All Transport

Distinguish between infrastructure and the operations that take place on it.
To pursue private investment in infrastructure, choose between competition for the contract or the regulated model.
Differentiate between attracting private investors in existing assets (privatisation) and in new infrastructure PPPs.

Discussion Paper,

27 November 2018

Discussion Paper,

4 October 2018

Discussion Paper,

28 August 2018

Research Report, Policy Insights,

21 June 2018

Pursue private investment in infrastructure on the merits of improved efficiency.
Invest more into upfront preparation of projects to reduce inefficient risk pricing by suppliers.
Undertake a comprehensive analysis of how to assist suppliers.
The pursuit of certainty in delivery should be balanced against cost.
Stimulate innovation through early contractor involvement or alliancing, not public-private partnerships.
Avoid transferring demand risk to public-private partnerships if service levels do not strongly impact demand.
Bundle and cross-fund public-private partnerships to reduce demand risk.
Adopt the regulatory asset base model where competition is absent or demand not strongly endogenous.
Introduce a transparent public accounting standard to maximise the value for money of private investment.
Foster competitive markets to achieve cost-effective infrastructure.
Pursue data collection on how contract design affects project outcomes.
Support the development of an evidence-supported procurement tool.

Roundtable Report, Policy Insights,

29 January 2018

Ne renégocier les PPP que dans des cas exceptionnels.
Faire appel à un arbitre indépendant pour établir si le résultat d’un PPP cadre avec ce que les parties auraient négocié si elles avaient prévu le changement intervenu.
Envisager de charger une instance indépendante de statuer sur le bien-fondé de la renégociation d’un PPP.
Inclure la réputation et la compétence avérée parmi les critères d’attribution des contrats de PPP.
Comparer les avantages et inconvénients des PPP avec ceux des autres formes de participation des capitaux privés.

Roundtable Report, Policy Insights,

27 November 2017

Planifier d’emblée la collecte des données nécessaires à l’évaluation.
Procéder à un exercice de vérification en cours d’exécution.
Confier l’exercice de vérification à des entités indépendantes.
Reconnaître la diversité des objectifs économiques des investissements dans les transports.
Associer les partenaires locaux en démontrant l’efficacité du projet.

Case-Specific Policy Analysis, Policy Insights,

23 March 2017

Systemic risks can be reduced where projects form part of a broad and long-term strategic plan.
Strategic infrastructure planning carries its own risks, including technology's influence on demand- and supply-side considerations.
When it works well, strategic planning can set out a stable set of priorities for future investment with durable cross-party support.
A successful infrastructure planning process balances a stable framework with maintaining flexibility.
The planning process requires clear objectives, a degree of independence and an open, collaborative approach.
The planning methodology needs to address risks and uncertainties, take into account binding policy constraints and include considerations of pricing the use of infrastructure.
A top-down approach to infrastructure planning to complement traditional project by project assessment is essential to a strategic assessment of long-term economic infrastructure needs across sectors.
Infrastructure planning across sectors can help identify the most important systemic risks early.
Using analytical methods such as a scenario-based approach to analysis can be helpful in future-proofing infrastructure plans.
It is important to consider how demand for scarce infrastructure can be managed. Debt management need to be part of any strategic investment plan.
A top-down approach could foster the development of an analytical framework for investment decisions reflecting both demand and supply side considerations.

Roundtable Report, Policy Insights,

28 February 2017

Roundtable Report, Policy Insights,

24 February 2017

Use renegotiation of PPPs only in exceptional cases.
Use an independent jury to assess whether the outcome of a PPP is what parties might have been expected to negotiate had they foreseen a change that has occurred.
Consider to task an independent body with determining when renegotiation of a PPP is legitimate.
Include reputation and demonstrated competence in selection criteria for a PPP.
Compare advantages and weaknesses of PPPs versus other forms of private capital.

Roundtable Report, Policy Insights,

20 January 2017

Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) guidelines can be expanded to include reliability and some wider impacts.
Further research into reliability benefits is needed to improve confidence in results.
Wider economic impacts should be examined in cases where they are expected to be significant.
Further research into the impacts and tools for capturing wider impacts is needed.
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) can play an important role in decision making, but need not dominate.