New risk management strategies, data sources, and tools help set priorities in water infrastructure

• Aging infrastructure – many pipes, facilities, and other assets are at or near the end of their service life, perhaps a century old, deteriorated or incapable of meeting today’s needs
• Decades of under-investment in maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement of assets
• Greater risk factors – climate change and stricter environmental regulations, such as larger and more frequent storm events and new contaminants are taking a toll and stressing the existing infrastructure
• Higher expectations by stakeholders on the protection of surface and groundwater, safeguarding the natural environment, and need to address disadvantaged or underserviced communities

One of the biggest challenges for good decision-making has been the lack of data. Fortunately, today we’ve become much more data rich; more data sources, data collection technologies, and more data analytics and visualization are new tools in the toolbox for water professionals. Particularly in wastewater and storm water management and planning. These tools are applied in a risk management approach to proactively set priorities to address these challenges. They help meet the needs of more stakeholders, customers – and satisfy rate payers or investors that funds and grants will be wisely spent to deliver the results required.

It’s about doing the right project, at the right time, at the right cost, and for the right reasons.

Many water professionals are used to working on tight budgets – there’s never enough money to do what needs to be done, much less think about the future and go beyond the standard by building better, more resilient, and sustainable infrastructure.

So, they may be left with working in a reactive mode. For example, failure of ageing infrastructure continues to prompt repair services, such as when a sewage force main breaks or an undersized stormwater line overflows. This can result in immediate impacts -- loss of service to a community, degradation to the surrounding environment, roadways and property, loss of people’s time, or the loss of confidence or reputation of the governing body.

That’s very important – but it doesn’t leave much room for resources to renew that pipe before it breaks or re-build it in a more resilient and sustainable manner. For example, consider alternative solutions such as the installation of permeable pavement and other stormwater management features that would reduce the flow of water into the storm system and thus relieve pressure on these assets.

This means most projects are undertaken to provide a single benefit, have a single purpose and provide a single type of service. What’s needed is a proactive, planned and integrated approach. Providing evidence-based assessments (data driven) of priorities, and enables consideration of multi-criteria, multi-benefit solutions while also bringing resiliency and sustainability to the project.

It begins with getting the right data out of the dark and into the hands of the managers and decision-makers!

For example, in seeking funding from the expected federal infrastructure program and certain states, the most competitive projects will be those bringing more than just the single benefit to an identified solution. This means we need to move beyond the traditional Return on Investment (ROI) and start to look at the Return on Community (ROC) and the Return on Environment (ROE). For example, projects that include benefits to disadvantaged or underserved communities, have multiple uses and provide multi-benefit solutions may also present a lower risk and overall improvement to the circular economy for the community. Demonstrating through transparency how resiliency, sustainability and equity are included in the decision-making.

While these benefits may result in a higher initial cost, the project can demonstrate it goes beyond a single type of service and brings a greater value or solution to the needs of more stakeholders and improves the economy of the community as a whole.

Projects that include the following go beyond the traditional approach, expand on more benefits, and will be more resilient and sustainable:

• Prioritizes the essentials – such as public health and maintaining an acceptable level of service for water infrastructure
• Puts a value on things that don’t have market price – such as quality of life, wellness, biodiversity, and social equity
• Helps disadvantaged or underserviced communities be heard – if a sound information gathering system is used (see below for more on that), it gives a voice to people and causes that normally don’t get attention
• Meets a wider variety of needs – a deeper understanding of priorities indicates how a project can serve multiple needs, many of them non-traditional – while continuing to promote protection of groundwater, watercourses and aquatic species
• Supports evidence-based, defensible decisions – if based on verifiable, hard data, decisions are easier to “sell” to stakeholders and financial sources, and defend when questioned by special interest groups
• Supports budgetary choices, which should be based on the agreed-upon priorities, so the funds are spent on projects providing the best returns (ROI, ROE, ROC)
• Helps compete for funding – Financial sources face many competing demands for the funds available, and are more likely to choose entities that have demonstrated a proactive and evidence-based approach

How can you place a value on new priorities or non-traditional needs and find a transparent measure to prioritize them?  We find many of these can be further evaluated with a proactive approach including risk-based strategies, i.e. monetization for determining the returns (ROC, ROE, and ROI) of a project.  Through this approach the Environmental, Social and Economic impacts of a proposed project are addressed, with data, and go beyond the traditional single benefit or single purpose and financial cost of a project.

New data and information technology tools help setting priorities in a proactive way, and provide the information required to address the needs of a wider range of stakeholders. Risk-based methodologies involve considering two aspects – the likelihood of failure, and the consequence of failure. The likelihood of failure would include the physical condition of infrastructure, erosion or the filling a flood control basin with sediment. This should be considered along with the consequences of that failure, which traditionally include costs or impacts of a flood to a business or residential community downstream of that basin. Add to this, the value of creating a public amenity, environmental restoration, or other benefits. These add to the costs, but result is a reduction in risk and greater returns.

While this is not a new idea, and there are many projects that have done this, what is new is the availability of more data sources, data collection technologies, and more data analytics. Visualizations can be created like the sample dashboard below from a recent project that add up to a more powerful package than ever before.

In summary, municipalities taking a proactive approach to going beyond a single purpose and only replace what was there type of infrastructure are missing out on the potential to do more and increase returns (ROC, ROE, and ROI) and a community’s circular economy. Incorporate together environmental and social criteria, asset management, risk-based strategies, information collection and data visualization tools. The right data will give municipalities an edge in the competition for funding and providing greater benefits to a wider range of stakeholders, while building more resilient and sustainable infrastructure.