrastructure industry. It is therefore important to undertake sustainability assessment of civil infrastructure projects. By having organisations take on sustainability assessments of civil infrastructure assets both during construction and in operation, the industry can assist to drive outcomes and results that will benefit society and future generations and make their own operations more efficient.

Investment decision framework for infrastructure asset management: a probability-based approach

Australia’s civil infrastructure assets of roads, bridges, railways, buildings and other structures are worth billions of dollars. Road assets alone are valued at around A$ 140 billion. As the condition of assets deteriorate over time, close to A$10 billion is spent annually in asset maintenance on Australia's roads, or the equivalent of A$27 million per day. To effectively manage road infrastructures, firstly, road agencies need to optimise the expenditure for asset data collection, but at the same time, not jeopardise the reliability in using the optimised data to predict maintenance and rehabilitation costs. Secondly, road agencies need to accurately predict the deterioration rates of infrastructures to reflect local conditions so that the budget estimates could be accurately estimated. And finally, the prediction of budgets for maintenance and rehabilitation must provide a certain degree of reliability. A procedure for assessing investment decision for road asset management has been developed. The procedure includes: • A methodology for optimising asset data collection; • A methodology for calibrating deterioration prediction models; • A methodology for assessing risk-adjusted estimates for life-cycle cost estimates. • A decision framework in the form of risk map

Review on Australian and international practices for asset management in building infrastructure

Both in developed and developing economies, major public funding is invested in civil infrastructure assets. Efficiency and comfort level of expected and demanded living standards are largely dependant on the management strategies of these assets. Buildings are one of the major & vital assets, which need to be maintained primarily to ensure its functionality by effective & efficient delivery of services and to optimize economic benefits. Not withstanding, public building infrastructure is not considered in Infrastructure report card published by Australian Infrastructure Report Card Alliance Partners (2001). The reason appears to be not having enough data to rate public building infrastructure. American Infrastructure Report Card (2001) gave “School Buildings” ‘d-’ rating, which is below ‘poor’. For effective asset management of building infrastructure, a need emerged to optimise the budget for managing assets, to cope up with increased user expectations, to response effectively to possible asset failures, to deal with ageing of assets and aging populations and to treat other scenarios including technology advancement and non-asset solutions. John (Asset Management, 2001) suggests that in the area of asset management worldwide, UK, Australia and New Zealand are leading.

Investment decision-making under risk (reliability) and uncertainty for infrastructure asset management

Risks and uncertainties are inevitable in engineering projects and infrastructure investments. Decisions about investment in infrastructure such as for maintenance, rehabilitation and construction works can pose risks, and may generate significant impacts on social, cultural, environmental and other related issues. This report presents the results of a literature review of current practice in identifying, quantifying and managing risks and predicting impacts as part of the planning and assessment process for infrastructure investment proposals. In assessing proposals for investment in infrastructure, it is necessary to consider social, cultural and environmental risks and impacts to the overall community, as well as financial risks to the investor. The report defines and explains the concept of risk and uncertainty, and describes the three main methodology approaches to the analysis of risk and uncertainty in investment planning for infrastructure, viz examining a range of scenarios or options, sensitivity analysis, and a statistical probability approach, listed here in order of increasing merit and complexity. Forecasts of costs, benefits and community impacts of infrastructure are recognised as central aspects of developing and assessing investment proposals. Increasingly complex modelling techniques are being used for investment evaluation. The literature review identified forecasting errors as the major cause of risk. The report contains a summary of the broad nature of decision-making tools used by governments and other organisations in Australia, New Zealand, Europe and North America, and shows their overall approach to risk assessment in assessing public infrastructure proposals. While there are established techniques to quantify financial and economic risks, quantification is far less developed for political, social and environmental risks and impacts. The report contains a summary of the broad nature of decision-making tools used by governments and other organisations in Australia, New Zealand, Europe and North America, and shows their overall approach to risk assessment in assessing public infrastructure proposals. While there are established techniques to quantify financial and economic risks, quantification is far less developed for political, social and environmental risks and impacts. For risks that cannot be readily quantified, assessment techniques commonly include classification or rating systems for likelihood and consequence. The report outlines the system used by the Australian Defence Organisation and in the Australian Standard on risk management. After each risk is identified and quantified or rated, consideration can be given to reducing the risk, and managing any remaining risk as part of the scope of the project. The literature review identified use of risk mapping techniques by a North American chemical company and by the Australian Defence Organisation. This literature review has enabled a risk assessment strategy to be developed, and will underpin an examination of the feasibility of developing a risk assessment capability using a probability approach.

Building infrastructure asset management : Australian practices

Generally, major public funding is invested in civil infrastructure assets. The efficiency and comfort level of expected and actual living standards is largely dependant on the management strategies of these assets. Buildings are one of the major & vital assets, which need to be maintained primarily to ensure their functionality by effective & efficient delivery of services and to optimise economic benefits. In Australia, billions of dollars are spent annually managing and maintaining built assets. These assets make up the social and economic infrastructure, which facilitate the essential services to public and business. Buildings are one of the prime & fundamental assets, which need to be managed effectively and efficiently to ensure that related services are delivered economically and sustainably

Capabilities for strategic infrastructure asset management

Infrastructure organisations are operating in an increasingly challenging business environment as a result of globalisation, privatisation and deregulation. Under such circumstances, asset managers need to manage their infrastructure assets effectively in order to contribute to the overall performance of their organisation. In an external business environment that is constantly changing, extant literature on strategic management advocates a resourced--�]based view (RBV) approach that focuses on factors internal to the organisation such as resources and capabilities to sustain organisation performance. The aim of this study is to explore the core capabilities needed in the management of infrastructure assets. Using a multiple case study research strategy focusing on transport infrastructure, this research firstly examines the goals of infrastructure asset management and their alignment with broader corporate goals of an infrastructure organisation. It then examines the strategic infrastructure asset management processes that are needed to achieve these goals. The core capabilities that can support the strategic infrastructure asset management processes are then identified. This research produced a number of findings. First, it provided empirical evidence that asset management goals are being pursued with the aim of supporting the broader business goals of infrastructure organisations. Second, through synthesising the key asset management processes deemed necessary to achieve the asset management goals, a strategic infrastructure asset management model is proposed. Third, it identified five core capabilities namely stakeholder connectivity, cross-functional, relational, technology absorptive and integrated information management 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.

Strategic infrastructure asset management : a conceptual framework to identify capabilities

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework that can be used to identify capabilities needed in the management of infrastructure assets. Design/methodology/approach – This paper utilises a qualitative approach to analyse secondary data in order to develop a conceptual framework that identifies capabilities for strategic infrastructure asset management. Findings – In an external business environment that is undergoing rapid change, it is more appropriate to focus on factors internal to the organisation such as resources and capabilities as a basis to develop competitive advantage. However, there is currently very little understanding of the internal capabilities that are appropriate for infrastructure asset management. Therefore, a conceptual framework is needful to guide infrastructure organisations in the identification of capabilities. Research limitations/implications – This is a conceptual paper and future empirical research should be conducted to validate the propositions made in the paper. Practical implications – The paper clearly argues the need for infrastructure organisations to adopt a systematic approach to identifying the capabilities needed in the management of strategic infrastructure assets. The discussion on the impact of essential capabilities is useful in providing the impetus for managers who operate in a deregulated infrastructure business landscape to review their existing strategies. Originality/value – The paper provides a new perspective on how asset managers can create value for their organisations by investing in the relevant capabilities.

A process for the management of physical infrastructure

Physical infrastructure assets are important components of our society and our economy. They are usually designed to last for many years, are expected to be heavily used during their lifetime, carry considerable load, and are exposed to the natural environment. They are also normally major structures, and therefore present a heavy investment, requiring constant management over their life cycle to ensure that they perform as required by their owners and users. Given a complex and varied infrastructure life cycle, constraints on available resources, and continuing requirements for effectiveness and efficiency, good management of infrastructure is important. While there is often no one best management approach, the choice of options is improved by better identification and analysis of the issues, by the ability to prioritise objectives, and by a scientific approach to the analysis process. The abilities to better understand the effect of inputs in the infrastructure life cycle on results, to minimise uncertainty, and to better evaluate the effect of decisions in a complex environment, are important in allocating scarce resources and making sound decisions. Through the development of an infrastructure management modelling and analysis methodology, this thesis provides a process that assists the infrastructure manager in the analysis, prioritisation and decision making process. This is achieved through the use of practical, relatively simple tools, integrated in a modular flexible framework that aims to provide an understanding of the interactions and issues in the infrastructure management process. The methodology uses a combination of flowcharting and analysis techniques. It first charts the infrastructure management process and its underlying infrastructure life cycle through the time interaction diagram, a graphical flowcharting methodology that is an extension of methodologies for modelling data flows in information systems. This process divides the infrastructure management process over time into self contained modules that are based on a particular set of activities, the information flows between which are defined by the interfaces and relationships between them. The modular approach also permits more detailed analysis, or aggregation, as the case may be. It also forms the basis of ext~nding the infrastructure modelling and analysis process to infrastructure networks, through using individual infrastructure assets and their related projects as the basis of the network analysis process. It is recognised that the infrastructure manager is required to meet, and balance, a number of different objectives, and therefore a number of high level outcome goals for the infrastructure management process have been developed, based on common purpose or measurement scales. These goals form the basis of classifYing the larger set of multiple objectives for analysis purposes. A two stage approach that rationalises then weights objectives, using a paired comparison process, ensures that the objectives required to be met are both kept to the minimum number required and are fairly weighted. Qualitative variables are incorporated into the weighting and scoring process, utility functions being proposed where there is risk, or a trade-off situation applies. Variability is considered important in the infrastructure life cycle, the approach used being based on analytical principles but incorporating randomness in variables where required. The modular design of the process permits alternative processes to be used within particular modules, if this is considered a more appropriate way of analysis, provided boundary conditions and requirements for linkages to other modules, are met. Development and use of the methodology has highlighted a number of infrastructure life cycle issues, including data and information aspects, and consequences of change over the life cycle, as well as variability and the other matters discussed above. It has also highlighted the requirement to use judgment where required, and for organisations that own and manage infrastructure to retain intellectual knowledge regarding that infrastructure. It is considered that the methodology discussed in this thesis, which to the author's knowledge has not been developed elsewhere, may be used for the analysis of alternatives, planning, prioritisation of a number of projects, and identification of the principal issues in the infrastructure life cycle.