29 February 2016

ProposalICE

Vision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050

making the difference

Rev Originator Approved Date1 Neil Smith/Lucy Howard Jason Martin 29/02/2016

ContactLucy HowardAssociate Director

Turner & Townsend Infrastructure (PM)

7 Savoy CourtStrandLondonWC2R 0EX

t: +44 (0)20 7544 4000e: lucy.howard@turntown.co.uk

© Turner & Townsend Infrastructure (PM). This is a proposal document and does not constitute a contract of engagement with us and in all respects is subject to the negotiation, agreement and signing of a specific contract/letter of engagement.The client names quoted within this proposal are disclosed on a confidential basis. All information in this proposal is released strictly for the purpose of this process and must not be made available or copied or otherwise quoted or referred to in whole or in part in any way, including orally, to any other party without our express written permission and we accept no liability of whatsoever nature for any use by any other party./tt/file_convert/5fbc38dfb512fa0e8356500b/document.docx

Turner & Townsend 2

Contents

Executive summary 4

Q1: Do you agree with our proposed vision and outcomes? What amendments would you propose? 5

Q2: What will the main drivers of demand for UK National economics infrastructure over the next 35 years that we should consider in our assessment? 6

Q3: What will be the main constraints on the UK's ability to provide sufficient UK national economic infrastructure assets and services over the period and what solution and mitigations of those constraints should the UK adopt? 8

Q4: What nationally significant investments in capacity or changes in policy & regulation should we prioritise to deliver these outcomes and deal with the drivers of demand? 11

Q5: In what areas can demand management or other forms of behavioural change make a significant impact? What are the blockers and enablers for realising these opportunities? 13

Q6: How can greater cross sectoral decision making be encouraged? 15

Q7: Opportunities and challenges presented by devolution of infrastructure decision making 16

Q8: What new and emerging technologies and disruptive trends should we consider in producing this assessment? 17

Q9: Improving public engagement in infrastructure decision-making 19

Bibliography 20

Turner & Townsend 3

Executive summaryICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050

Where to invest?Investments in technology need also be made alongside investments in infrastructure assets and services, as this will enable more efficient use of resources; increasing capacity alone will not be sufficient. These investments will, not only need to address the demands of an increasing, ageing and well informed population, but also meet the UK’s sustainability obligations.

Putting in place the right decision making framework and governance structure.At the forefront of decision making the key question should be about delivering “Service Outcomes” to the customer. Key to achieving these outcomes successfully is the Decision Making Framework. It is submitted that a more consistent cross sectoral application of market forces and whole life considerations during the policy, planning and delivery phases will enable these outcomes. This is starting to be realised at Policy level through the work being undertaken by the Interdependency Planning and Management Framework. This however needs to be continued to the development and delivery phases with a single body with responsibility for oversight where there are cross sectoral interdependencies such that we can repeat the successes of London 2012 and the ongoing successful delivery of Crossrail. These two examples also show that where the benefit is clear for all to see, barriers to delivery are more likely to be overcome and the chances of a successful outcome increased.

How do we ensure efficient and affordable outcomes?Once a decision on the “Service Outcome” has been made an effective assessment of the projects complexity is needed. This should also account for the complexity of the project planned and the capability of the public sector and supplier market to deliver them. This in turn should ensure a tender ready pipeline of work is delivered for procurement to the private sector. It is when this is wrong which causes delay and cost increases which generate more work in re-planning and reprioritization. More needs to be done to get the scope and programme right from the start.

Work is also required to embed whole life considerations into the procurement process and ensure adequate incentivisation for innovation in this area. In addition, where whole life project costing is undertaken this will also enable benefits to be better communicated and understood by the public, thereby enhancing the likelihood of success and thereby minimizing the chances of delay in projects coming to market.

Turner & Townsend 4

Q1: Do you agree with our proposed vision and outcomes? What amendments would you propose?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050We agree with the vision, with the addition of technology as underlined below. From the text provided on the web-link we found it useful to distill the further text into the below graphic, culminating in the outcomes. We were then able to agree that the bullet points in each shape provided adequate introductory steer to set about achieving the vision, however we suggest further clarity should be achieved on:

Size/scale/impact of project satisfies the ‘strategic option’ criteria and will be put through any Decision Making Framework, and which projects are deemed to proceed as business as usual.

Responsibilities for implementation of the outcomes and how that will be achieved

Vision: The UK will invest efficiently, affordably and sustainably in the provision of infrastructure assets, technology and services to drive the economic growth necessary to enhance the UK's position in the global economy, support a high quality of life and shift towards a low carbon future.

We also believe that in setting out a vision for 2050, context is key. There may be value in signposting parties to similar exercises that have been / are being carried out in terms of long term infrastructure planning, and how this activity proposes to interact with those.

It would be helpful to frame the planning horizon including major legislative requirements to be met:

Years Planning Horizon Timeframe typified by:

2016-2020 Up to 5 years Workload of projects is somewhat fixed, ability to make an impact is limited2021:2030 5-15 years Opportunities to influence projects which solve immediate problems but are

Turner & Townsend 5

Sectors

TransportEnergyFloodingWasteWaterComms

Goals

Address demands

Incorporating:EfficiencyFlexibilityResiliencyFuture-proofingCross-sector wins

ConstraintsExisting infrastructureSupplyAffordabilityFinance & fundingEnvironmental impactsPublic/political acceptabilityTechnological FeasibilityDeliverability

OptionsProjects which are: Climate mitigating Harnessing technology Changing behaviours Major new investments

Enhanced by options for:Policy/regulation Alternative funding

Outcomes35 year planAchieves goalsAddresses constraintsRecommended optionsNational & localTimely actionAligned policiesInnovatingEconomic Growth

Executive summaryICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050

enablers for the future in significant detail2031-2040 15-25 years Optimum timeframe to implement nationally significant projects given past

experience2041-2050 25-35 years Opportunities to do the groundwork for these projects now (for example by

allocating land to them)

Turner & Townsend 6

Q2: What will the main drivers of demand for UK National economics infrastructure over the next 35 years that we should consider in our assessment?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050Over the last 35 years the UK’s national infrastructure has seen its output volume increase from £1.5 billion per quarter in the 1980s to £3.5 billion per quarter in the current decade (CECA, 2013).1 This coincides with a rise in GDP volume, so whilst the two are interrelated with many drivers, sustaining or increasing infrastructure output supports the UK’s economic future and should be pursued consistently regardless of GDP fluctuations.

Rising & Ageing PopulationRising population fuels the demand for greater infrastructure output with Eurostat (2015)2 predicting the UK will become the largest population in Europe by 2050 reaching a total of 77 million people from 64.1million in 2013. London is one of the first places experiencing this projected increase in population. 2015 saw London overtake its pre-World War 2 total of 8.6 million (Greater London Authority, 2015)3. As the capital grows the infrastructure so does the demand for infrastructure to avoid service interruptions. Cases of infrastructure capacity already being exceeded include frequent unplanned closures of central London Tube stations during peak times and increasing frequency of overflow from the drainage network into the Thames. These should be alleviated by projects such as The Thames Tideway tunnel and Crossrail coming on line. However, experience of building London transport project shows the capacity is quickly absorbed by people changing journey patterns to utilise the new capacity. A shifting demographic due to factors such as historic birth rates and life expectancy increases also mean changes in demand such as in access to medical care.

Industrial & Technological trendsChanges to UK manufacturing affect demand. Importing more goods puts pressure on ports and airports and the transport systems that service them. Previously highly used transport links around manufacturing centres may fall into decline whilst others start to develop elsewhere. Internet shopping uptake puts pressure on the distribution network and roads.

Consumer EffectsAs the ability to deliver more consumer-friendly infrastructure increases, so the demand for this infrastructure grows. This results in increased demand for faster trains, more efficient transport services, and greater reliability in utilities leads to pressure to upgrade systems which had previously met consumer expectations. This is perhaps best demonstrated through the demand for increased reliability and speed of electronic communications delivered using Fibre Optic cabling systems. 35 years ago this technology was in its infancy and homes functioned without computer communications, now lack of access to the internet is taken as an indicator of social deprivation. Whilst communications are made available to the consumer by

Turner & Townsend 7

Q2: What will the main drivers of demand for UK National economics infrastructure over the next 35 years that we should consider in our assessment?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050several different companies the competition to offer the best service, and therefore demand for the infrastructure to support it, remains intense. Another example will be the electricity infrastructure required to support electric vehicles.

The industry is under pressure to increase service levels to customers and end users, with the tolerance of service interruptions ever decreasing. In Rail for example there are many metrics around the reliability of services and the focus on improving these outcomes will only grow. In Water there is a renewed emphasis on customer service levels. Scottish Water Chairman Douglas Millican recently advised “We are in the business of delivering service outcomes for customers. So we don’t start with the presumption that it is an investment answer. The answer might be an operational improvement; it might be working in collaboration with a third party; it might involve land management; or it might be an investment.”

Climate ChangeThe Climate change issue will drive infrastructure demand as new infrastructure is required to meet the challenge of lower carbon emissions, and to tackle the consequences of climate change. Following on from COP2014, held in Paris, the UK government is one of many that have signed up to lower EU emissions by 40% by 2030. The Climate Change Act5 goes further and requires a reduction of 80% on 1990 levels by 2050. Achieving this will necessitate delivering Nuclear New Builds, exploring new approaches such as the tidal lagoon at Swansea, and exploring ways to enhance uptake of existing renewables. The floods of winter 2015 are just the latest reminder that past 1 in a hundred year flood events are becoming increasingly more frequent. There is a need to reassess whether increased flood protection, or new flood resilient communities and infrastructure are required.

Sector Specific Challenges

TransportEnhancing capacity, accessibility and connectivity, energy consumption and journey times. Increased reliability, ability to mitigate impacts of incidents if they do occur and customer focused service levels are required.

Energy

Security and supply: Increasing and diversifying output, reducing reliance on reducing resources, overseas imports.Limiting climate impact: Cleaner technologies, more efficient transmission and usage.The need to address long term questions on sustainability of nuclear generation.Ability to deliver energy upgrades required for other sector projects.

Flooding The need to manage infrastructure resilience to increasing severity of extreme events.Achieving the balance between use of land and flood risk.

Waste Increasing & localising recycling, energy capture, reducing transport of waste

Water Enhancing capacity for water supply and sewage.EU rules on water quality

Communications Enhancing capacity, accessibility and connectivity, speed of connections

Turner & Townsend 8

Q3: What will be the main constraints on the UK's ability to provide sufficient UK national economic infrastructure assets and services over the period and what solution and mitigations of those constraints should the UK adopt?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050Key Constraint 1: Consideration of technological advances within and across sectors when determining infrastructure needs. Strategic investment decisions on long term infrastructure planning have to ensure that the assets planned now are fit for the future. In the immediate planning horizon readiness to respond to upcoming advances is already an issue between sectors. Take for example the ability of the electric grid to support electric vehicle uptake in a transport-energy sector interface. Future interoperability issues must be identified and a timeline agreed that accounts for durations required in areas such as development of supporting legislation (e.g. fully electric vehicles, ERTMS Level 2/3 signaling)

Key Constraint 2: The ability of the public sector to synchronize a ‘tender-ready’ pipeline of work entering the procurement market, with the market’s ability to deliver. This should be done in the way which ensures that current and forecast private capital available can be efficiently employed in infrastructure investment. Public sector procuring authorities must have the relevant skills and expertise to scope up and assess the technical, financial and economic feasibility of infrastructure projects over a 35-year horizon, before the tenders are published in an open market. The market’s ability to deliver can be actively impaired by the lack of visible pipeline, or delays to schemes, as industry is deterred from investing in the latest technology For example proposals by opposition parties before last years’ general election on curtailment of some road schemes were sufficient to rock industry confidence in all of the investment plans.

Private sectors developers are reluctant to invest in projects which may be ill conceived, subject to change or delayed due to political interferences. Having a clear pipeline of feasible work also supports the development of more innovative financing arrangements, paving the way for more schemes to progress simultaneously.

Turner & Townsend 9

Q3: What will be the main constraints on the UK's ability to provide sufficient UK national economic infrastructure assets and services over the period and what solution and mitigations of those constraints should the UK adopt?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050Key Constraint 3: The impact of changing skills gaps on market ability.Developing skills is a long term commitment, which requires strategic cooperation between industry and educational bodies to set out what is required and provide such training in a suitable timeframe. Two primary factors causing this to be a constraint are the need for more/better skilled people, and the number of people forecast to leave the workforce. The National Infrastructure Plan for Skills6 shows that the UK has a rapidly ageing engineering construction (civil engineering trades) workforce. Despite recent increases in the statutory retirement age, construction workers tend to retire earlier than the national average due to either injury or ill health brought on as a result of their work. Skills shortages push up the costs of infrastructure. There is already significant activity by the ICE and other industry bodies to harness childhood enthusiasm for building related toys and banish outdated perceptions with the aim of increasing participation in STEM subjects. This should be supported by efforts to direct participants towards areas where there is a predicted skills deficit, eg. BIM technology, Overhead Line Engineering, with tailored apprenticeships and degree qualifications. However overly-bespoke training should be avoided with improved transferability of skills (e.g. between National Grid overhead linesmen and Network Rail OLE). “Regionally and locally, we need to create a positive brand for construction with powerful campaigns that attract the best talent from a wide pool of people” (“Closing the Industry Gap”, Patricia Moore, Turner & Townsend)7.;

Other constraints to the UK ability to provide sufficient assets and services include:1 Economic and political uncertainty: Factors include oil prices, Brexit, migration/immigration levels,

regulatory changes due to political interferences, constant change around devolving decision making. Planning needs to model the impacts of these.

2 Need for effective planning policy: streamlining consultation and decisions to significantly reduce the time taken from inception to first spade in the ground (See Q9)

3 Optimum financing arrangements and a variety of funding sources: Creation of a national investment bank; allowing for time required to attract funding sources and flexible financing arrangements. Schemes need to deliver economic benefit that attracts private sector investment. For example, the key to Northern Powerhouse and Midland Engine success is to unlock economic growth through infrastructure. Industry needs to be at the forefront of identifying schemes and their economic benefit.

4 Existing Physical Constraints: Population density and land values (scarcity) make infrastructure investment more costly in the UK than almost anywhere else in Europe. Acting now may protect corridors required for 2050.

5 Existing Infrastructure Condition: Working to integrate disparate survey data would address some issues encountered in upgrading ageing and undersized existing infrastructure.

6 Project Execution Expertise / Approach: Constant challenge required to deliver whole life costed, Value for Money investments, with certainty rather than increasing cost. This requires closer integration between the client, the supplier team and the supply chain. Shifting their joint focus from building assets to providing a better customer service, by the application of BIM and digitization, would also achieve efficiencies.

7 The absence of cross-sector alignment as discussed in Response 6, limits the ability of infrastructure projects to assess if their output will meet the ‘sufficient’ criteria.

The chosen Decision Making Framework (DMF) should account for these factors, such that: The changing impact of these constraints is modelled over time Each strategic option is tested for its ability to overcome remaining constraints It is applied consistently within, and across sectors

Turner & Townsend 10

Q3: What will be the main constraints on the UK's ability to provide sufficient UK national economic infrastructure assets and services over the period and what solution and mitigations of those constraints should the UK adopt?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050In using the DMF the ability of the UK public sector procuring authorities to ‘feel the pulse’ of the supplier market and drive it in the way which would meet the national infrastructure delivery needs, should be improved. This includes enabling an effective assessment of the complexity of the projects planned, accounting for capability of the public sector and the supplier market to deliver them and allowing alignment of the delivery strategy for success in a phased way over a 35-year horizon. The Project Initiation Routemap8

below is an example of the concept which could be rolled out across different sectors.

Turner & Townsend 11

Q4: What nationally significant investments in capacity or changes in policy & regulation should we prioritise to deliver these outcomes and deal with the drivers of demand?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050Funding as a % of GDP in nationally critical infrastructure projects (e.g. HS2) should be maintained or increased, while at the same time increasing devolved infrastructure funding for local authorities (or clusters of authorities as in the case of the Northern Powerhouse). All sectors require investment and hence the below aims to highlight particular opportunities to modify existing policy and investment trends:

Transport: (ICE State of the Nation9 included Local Road Networks - ‘At Risk’ status) Policy to incentivise businesses to alleviate daily peaks in

transport demand by changing shift patterns Policy to specify train operators review timetabling upon

franchise renewals to explore options to improve connectivity of rail journeys. A 2014 study10 by Network Rail showed significant reductions in journey times could be achieved by changing timetable planning using principles in use in Switzerland.

This could be co-ordinated with the proposed early delivery of the digital railway (overhauling the signalling system to deliver 40% more capacity on existing infrastructure)11 to avoid timetable disruptions.

Significant investment should then be targeted only where rail journey times remain problematic More investment should be targeted on Local roads maintenance, particularly where public transport is

not economically viable. Devolution should help target investment to local needs.Water: With the introduction of the Water Act 201412 there will already be increased competition in the water

market from 2017, initially for non-domestic users, then water and wastewater services. This has the potential to change the market, so there may be a need to react to these effects.

Flooding: (ICE: ‘Requires attention’ status)

Turner & Townsend 12

Q4: What nationally significant investments in capacity or changes in policy & regulation should we prioritise to deliver these outcomes and deal with the drivers of demand?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050 Policy to ensure impermeable surfaces as a % of total area is reduced through new construction and shift

to Sustainable Drainage Systems SuDS13 within the maintenance cycle. This needs to be targeted at both individuals on a small scale and communities on a medium scale. Similarly changes to farm subsidies to maintain scrubland which reduces run-off in upland areas should be considered.

Policy to place higher burden of responsibility for managing flood risk by design on developers seeking to encroach on previously unused land

Significant investment required in large scale flood protection where communities are at risk, to design new, or retrofit existing infrastructure to manage flooding and/or its effects eg. flood barriers and enhancing resilience of transport links. This should be supported by policy and funding to drive long term consideration of flood risk when designing these schemes, rather than solving the immediately envisaged problem as recent events include relatively new defences being breached.

Waste – (ICE: ‘Requires attention’ status) Significant investment (with private sector input) on major Energy from Waste (EfW) facilities programme

with targets for overall energy production, as several EfW plants have been subject to delays Policy change towards driving the use of ‘electronic duty of care’ (edoc) within infrastructure projects to

manage waste and centrally capture information. This is currently optionalEnergy and carbon agenda – (ICE: ‘Requires attention’ status) Renewed incentivisation policy for energy-saving measures in the home (such as free insulation, boiler

upgrades), business and in transport. Policy change to re-align government subsidies between energy generation options to ensure that the

correct incentives exist to support long term goals. Similarly, examples such as the Wind Energy Network14 demonstrate how initiatives to offer business rate relief, simplified planning rules and special status can incentivise businesses.

Significant investment required in grid infrastructure to ensure that cleaner energy generation, and cleaner technology at the user end (such as electric vehicles) can be supported. Currently the availability of charging points may be limited by local grid capacity.

Significant investment required to build clean energy generating facilities, including Energy from Waste to deliver short term needs, Nuclear where necessary to deliver medium term needs, and renewables for the long term. Requires collaboration with private sector investment.

Cross Party policy alignment to ensure that successive governments are able to proceed with significant infrastructure projects unhindered

Grow UK Green Investment Bank to support UK transition to greener stronger economy.

Turner & Townsend 13

Q5: In what areas can demand management or other forms of behavioural change make a significant impact? What are the blockers and enablers for realising these opportunities?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050A consistent, cautious and joined up application of demand management is needed across all sectors Such that consequences and interdependencies are fully understood, particularly where resources become more constrained. The current situation with the application of demand management across the UK’s existing infrastructure asset base is varied. For example the National Infrastructure Plan 2014 15 coverage of the Strategy for Waste identifies efficiency being market driven, incentivised and utilising tax to influence behavioural change. The Roads strategy however is based on providing more investment, creation of a new publicly owned Strategic Highways company, making the best use of road capacity and taking advantage of technological change to improve the experiences and choices of travellers. The two approaches are very different and are probably driven by public and political acceptability. Care should be taken in quantifying opportunities to demand manage, such that forecasts do not adversely affect the progression of major infrastructure required, such as energy generation projects.

Some opportunities to demand manage using pricing can be taken furtherTaking the road example further, charging road users is being used by devolved authorities e.g. Congestion Charge and Low Emission Zones in London with some success. However a recent study undertaken by ComRes commissioned by business group London First and reported on in the Evening Standard on the 1st February 201616 found that nearly two thirds of adults in the capital believe road congestion has continued to get worse in the last two years, with three quarters thinking it will deteriorate further by 2020. “Faced with such gridlock, 37 per cent back variable road charging for cars on London’s busiest roads — including outside the Congestion Charge zone — provided the money raised is ploughed back into the capital’s transport network.” This suggests that attitudes are beginning to change and indicates that where there is both an appreciation of the need for, and the benefits of, road pricing it may be seen as a palatable solution. This is a relatively simplistic example of effects within the road sector alone and becomes more complicated when cross-sectoral interdependencies require exploration.

Changing behaviours from a traditional cost based approach of investment to one of realising value and beneficiary funding must be acceleratedThere are examples, a PWC report in 201417 showed that over half of the costs of the scheme could be met by London using existing funding mechanisms, such as retaining the Council Tax contribution arrangements that were introduced to help fund the 2012 Olympic Games as well as potentially increasing the Mayoral

Turner & Townsend 14

Q5: In what areas can demand management or other forms of behavioural change make a significant impact? What are the blockers and enablers for realising these opportunities?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Funding from property related developments and from land owners adjacent to the line could also be part of the mix of contributions. Similarly community funding for flood alleviation schemes is also being investigated such as “The Partnership Funding Model”18 which the Environment Agency is pursuing. These however should be expanded to cover the whole life cost impact of assets/infrastructure both in their assessment and consideration for funding options. This behavioural shift should include how the professional infrastructure community do business. The uptake of collaborative forms of contract should be moved to the next level where consideration of whole life impact is considered during a project’s development and parties rewarded for delivering benefit. This requires a standard framework for assessing and accounting for value. This will be addressed for Carbon by the introduction of PAS2080 in May 2016.

Other opportunities to change behaviours in a way that benefits infrastructure demand include.1 Challenging use of existing housing stock: The government have already used the Bedroom Tax to

attempt to maximise utilisation of the existing council housing stock, can this principle be applied to houses in private ownership to further disincentivise under-occupancy as a lifestyle choice? Options include a premium on council tax, where the electoral roll is used to dynamically track occupancy.

2 Changing working patterns to avoid peaks in demand: This could be by physically splitting the workforce and shifting the working day. It compliments existing shifts to flexible working, which need further technological support to gain further buy-in from employees and employers.

3 Using smart metering/fitbit technologies/apps to drive behaviours towards lower consumption: Enabling users to track their consumption of infrastructure and assign a cost that is meaningful to them – whether that be impact to environment, financial cost, time taken for example. Combined further with consideration of incentives to drive behavioural shift such as tax exemptions.

4 Designing for reduced point of use consumption: one-cup kettles, half-flush toilets, as standard.5 Enabling regional bodies to deploy new initiatives from the centre to the regions at increased pace: As an

example – if the ‘Boris Bike’ scheme has had benefits for London, how is this packaged up so that the opportunity for it to be used in regional centres is assessed, invested in, and implemented within the fastest time possible.

6 Ensuring Regulators encourage Whole Life Cost investment in infrastructure on a cross sectoral basis making sure that infrastructure providers deliver best value for society.

Turner & Townsend 15

Q6: How can greater cross sectoral decision making be encouraged?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050The Interdependency Planning and Management Framework (IP&MF)19, initiated by the HM Treasury group Infrastructure UK sets out the core elements, key principles and premise upon which greater cross sectoral decision making could be encouraged. The following link cites ‘The framework has been trialled and developed through a number of [future project] case studies, including High Speed 2 Phase 2, the Northern Line Extension and the Lower Thames Crossing.’

Looking back, the UK can deliver internationally significant projects, with cross-sectoral dependencies, as shown by London Olympics 2012, and the ongoing delivery of Crossrail. However in these cases there is an easily understood objective, clear deadlines of the opening ceremony / first rail service, and political interest to motivate parties and remove blockers to performance. Hence the ability to advance cross-sector developments, say in a particular region, may depend on the ability to give the included projects a shared vision, brand, and significant deadline.

A way must be found to motivate the target audience of ‘policy makers, economists, planners, and engineers’ to follow the IP&MF approach, given much of this detailed activity is constrained within a sector. The government announcement of the ‘Northern Powerhouse’ will be an interesting case requiring works outside the core sector of transport to maximise the benefits achieved for all in terms of efficiency of delivery.

Individual sectors need support from other sectors in planning and executing enabling projects for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) to avoid slow starts. In the case of NSIPs there remains room for improvement where the project exists almost entirely within one sector, and particularly where it is promoted by a developer. Problems arise where these projects need corresponding works from other sectors to enable their project to happen. For example, a nuclear power station needs a rail heading to transport materials without impacting the road network often involving large volumes in enabling works stages. The time between project commencement and needing that rail heading in place can be shorter than Network Rail planning processes can deliver, causing a critical path delay or alternative sub-optimum solution to be found. If each sector were required to set out their ‘must happen’ priorities and the other sectors were required to respond on interdependency issues, these enabling works may at least be factored into long term strategy planning by the enabling party. This could either be achieved by giving co-ordination responsibilities to the UK Regulators Network which oversees all UK Regulatory bodies or separating out the infrastructure delivery oversight and the consumer oversight functions and making the former accountable to the Infrastructure Commission.

At all levels from national to very local the impact of projects on other sectors must be understood, communicated, and priorities and mitigations agreed. This is to avoid problems being shifted from one area of an infrastructure network to another. Understanding how each of the sectors impact upon each other, may enable a priority or ranking system for each of the sectors but this requires an impartial view. On the large scale an expansion at Heathrow may generate additional air capacity, but the additional burden on the surrounding road network and impact on air quality is currently a blocker to progress. Deciding which is more palatable is proving challenging.

Turner & Townsend 16

Q7: Opportunities and challenges presented by devolution of infrastructure decision makingICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050Plans for the decentralisation of powers to regional areas have progressed rapidly since the conservative government won the 2015 election. Government demonstrated a serious and positive commitment to devolution through the devolution bill20. Devolution should extend to a variety of powers, including utilities, transport, housing etc thus helping regions to maximise growth potential.

The Decision Making Framework should reflect levels of devolved decision making, anticipated changes, and encourage maximising the following opportunities when assessing strategic options: Devolved powers mean a greater opportunity to bring benefits to where they are really needed. Local

decision makers may have a more comprehensive understanding of the needs and pressures of their local area. Informed decisions can be made which will make a more tangible impact on that area.

Increased ownership with local communities more engaged and receptive to projects Helping to eradicate the ‘north south divide’, allowing regions to represent themselves, attract spending,

and improve perception that investment is too focused on London Opportunities for local sector and private sector collaboration to deliver high value projects, thus

delivering maximum benefit for the local economy Opportunities for inter-county arrangements strengthen regions and drive ‘larger than local’

infrastructure investment decisions. E.g.: Northern powerhouse. An appropriate example is the challenge of maintaining the road network is a nationally significant issue but can be an easy target for underspending. The State of the Nation report21 graded local transport a D minus. There are lots of opportunities for devolution to make a real difference by prioritising local road networks.

The DMF should aim to assess and mitigate the following risks: Redistribution of power needs to be appropriately led by a centralised government to ensure that the UK

is still working collaboratively to drive economic growth on a national level. Will regions need to create new working arrangements / governance frameworks? This may take time for

the right structure to be implemented. There may need to be a standard framework to ensure consistency in decision making. Central government will need to provide support to regions.

How is decision making regulated? Is there a risk that projects suffer because of local pressure/undue influence on decision makers? Will there be additional layers of bureaucracy? Will this be expensive? Who has overall accountability if something goes wrong?

How will funds be allocated to ensure fair distribution? There is a risk this could cause conflict.

Turner & Townsend 17

Q8: What new and emerging technologies and disruptive trends should we consider in producing this assessment?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050

Local areas need to co-ordinate for projects which cross boundaries such as transport links, roads etc. This is particularly important in flood management where the problem can be moved downstream. Avoiding conflict is key, and inter regional strategies should be encouraged.

Are controversial decisions or very high value projects best placed with regions? Will it depend on the project? Where is the line drawn? Will funding for national or controversial infrastructure projects be set aside i.e.: HS2, Hinkley Point, Crossrail, or will powers be devolved to regions which these projects impact. Not addressing this issue will result in a doubling up rather than achieving the perceived efficiencies.

Q8: What new and emerging technologies and disruptive trends should we consider in producing this assessment?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050Improved Asset Management & Modelling through Big DataData generated during the construction process is accelerating at an ever increasing rate. Smarter data management will be required with consideration around security and adopting the right approach, so it can drive better commercial outcomes on projects.The Internet of Things is a term used to describe an environment in which society’s assets have increasing interconnectivity: i.e. an ever growing number of items within the industry will be able to ‘talk’ to one and other, and will be able to relay this information back to central data analysis centres.

The combination of Big Data, (the ability to cheaply capture and process huge amounts of information) and increased interconnectivity provides a multitude of benefits in accurately predicting failure of assets for planned vs. unplanned maintenance, cost and report management, facilities management, smart buildings, smart infrastructure and in a combination of these aspects Smart Cities, (cities that see significantly reduced energy consumption and cost through high tech infrastructure). Moore’s Law highlights the fact that computing power is increasing year on year, highlighting the importance of ‘e-infrastructure’ moving forwards.

On a large scale this technology will allow infrastructure spending to be optimised by better modelling of the business case, and predicted impacts of schemes. At the small scale real time data will permit monitoring of increasingly smaller components within infrastructure projects. In the delivery stage of projects timescales may also be significantly reduced by more accurate data for analysis facilitating continuous improvement.

Opportunities through increased use of BIM and Augmented Reality (AR) as an integral part of infrastructure planning and constructionCollaboration, enhanced project performance and speedy project delivery are just some of the advantages of utilising BIM on infrastructure projects. Whilst the industry has responded to the 2016 mandate to integrate BIM to level 2 in to all Government construction projects, its use is yet to be commonplace. Realisation of BIM benefits by the wider industry is key to its progression and uptake in both the immediate

Turner & Townsend 18

Q8: What new and emerging technologies and disruptive trends should we consider in producing this assessment?ICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050

and distant future. This will only occur when the business case for it’s use stacks up. The real benefit is likely to be when BIM is used in combination with Whole Life Costing or BIM level 3.

Looking forward, the combination of Augmented Reality (AR) and BIM, will allow designers better communication of design intent, ease of access to information and increase general understanding of the built environment. AR BIM projects are likely to encourage the industry to achieve a widespread higher level of BIM integration, it is becoming increasingly important that legislation provides forward thinking objectives for the industry to achieve.

The Government’s 2016 mandate, although challenging, is on track to be achieved (NBS- National BIM Report 2014)22. The Governments subsequent BIM ‘target’ will act as a vehicle to allow infrastructure projects to be delivered increasingly economically and safely, whilst providing long term value and resilience in infrastructure.

Data Security

Data generated during the construction process is accelerating at an ever increasing rate. Smarter data management will be required with consideration around security and adopting the right approach, so it can drive better commercial outcomes on projects.

Changes to the way we workAs communicative technology advances, we are increasingly able to work collaboratively from remote locations. This may drive a move away from peak travel times, and a more constant flow in and out of our cities, thus altering the way infrastructure is required to operate as day to day working patterns change.

The way in which we use infrastructure can also be influenced through harnessing the power of Social Media and availability of real time information, which will enable people to make better decisions but could also could enhance how assets are used. The Stations as a Service initiative23 is one such example in the Rail Industry through which they are exploring how stations might service a greater purpose than just places to board and alight trains.

In addition to this, the way in which we travel is likely to change, with a move away from cars, to trains and mass modes of transports. It is unclear how this area will develop but it is clear that technological strategies are adaptable and flexible with regards to the way these technologies advance. This however will also see a change in the demand on other infrastructure assets which will also need to be considered.

Turner & Townsend 19

Q9: Improving public engagement in infrastructure decision-makingICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050There needs to be an improvement in communication between the developer and public both locally and nationally in infrastructure decision-making. This will help not only to avoid project delays at the point of delivery but to increase public buy-in to projects before their inception. The public needs to realise the value great infrastructure provides society. Whilst annual rail fare rises beyond RPI frustrate commuters this can be mitigated by education and information on how that money is spent to solve long term issues, as the benefits of solving those issues are often not perceived.

Existing processes and procedures for public engagement have been viewed distant, dated and require improvement. In order to improve public engagement the method has to be suited and designed for the project. If the process does not fit then the developers will struggle in obtaining critical information but also the public will lose ownership and challenge the engagement processes inciting delays and additional costs. The use of technology can aid in this process by making consultation more available and interactive.

Quality of engagement in early decision-making. Is there enough attention directed to the local and national population in not only the developer’s decision-making but government strategy planning? The level of engagement should not be entirely considered on the developer’s decision making but at a strategic level when plans and schemes are being developed. The level of information to the developer would be enhanced, producing more suitable projects with a reduced likelihood of delay from appeals and reviews.

Even at manifesto stage the New Anglia Green Economy for Norfolk and Suffolk24 recognised the importance of effective communication in delivering infrastructure schemes and identified it as one of the 5 objectives key to its future success. They proposed to measure this by requiring more than 50% of respondents to a public poll to have heard of and understand their place in the green economy: Other infrastructure schemes could also adopt this approach.

Streamlining the availability, and ease of interpretation, of project information There has been criticism of current processes of consultation using a series of extensive documentation. Modern technology is sufficient to improve the process of engagement from the earliest stages of a project. Through technologies availability and capability, the public awareness levels can be enhanced and the decision-making process improved. Diane Beddoes, Chief Executive at Dialogue by Design25 has discussed using technology beyond digital documents to using modelling tools which can map and detail the consequences of developers electing one choice over another. This could be extended to show ideas and issues from targeted audiences whilst offering the wider public an opportunity to express opinion in an open and clear format.

Standardising Communications between Developers & the Public through one consistent channelPresenting the benefits from infrastructure developments rather than focusing on the costs to the individual will improve the levels of public engagement and satisfaction. A public body could be created which seeks to distil the thoughts and views from the public and express them in a structured way. Either way, an

Turner & Townsend 20

BibliographyICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050

improvement in public dialogue is necessary in facilitating the communication barriers between the developers and public. This body should be utilised at a strategic level of decision making when schemes and plans are being developed and thought-out.

BibliographyICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050For Question 2:CECA. (2013). Securing our Economy: The Case for Infrastructure. London: Cebr.

Eurostat. (2015, September 28). Population Projections. Retrieved from Ec.Europa:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tps00002&plugin=1

Greater London Authority. (2015). Population Growth in London. GLA Intelligence, 5.

For Question 3:(https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-infrastructure-plan-for-skills)

(“Closing the Industry Gap”, Patricia Moore, Turner & Townsend). (http://turnerandtownsend.cld.bz/360-06#14);

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/improving-infrastructure-delivery-project-initiation-routemap

For Question 4:Institution of Civil Engineers, 2014, State of the Nation: Infrastructure 2014.

https://www.ice.org.uk/media-and-policy/policy/state-of-the-nation-infrastructure-2014

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term.../improving-connectivity.pdf

http://digitalrailway.co.uk/

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/21/contents/enacted

Ciria, Open Space, Flood Risk Management. Available at < http://www.opengreenspace.com/opportunities-and-challenges/climate-change/flood-management/>

http://www.windenergynetwork.co.uk/enhanced-entries/great-yarmouth-borough-council/

For Question 5:HM Treasury, 2015, National Infrastructure Pipeline factsheet. Available at <

Turner & Townsend 21

BibliographyICEVision for UK Infrastructure and Deliverables to 2050

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-infrastructure-pipeline-july-2015/national-infrastructure-pipeline-factsheet-july-2015>

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-variable-charging-will-help-tackle-gridlock-a3169941.html

https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2014/november/funding-and-financing-options-for-crossrail-2

http://www.eacg.org.uk/default_partnership_funding.asp

For question 7: (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/eng-systems-centre/research/researchhighlights/interdependencyplanning.html<http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2015-16/citiesandlocalgovernmentdevolution.html>

Institution of Civil Engineers, 2014, State of the Nation: Infrastructure 2014

For Question 8:https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/nbs-national-bim-report-2014

Stations of the Future, Rail Engineer, January 2016 pg 38-42

For Question 9:http://www.newanglia.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Green-Economy-Manifesto.pdf

Infrastructure and the Citizen, A Dialogue by Design and UCL Transport Institute policy paper, Dialogue by Design, (2015)

Turner & Townsend 22