In recent years, the delivery of major infrastructure projects has been plagued by spiralling costs, stop-start decision making and public apathy. Sam Gould, director of policy and external affairs at the Institution of Civil Engineers, examines what needs to change
For many years, infrastructure supply chains and investors have asked for a stable, long-term plan for delivery from government. This year, the UK government answered that call with an ambitious 10-year Infrastructure Strategy, a Modern Industrial Strategy and a new online pipeline tool.
These publications mark a shift in this Parliament from planning to delivery. The pressure is now on to demonstrate progress by the next election (expected in 2029). The success of the aforementioned strategies will depend on the capacity of the infrastructure ecosystem to respond.
Overcoming barriers to infrastructure delivery
The 10-year strategy outlines a huge increase in new infrastructure over the next decade. The scale isn’t fully understood yet and there’s a lingering concern that the government may have underestimated the barriers the supply chain faces.
The Institution of Civil Engineers is exploring what those barriers are – and the policy options that could help overcome them.
Our recent paper, Why Do Major Projects Take So Long and Cost So Much?, examined how projects can be delivered faster, for less money. Its recommendations included aggregating assurance evaluation data, establishing a roving delivery unit in government to support public bodies, and more meaningful engagement with the public about infrastructure projects.
We’re also looking at what needs to happen in the wider infrastructure ecosystem. Confidence among investors and companies in the supply chain remains low after decades of uncertainty arising from delayed decisions, stop-start funding and cancelled projects.
Challenges include vulnerable domestic and global supply chains, skills gaps, planning delays and wary investors.
We recently hosted a panel event with infrastructure leaders to explore these topics and several themes emerged from the discussion:
- The importance of collaboration and strategic relationships.
- The need to boost productivity as well as growing the workforce.
- How rationalising – rather than merely speeding up – planning can achieve better outcomes.
- Why making the most of the infrastructure we already have should be a much greater priority.
Collaboration is key
First, collaboration. The 10-year strategy and the increased volume of work should encourage more long-term strategic relationships between contractors and suppliers and the use of enterprise-based models, like Project 13.
These approaches could reduce costs associated with one-off purchases and annual bidding processes and inefficiencies arising from the UK’s fragmented construction sector.
We’ve heard about positive examples of this already. In the energy sector, the Great Grid Upgrade is benefiting from the alignment between the government, the regulator and network companies.
Collaboration should extend to how risk is shared between the public and private sector. The Thames Tideway sewer project showed how transparent and appropriate risk sharing between government and the private sector can lower costs – for project delivery and ultimately on customer bills.
Closing the skills gap
Second, skills and productivity. While the government has promised more investment to increase the workforce, it’s unlikely to be enough to meet expected demand in construction and engineering. The UK also faces a shortage of leaders capable of overseeing the many complex major projects and programmes ahead.
More early careers engagement to inspire young people can help close skills gaps in the longer-term. In the shorter-term, reconsidering immigration restrictions may be one option.
But the UK won’t be able to deliver on its infrastructure ambitions without a much bigger focus on improving productivity and innovation in the supply chain, for example through more offsite construction.
Rationalising the planning system
Third, planning. There’s been much talk about speeding up planning decisions through the government’s Planning & Infrastructure Bill. However, it’s still unclear how effective
the legislation will be and concerns remain about potential compromises to environmental protections.
A greater focus on rationalising the system, ensuring it is well-coordinated and properly resourced, will also help deliver better outcomes. For example, the Infrastructure Client Group is exploring how better data sharing, integration and collaboration can enable solutions to be repeated across programmes.
More early and meaningful engagement with the public, emphasising a clear narrative and the whole-life benefits of infrastructure projects – like social mobility and economic
growth – can build support, reduce delays and lower costs.
Finally, we shouldn’t overlook that the UK already has most of the infrastructure it will use in the coming decades. But historically, government and industry have been poor at considering the upsides of investing in that infrastructure – and the downsides of not doing so.
Maintaining and upgrading those assets is increasingly urgent in the face of climate change and other risks. Properly maintaining existing assets will lessen the need for new infrastructure.
In our panel discussion, it was noted that Private Finance Initiatives used to incentivise infrastructure owners and operators to take a whole-of-life approach to their assets. That type of long-term thinking needs to be at forefront of decision-making as we embark on delivering a new infrastructure strategy.
We’re keen to hear further views on these topics. To share your views please contact us at policy@ice.org.uk.
The post Turning up the dial on infrastructure delivery appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
