A presentation conducted by Ms Kate Young, Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford. Presented on Tuesday the 1st of October 2013. Evaluation of potential infrastructure projects varies from straightforward financial assessment, to explicit methods requiring multi-criteria valuation and uncertainty analysis. All, however, are siloed to their own sector and in many cases the stand-alone project under consideration, ignoring the growing interdependence between the sectors. Reviewing outputs of current assessment methods against the London ‘Thames Hub’ proposal, we develop these into a multi-sector, multi-attribute decision analysis over a 100 year time-frame. Uncertainty is assessed through sensitivity analysis, provisioning time-dependency analysis and an adapted real options analysis, to produce bounded valuation of decision pathways. Further consideration of spatial feedbacks is then reviewed through a land-use transport model. The results are brought together to demonstrate a strategy level, integrated infrastructure assessment methodology, focused on delivering long-term resilience despite uncertainty.

1. ENDORSING PARTNERS
Strategic Appraisal of
Interdependent Infrastructure
Provision:
A Case Study from the
www.isngi.org
Thames Hub
The following are confirmed contributors to the business and policy dialogue in Sydney:
•
Rick Sawers (National Australia Bank)
•
Nick Greiner (Chairman (Infrastructure NSW)
Monday, 30th September 2013: Business & policy Dialogue
Tuesday 1 October to Thursday, 3rd October: Academic and Policy
Dialogue
Presented by: Ms Kate Young, Environmental Change Institute,
University of Oxford
www.isngi.org

2. Strategic Appraisal of Interdependent
Infrastructure Provision:
A Case Study from the Thames Hub
Kate Young and Jim Hall
Environmental Change Institute
University of Oxford

3. Appraisal
“The acquisition of information to aid a process of
rational decision-making and resource allocation”
(Townley, 1992), conducted to maximise utility for a
given level of resource.
Infrastructure Appraisal:
• Multiple stakeholders and priorities
• Substantial impacts in a number of domains
• Decadal lifetimes (impacts and uncertainty)
• Factors may not be monetisable or even
quantifiable

4. UK Infrastructure Appraisal
Opportunity
Identification

5. UK Infrastructure Appraisal
Regulations &
Investment
Policy
Opportunity
Identification
Objective
Setting

6. UK Infrastructure Appraisal
Regulations &
Investment
Policy
Opportunity
Identification
Timeframe &
Change
Assumptions
Objective
Setting
Option
Generation

7. UK Infrastructure Appraisal
Regulations &
Investment
Policy
Opportunity
Identification
Timeframe &
Change
Assumptions
KPI, Method,
Uncertainty
Analyses
Objective
Setting
Option
Generation
Option
Appraisal

8. UK Infrastructure Appraisal
Regulations &
Investment
Policy
Opportunity
Identification
Timeframe &
Change
Assumptions
KPI, Method,
Uncertainty
Analyses
Objective
Setting
Option
Generation
Option
Appraisal
Choice and
Implement’n

9. UK Infrastructure Appraisal
Benefit:
• Do minimum is more obvious
• Solutions are more comparable and more
straightforward to analyse (less impacts)
• Limits required skill set and experience of
analyst
• Limits complexity of solution and thus eases
Opportunity
Objective
Option
Choice
Option
communication of options to stakeholdersand
Identification
Setting
Generation
Implement’n
Appraisal
Regulations &
Investment
Policy
Timeframe &
Change
Assumptions
KPI, Method,
Uncertainty
Analyses

10. Adding Interdependency

11. Adding Interdependency

12. Regulations &&
Regulations
Regulations
Investment & &
Regulations
Investment
Investment
Policy
Investment
Policy
Policy
Policy
Opportunity
Opportunity
Opportunity
Identification
Opportunity
Identification
Identification
Identification
Timeframe &&
Timeframe &
Timeframe &
Change
Timeframe
Change
Change
Assumptions
Change
Assumptions
Assumptions
Assumptions
KPI, Method,
KPI, Method,
KPI, Method,
Uncertainty
KPI, Method,
Uncertainty
Uncertainty
Analyses
Uncertainty
Analyses
Analyses
Analyses
Objective
Objective
Objective
Setting
Objective
Setting
Setting
Setting
Option
Option
Option
Generation
Option
Generation
Generation
Generation
Option
Option
Option
Appraisal
Option
Appraisal
Appraisal
Appraisal
Choice and
Choice and
Choice and
Implement’n and
Choice
Implement’n
Implement’n
Implement’n

13. Problem:
• Conceals resource constraints
• Ignores benefits
– Efficiencies through industrial symbiosis
– Macro-scale impacts from complementary
systems (Bannister & Berechman, 2003)
• Ignores direct (and indirect) demand on
other sectors
Regulations &&
Regulations
Regulations
Investment & &
Regulations
Investment
Investment
Policy
Investment
Policy
Policy
Policy
Opportunity
Opportunity
Opportunity
Identification
Opportunity
Identification
Identification
Identification
Timeframe &&
Timeframe &
Timeframe &
Change
Timeframe
Change
Change
Assumptions
Change
Assumptions
Assumptions
Assumptions
KPI, Method,
KPI, Method,
KPI, Method,
Uncertainty
KPI, Method,
Uncertainty
Uncertainty
Analyses
Uncertainty
Analyses
Analyses
Analyses
Objective
Objective
Objective
Setting
Objective
Setting
Setting
Setting
Option
Option
Option
Generation
Option
Generation
Generation
Generation
Option
Option
Option
Appraisal
Option
Appraisal
Appraisal
Appraisal
Choice and
Choice and
Choice and
Implement’n and
Choice
Implement’n
Implement’n
Implement’n

14. Adding Time Dependency
Uncertainty: Extrapolation of errors
• Assumed demand requirement on our sector
• Assumed potential for sectoral development
without constraint
• Assumed development and performance of
other sectors

15. Adding Time Dependency
Problem:
• Assumption of benefits possible and realised
• Ignores implications of delay or speedier
provisioning on the other sectors
• Lock-in to ‘optimised’ decision, ignoring
flexibility

16. The Size of the Problem
Over £310bn of
infrastructure projects
to 2015 and beyond:
(Infrastructure UK, 2011)
Offshore wind deployment
Broadband for all
Crossrail
London Gateway
Airport capacity reached in
the South East
• 80 new flood defence
projects
•
•
•
•
•
(Adapted from
Engineering the Future, 2013)

17. Aims
• To provide a framework capable of appraising
multiple sector networks, capturing system
impacts and allowing for different sequencing
of provisioning options throughout time to
make up a functional interacting system; and
• To provide a method to view these feasible
combinations and their multiple benefits to
support the process of decision making from a
policy maker’s perspective.

18. Interdependent Appraisal: Strategic Review
Spatial Opportunity Identification
Multi-sector Objective Setting
Cross-Sectoral Regulations
Key Sectoral Regulations

19. Interdependent Appraisal: Create Pathways
Spatial Opportunity Identification
Multi-sector Objective Setting
Multi-sector Option Generation
Decision Analysis
Common Time Frame
and Change Assumptions
Apply constraints and
prerequisites to give
pathway permutations

20. Interdependent Appraisal: Analysis
Spatial Opportunity Identification
Multi-sector Objective Setting
Multi-sector Option Generation
Decision Analysis
Decision Pathway Appraisal
Policy approach, consistent
MCA, sensitivity and
options analyses

21. Interdependent Appraisal: Review
Spatial Opportunity Identification
Multi-sector Objective Setting
Multi-sector Option Generation
Decision Analysis
Decision Pathway Appraisal
Decision Pathway Choice and
Implementation
Review of Assumptions and
Objectives
Key assumptions,
scheduled review points
and triggers for review

22. Interdependent Appraisal: Review
Spatial Opportunity Identification
Multi-sector Objective Setting
Multi-sector Option Generation
Decision Analysis
Re-review
Available
Decision
Pathways
Y
Decision Pathway Appraisal
Decision Pathway Choice and
Implementation
Review of Assumptions and
Objectives
Review of Option to Abort
Y
Change in
Objectives/New
Opportunity
N
Assumptions
Accurate
N

23. Case Study: The Thames Hub Vision
Pictures from
Foster+Partners
(2011)

24. Current Progress
• Review of performance metrics
• Decision analysis of the proposal
• Options analysis
Created using tagxedo.com

25. Current Progress
•
•
•
•
•
Review of performance metrics
Decision analysis of the proposal
Options analysis
Temporal issues
Initial MCA
Created using tagxedo.com

26. Initial Conclusions
Inclusion of the interdependency of infrastructure
networks and the time dependency of their
provisioning during appraisal is possible and enables
• A more complete assessment of the impacts and
benefits realised
• Development of a more accurate risk profile
• Resilient choices through the consideration of
flexibility and ongoing review of assumptions
• a

27. Initial Conclusions (2)
Through our case study:
• The potential for cross-sector performance
metrics, providing a comparable and therefore
prioritisable result
• That system benefits and temporal
characteristics exist and would not be captured
by traditional valuation methods

28. Future Work: Defined Multi-Sector ‘Do Min’

29. Future Work: Asset Benefits and Impacts

30. Future Work: System Benefits and Impacts

31. Future Work: Value of Flexibility

32. Future Work: Land Use Change Feedbacks
Stylised location of infrastructure assets

33. Future Work: Summary
• Full MCA of all pathways under different
policy approaches
• Derivation of full decision tree visualisation for
stakeholder communication
• Land Use Transport Modelling to analyse
impacts of interdependencies between
developments and population

34. Thank you
Contact details:
katherine.young@ouce.ox.ac.uk
References:
Bannister, D. and Berechman, J. (2003). Transport investment and economic development, (Taylor and Francis e-Library ed.). London: UCL Press
Engineering the Future (2013). Infrastructure Timelines Report. Retrieved 18 June 2013, from
http://www.engineeringthefuture.co.uk/government/pdf/EtF_Infrastructure_Interdependencies_Report.pdf
Foster+Partners (2011). Thames Hub: An integrated vision for Britain. Retrieved 10 January 2012, from http://www.fosterandpartners.com/ThamesHub/
Infrastructure UK (2011). National Infrastructure Plan 2011. London: Stationary Office.
Townley, B. (1992). In the eye of the gaze: The constitutive role of performance appraisal. In P. Barrar and C.L. Cooper (Eds.), Managing organisations in 1992 (pp185-202).
London: Routledge