Infrastructure Systems in Britain - Term Paper Example

Infrastructure Application and Review – Infrastructure systems in Britain Introduction The development of technology worldwide led to the improvement of infrastructure systems used in countries worldwide. However, often the changes applied have been enforced by the need to increase the country’s competitiveness in the global market than to improve the quality of life of citizens. Another issue related with the update of the infrastructure systems in modern states is the fact that the relevant projects are usually extremely costly while their results cannot be guaranteed. Often, the position of a country in the international community is used as a criterion in order to evaluate its ability to develop infrastructure systems of high quality; however, it is noticed that in developing countries the projects related with the local infrastructure systems can be significant – the support of international bodies is usually required for the completion of the particular projects. Current paper focuses on the examination of Britain’s infrastructure systems – referring not only to the country’s road network but also to the utilities, the transportation facilities and so on. UK is considered to be a highly developed country; its infrastructure systems are under continuous monitoring and control; however, in practice it could be noticed that additional work should be done on the improvement of these systems in order to meet the needs of the local population; on the other hand, the cost of these systems is often high even if attention is paid on the application of all phases of the relevant project. In order to understand the structure and the role of infrastructure systems in Britain it is necessary to refer primarily to the needs of people across the country – in terms of infrastructure systems; at a next level appropriate projects could be developed under the terms that their realization would be feasible for the British government. 2. Infrastructure systems in developed countries – role and characteristics In order to understand the role of infrastructure systems in the improvement of a country’s economy it is necessary to refer to the characteristics of these systems as they can be observed in the everyday world. In accordance with Azizi (2000, 1345 ‘a variety of means are currently used throughout the world to finance urban infrastructure in new areas - many countries have attempted to apply alternative and innovative methods to address this issue’. One of the most important advantages of people living in developing country is the fact that these people – at least most of them – have access to the country’s infrastructure systems – in developing countries the role of these systems for the improvement of local economy is crucial. Through the years, the performance of infrastructure systems has been increased - under the influence of the increase of the country’s productivity. It is already noticed above that infrastructure systems can have many different forms. Regarding this issue, it is noticed that ‘sewers, highways, and other infrastructure are public assets that can and should be managed to maximize public profit, which is measurable as total return on assets’ (Lemer, 1999, 255). Governments in modern states have the responsibility to control the improvement of infrastructure systems using a series of specific criteria in order to check the effectiveness of these systems for a specific social and commercial environment. The role and the characteristics of infrastructure systems in developed countries can be identified only by referring to the parts of existing infrastructure systems – as they are continuously improved in order to meet the needs of customers but also the financial potentials of the countries involved. In the case of Britain, the role of infrastructure systems in the development of the citizens’ benefits (social, health and financial) has been significant – as explained in the sections that follow. Specific parts of the country’s infrastructure network are highlighted: transport, urban planning and utilities. Appropriate case studies are used in order to show that the development of Britain’s infrastructure systems led gradually to the increase of the financial and health benefits of residents. Through the years the use of appropriately customized methods of evaluation led to the conclusion that the strategies followed by the British government regarding the development of various infrastructure systems have been successful even under adverse political or financial conditions. 3. Britain’s infrastructure systems – an overview – effects on social and health benefits of the economy In general, infrastructure in Britain refers to a series of issues like the following ones: ‘roads, rail, air travel, shipping/ ports, freight, national road safety policy, buses, cycling and walking’ (Government Offices for the English regions, 2008). The development of infrastructure systems has been a priority for governments in Britain since the first steps of the empire. The study of Morriss (2007) refers to the historical roots of infrastructure systems in Britain; it is made clear that these systems had always a crucial role in the increase of the country’s competitiveness within the international community. In this context, it is noticed that ‘although in 1776—83 Britain failed to suppress its American colonists, the necessity to maintain an army across the Atlantic developed both the infrastructure and the experience needed to manage an empire’ (Morriss, 2007, 310). In other words, the development of infrastructure systems in Britain has been the most appropriate strategy for the development of the country’s power towards its competitors being related with the expansion of the empire around the world. Today, the importance of infrastructure systems in Britain is still high. In fact, it is noticed that ‘the past 15 years have seen an enormous shift in the regulation and management of infrastructure networks in the UK; complex patchworks of competitive gas, electricity, water and telecom providers are replacing the relatively uniform, monopolistic and monolithic regimes of the post-war period’ (Guy, 1997, 191). Of course, today the needs of population in the country have been changed – compared to the past; however, infrastructure systems are still important for the improvement of the quality of life of people in Britain (as in all countries worldwide). For this reason, the policies followed by the British government regarding the development of these systems can influence the perceptions of the public on the effectiveness of the government – leading to the formulation of a specific political framework across the country. More specifically, the political powers that strongly support the development of the country’s infrastructure systems are more likely to gain the trust of the public if compared with those political powers that follow a more conservative strategy emphasizing on the need for limitation of expenses on infrastructure systems. However, the plans involved in the development of infrastructure systems should be carefully chosen; currently, the cost of interpreters in Britain’s police force reaches the 1 million pounds annually (Daily Mail, 2007), an amount that can be characterized as high compared to the funds released on other governmental projects related with the country’s infrastructure systems. The above facts are in accordance with a report prepared by Cox in 1997. In accordance with the specific study ‘by its nature infrastructure is always in decay and in need of renewal; however, within the last decade there has been an increasing perception that as a country Britain is failing to carry out the necessary renewal and that the level of decay is increasing’ (Cox, 1987, 122). Britain is a country that is heavily based on its infrastructure systems. In accordance with a relevant research, the use of raw materials across the country is considered to be more important than the use of marine materials (see Figure 4, Appendix) despite the fact that Britain is a country heavily based on profits from activities related with the sea. The successful management of the country’s raw and marine materials can lead to the improvement of the national economy; in this way the benefits (social, health and financial) provided to the citizens are expected to be increased. In this context, infrastructure systems are proved to be closely related with the social and health benefits offered to people living in a specific country – including Britain. 4. Integration of infrastructure systems – economic benefits – effects on stakeholders The evaluation of the effects of infrastructure systems on a country’s economy has to be based on specific criteria. In accordance with the study of Lemer (1999, 255) ‘it is possible to estimate changes in infrastructure performance in ways useful to decision makers’. At a next level, the above researcher states that managers dealing with the evaluation of infrastructure systems could use an appropriately customized asset-management framework that would be divided into five major parts: ‘data collection and analysis, performance modeling, scenario generation and management alternatives, decision analysis, and management reporting’ (Lemer, 1999, 255). Such a system could be used in order to measure and evaluate the performance of a country’s infrastructure systems having in mind that the needs of local population may change under the influence of global political or financial conditions. In other words, the evaluation of a country’s infrastructure systems should be aligned with the local social and political conditions as they have been formulated under the influence of the international political and financial conditions. In any case, it is possible that the performance of infrastructure systems is examined and evaluated at any point of time using appropriate criteria and methods. The effectiveness of such methods has been tested in the study of Baker et al. (2001). In the above study it is made clear that successful infrastructure systems should have the following characteristics: ‘(a) select appropriate metrics for diverse projects; (b) coordinate information systems; (c) avoid preassigned factor weighting, enabling juxtaposition of quantitative and qualitative factors and invitation of new factors in a deliberation and so on’ (Baker et al., 2001, 198). The effects of infrastructure systems on a country’s economic benefits are not highlighted; however, it could be assumed that the simultaneous use of different frameworks for the improvement of a country’s social and health infrastructure should lead to the improvement of the quality of life of local population. The specific target can be achieved only under the terms that the national economy is strong enough to respond to the needs of the particular project; in this context, the country’s residents could enjoy a series of benefits – social and financial – either in the short or the long term. The fact that significant efforts are made in Britain for the development of the country’s infrastructure cannot lead to the assumption that the effectiveness of the relevant plans is guaranteed. An indicative example is the case of the country’s Network Rail which presented a decrease in its profits compared to the previous year (£706m in September 2008 – in September 2007 the relevant figure was estimated to £780m); moreover, the organization’s operating costs have been increased in 2008 – compared to 2007. More specifically, in 2008 – up to now – the costs of the organization’s various operational activities have been estimated to £1,891m while in 2007 it was estimated to £1,764m (see Network Rail report, 2008). From another point of view, it is noticed that despite the investment made on the development of Britain’s infrastructure systems, still the country has ‘the most crowded and congested roads, the fewest motorways and ‘some of the worst public transport’ among leading industrialized countries’ (Which News, 15 January 2008). The perceptions of the public regarding the country’s infrastructure systems seem to be rather negative; apart from the fact that many of the Britain’s infrastructure systems are quite old it seems that the specific systems fail to respond to the needs of the public and for this reason the complaints of people in Britain regarding the country’s infrastructure systems are quite common. Indicatively, it is noticed in a report published in Guardian (20 July 2008) that ‘the classic complaints involve poor punctuality, delays caused by engineering works and exorbitant fares’ (Guardian, 20 July 2008). The specific report refers to the country’s railway network; however, similar complains have been developed in other parts of the infrastructure systems in Britain. An indicative example is the framework applied on Britain regarding the land use; the specific issue has been examined in the study of Evans (1998) and it has been revealed that ‘existing policies of urban containment, in particular the designation of greenbelts, actually increase car use and the length of journeys’ (Evans, 1998, 137). The weaknesses of the policies related with the land use in Britain are also highlighted in the study of Tyler et al. (1987) where it its noticed that transport costs in Britain are differentiated in accordance with the social and financial characteristics of each region, a fact that is negative taking into account the instability of the world market and its effects on the British economy. 5. Conclusion The efforts made by the British government in order to guarantee the effectiveness of the country’s infrastructure systems can be characterized as satisfactory – despite the weaknesses identified above. Towards this direction the study of Batterbury led to the conclusion that ‘major national, citywide, and local policy changes have permitted citizens groups to work more actively with progressive elements in government planning, breaking down citizen-expert divides’ (Batterbury, 2003, 150). The above assumption is supported by the results of the study of Carnis (2007) who tried to identify the benefits of the control system established by the British government regarding the checks across the country’s road network. Through the above study it is revealed that ‘at the start of the 1990s, Great Britain implemented a national programme of speed checks that includes more than 5000 check locations; the results are convincing; a reduction in traffic speeds and an improvement in the road casualty toll’ (Carnis, 2007, 597). On the other hand, the use of innovative policies on the development of a country’s infrastructure systems can be considered as the best policy for the increase of the trust of the public towards a specific political team. In this context, the use by governors of specific tools for the increase of effectiveness of a country’s infrastructure systems can be considered to be of high importance for the improvement of the quality of life of citizens. Under these terms, it is supported that ‘negotiations have long been a feature of planning systems which need further and wider consideration’ (Ennis, 1997, 1935). Other strategic policies can be chosen by governments worldwide when the development of infrastructure systems within a specific country is put as a priority by the local government. On the other hand, it is supported that ‘transport policies should not be dominated by the topic of infrastructure investment; neither inter-regional nor intra-regional transport investment will promote sustained growth in disadvantaged regions if other favourable conditions are lacking’ (Hart, 1993, 417). In other words, the development of infrastructure systems within a specific country needs to be appropriately customized taking into consideration the needs of local population, the resources available for the completion of the relevant project but also the effects of the particular project on the quality of life of people across the country involved. In any case, the British government has been trying to minimize the risks for the failures of the governmental projects related with the development of the country’s infrastructure through the establishment of a body, the Local Government Ombudsmen that has the responsibility for the administration of all complaints related with the country’s infrastructure systems. In accordance with the studies presented in current paper, Britain’s infrastructure systems need further improvement in order to meet the needs of the population; when compared with similar plans of other countries worldwide, the infrastructure systems of Britain are proved to be inadequate (see Figure 2, Appendix). However, the protection of the environment remains a priority for the specific country (see Figure 3, Appendix) and this fact could lead to the assumption that any part of the country’s infrastructure strategy that is not appropriate could be reviewed and amended in order to support the increase of social and health benefits for people across the country. References/ Bibliography Azizi, M. (2000) The User-pays System in the Provision of Urban Infrastructure: Effectiveness and Equity Criteria. Urban Studies, Vol. 37, No. 8, 1345-1357 Baker, J., Lambert, J. (2001) Information System for Risks, Costs, and Benefits of Infrastructure Improvement Projects. Public Works Management & Policy, Vol. 5, No. 3, 198-208 Batterbury, S. (2003) Environmental Activism and Social Networks: Campaigning for Bicycles and Alternative Transport in West London. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 590, No. 1, 150-169 Blumler, J., Dutton, W. (1988) The Faltering Development of Cable Television in Britain. International Political Science Review, Vol. 9, No. 4, 279-303 Carnis, L. (2007) The automated speed enforcement system in Great Britain: between a technical revolution and administrative continuity. International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 73, No. 4, 597-610 Cox, P. (1987) Modernising Britain’s infrastructure. Structural Survey, 5(2): 122-129 Ennis, F. (1997) Infrastructure Provision, the Negotiating Process and the Planners Role. Urban Studies, Vol. 34, No. 12, 1935-1954 Evans, A. (1998) Dr. Pangloss Finds His Profession: Sustainabiity Transport, and Land Use Planning in Britain. Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 18, No. 2, 137-144 Guy, S. (1997) Splintering Networks: Cities and Technical Networks in 1990s Britain. Urban Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2, 191-216 Hart, T. (1993) Transport Investment and Disadvantaged Regions: UK and European Policies since the 1950s. Urban Studies, Vol. 30, No. 2, 417-435 Lemer, A. (1999) Building Public Works Infrastructure Management Systems for Achieving High Return on Public Assets. Public Works Management & Policy, Vol. 3, No. 3, 255-272 Morriss, R. (2007) Colonization, Conquest, and the Supply of Food and Transport: The Reorganization of Logistics Management, 1780—1795. War in History, Vol. 14, No. 3, 310-324 Tyler, P., Kitson, M. (1987) Geographical Variations in Transport Costs of Manufacturing Firms in Great Britain. Urban Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1, 61-73 Reports Daily Mail (2007), available from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482559/Police-force-spending-1-million-year-interpreters-rise-migrant-workers.html [last accessed on 6/12/2008] Network Rail (2008), available from http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/5327.aspx Which News (2008), available from http://www.which.co.uk/news/2008/01/road-infrastructure-not-fit-for-purpose-129261.jsp Guardian (2008), available from http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/jul/20/transport.railtravel Government Offices for the English regions (2008), available from http://www.gos.gov.uk/transport/natinfrastruc/?a=42496 Appendix Figure 1 – Length of Roads in Britain through the years (source: International Road Assessment Programme, http://www.iraptranstats.net/table_edit?command=viewtable&file=pt_dem_road_length.xml) Figure 2 – Classification of cities in accordance with the quality of public transport (source: http://www.lda.gov.uk/upload/pdf/Evidence_Base_Section_2.pdf) Figure 3 – Number of motor vehicles in cities worldwide (source: http://www.lda.gov.uk/upload/pdf/Evidence_Base_Section_2.pdf) Figure 4 – Use of mineral raw materials in Britain – compared to the country’s marine materials, source: http://www.bgs.ac.uk/britainbeneath/res_production.html) Read More