[Zurück]

D. Wiegand:
"Decision support in infrastructure projects - Research approaches and results";
Vortrag: Construction Industry - 2014, Rostov State University of Civil Engineering, Rostov on Don (eingeladen); 11.12.2014.

Development and Operation of public infrastructure has to serve at least two meta-targets:

(a) efficient use of ressources, especially of public financial means, to achieve the targeted goals
(b) a minimal negative and maximal positive externalities (external effects)

Infrastructure development, infrastructure management is decision making.

From cradle to cradle - starting with the very early stages of infrastructure projects, the fist prestudies, followed by planning and realisation, during the operation, in case of a modernisation and when deconstructing and recycling decisions have to be made. These decisions have to assessed, whether they serve the goals I already mentioned on a mid or long term!

These decisions, the attempt to optimise these decisions, have to be based on precise and wherever possible measurable targets.

Very simple, but very seldom used key figures:

Concerning target (a):
Costs minus benefits in Rubel / Utilization-Unit (e.g. one hour of education [costs for personel like teacher not included])


Für (b)
CO2 emission in kg / Utilization-Unit (e.g. one hour of office work of an employee)

Applying a very simple assessment-method (when budget for optimisation is limited - already a contradiction): just the CO2 emissions related to e.g. a school building and the use of a school building (for heating, cooling and hot water) will be calculated.
Of course it would be much better to take into account also all climate relevant emissions and other ecological aspects from cradle to cradle.

CO2 Emissions und Total occupancy costs (TOC - income minus expenses in our case) have to be made comparable by "Normierung" and should from now on be criteria be the basis for Planning- and Management-decissions.

The key figures mentioned before will always be based on forecasting (e.g. the future development of interest rates and the price for gas) and forecasting will always be limited concerning precision and "probability". The bandwidth of possible developments - possible cost-benefits and CO2 emissions over the lifecycle of the infrastructure - can be reduced by including real options into the assessment. Real options means "possibility to behave / to act in a certain way, without the obligation" (e.g. the possibility to re-negotiate a contract after a certain time or when certain conditions have occurred). The difference between the worst and the best possible future will be smaller - the worst case ca be avoided by creatng options to react. This has a certain price - the so called option costs.

The decision processes I outlined can be applied when govermental organisations developing or providing public infrastructure or when valuating bids (offers by private companies) in atender action, that i spart of a public private partnership.

Infrastructure projects, decision support, utilization unit