Traditionally infrastructure projects have been valued and assessed using methods which often do not best leverage all benefits and opportunities, or fully evaluate all costs. In addition, it has been quite common for infrastructure project proposals to be poorly communicated to the wider community, eroding social and political license and capital.
In this context, and as government policy attempts to meet the challenges of population growth, climate and demographic change, constrained budgets and funding challenges, the role of broader cost-benefit analysis and business case assessment is increasingly coming under scrutiny.
ASBEC held a series of roundtable discussions in Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne, Canberra and Perth from 2016-2017, with over 50 key decision makers from across government departments, agencies and industry. Participants were asked to share their views on the challenges associated with developing business cases for infrastructure projects across Australia. These discussions facilitated a range of views on the opportunities for government to support policy reform that would deliver better business cases, and ultimately better infrastructure and improved outcomes for the tax payer.
The findings from these discussions, presented in this paper, provide a rare insight across all levels of government across Australia as to what practical interventions can be delivered today and in the longer-term to achieve a better bang for our buck from our infrastructure spend.
Bang for Buck outlines a powerful case for reform across four broad areas of focus:
1. Leading with bipartisan vision across all levels of government
2. Improving infrastructure decision making
3. Understanding the method (and the madness) of business case development
4. Engaging the public in the benefits of their infrastructure investment
Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council 2017
Industry misconceptions around high cost and poor market interest in energy efficient homes continue to obstruct the mass adoption of low carbon housing. Josh’s House demonstrates that low carbon housing is accessible and cost effective. The Star Performers series showcases how...Read more
A rapid review on green-rated office buildings, and their operational energy use, found that the conclusions of six studies ranged from the certified buildings performing worse, similarly or much better than the non-certified buildings in terms of energy usage intensity. Two...Read more
Rapid global urbanization and the increase of the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect make urban cooling a necessity as well as an opportunity to increase the liveability and amenity of cities. This review is a scoping study of the relevant worldwide UHI mitigation/adaptation...Read more
This book focuses on the challenge that Australia faces in transitioning to renewable energy and regenerating its cities via a transformation of its built environment. It identifies innovative and effective pathways for decarbonising the built environment from applied research undertaken by the Co-Operative Research Centre for Low Carbon Living.
This statement is in two parts. Part one provides the context for the development of the National Waste Policy and summarises the roles and responsibilities of governments. It highlights progress in relation to waste management and resource recovery and presents the drivers for change.
Sustainability assessment tools aim to promote high sustainability outcomes in residential buildings, ensuring less consumption of water, energy and less emission of greenhouse gases. However, existing literature often presents variations between the estimated outcomes from the assessment tools and actual outcomes after building occupation.
This paper is a review of the potential commercialisation and adoption pathways for a suite of energy efficiency policy-uptake modelling capabilities from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation’s (CSIRO). Common Capital undertook this review for the Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Low Carbon Living and CSIRO.