Category: Lytton Advisory

Categories
Circular Economy Economics Local Government Lytton Advisory

Sustainability Experiements: A-B Testing Household Waste Management

As Queensland’s local governments strive to ensure sustainability in waste management, innovative techniques like A-B Testing are increasingly gaining traction. This method, commonly used in marketing to test consumer preferences, can also be applied to household waste behaviour. It involves comparing two groups – one following the current waste management practice (A) and the other testing a new approach (B).

Recently I have been thinking about three ways this might be done in a local government context:

Study 1: Recycling Education Programs. Educational programs about the importance and methods of recycling are key to promoting responsible waste management. A-B Testing can be used to measure their effectiveness. Group A could continue with the current education approach, while Group B would receive enhanced education material – perhaps more engaging, interactive content. The success could be measured in terms of recycling rates, contamination rates, and waste volume reduction.

Study 2: Waste Collection Frequency. Changing the frequency of waste collection is another variable local governments could experiment with. Group A could maintain the current schedule, while Group B could have more frequent recycling pickups and less frequent general waste pickups. This encourages households to recycle more and could result in substantial landfill reduction.

Study 3: Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) Policies. Finally, implementing PAYT policies could be a game-changer. Under this scheme, households are charged based on the amount of waste they produce. Group A could continue with the flat fee structure, while Group B would test the PAYT policy. The impact would be measured through waste volume, disposal costs, and recycling rates.

A-B Testing in these areas could provide local governments with robust data on the effectiveness of new waste management strategies. It’s an evidence-based approach that can drive better policy-making and offer several potential gains. There are many more options for this kind of analysis.

But what are the benefits?

For the councils, the benefits include better resource allocation, improved recycling rates, and reduced costs associated with waste management. It can also drive innovation in service delivery and contribute to sustainability goals.

Ratepayers also stand to gain significantly. Efficient waste management systems can lead to lower rates over time. Moreover, they provide an opportunity for households to play an active role in waste reduction and recycling, contributing to the larger goal of environmental sustainability.

A-B Testing allows us to bring data to the heart of decision-making, fostering an innovative, evidence-based approach to household waste management. Queensland local governments, by embracing such methodologies, can set an example in driving sustainability through informed, data-driven decisions.

#ABTesting #WasteManagement #Sustainability #QueenslandLocalGovernment #InnovationInPolicy #Recycling #PayAsYouThrow

Categories
Economics Lytton Advisory Waste Management

When should a local government deliver waste services from in-house resources?

The drive to outsourcing is an alluring one with promises of lower costs, fewer workforce issues and risk transference.  However, it is important to realise that there are a few situations in which it may be more advantageous for a local government to deliver waste services from in-house resources.

When the community is small and the volume of waste generated is low, it may be more cost-effective to have an in-house team handle waste collection and disposal.

If the local government has the necessary equipment and personnel to provide waste services, it may be more efficient to deliver these services in-house rather than contracting out to a private company.

In cases where the local government has specific regulations or policies in place for waste management, it may be easier to ensure compliance by delivering services in-house.

If the local government is able to secure funding or grants for waste management programs, it may be more beneficial to use these resources to hire and train an in-house team rather than paying a private company.

These are also the other side of the coin to consider when deciding whether the advantages of outsourcing can be realised.

How does your local council assess whether the in-house opportunities are worthwhile?

Categories
Lytton Advisory

Can Local Governments Deliver Sustainable Infrastructure?

As local governments continue to face the challenge of delivering more essential infrastructure services to their communities, it’s important for them to prioritise sustainable infrastructure development. By implementing a series of sustainable infrastructure practices, they can minimize environmental impacts and reduce long-term maintenance costs, while providing reliable and effective services to their communities. Here are three big concepts to consider.

Green infrastructure

One way that local governments can promote sustainable infrastructure development is by prioritizing green infrastructure projects. Green infrastructure refers to the use of natural systems such as parks, wetlands, and green roofs to manage stormwater, reduce heat island effects, and improve air quality. By investing in green infrastructure projects, local governments can help to minimize the environmental impact of their infrastructure development projects and create more livable and sustainable communities.

Energy-efficient technologies

Another important consideration for sustainable infrastructure development is the use of energy-efficient technologies. By adopting energy-efficient building designs and technologies, local governments can reduce the energy consumption of their infrastructure projects and lower long-term maintenance costs. For example, the use of solar panels, energy-efficient lighting systems, and smart building technologies can help to reduce energy use and costs over the long term. It can also provide a catalyst for local businesses to follow because local government purchasing helps create the market for these services.

Leveraging the power of data and technology

In addition to promoting sustainable infrastructure development through green infrastructure and energy-efficient technologies, local governments can leverage the power of data and technology to optimize infrastructure operations and maintenance. By investing in asset management systems and predictive maintenance technologies (PMTs), local governments can improve infrastructure performance and reduce the need for costly and disruptive repairs and replacements. The pros and cons of asset management systems and PMTs needs to be carefully considered to ensure the business cases for leveraging these approaches generates financial and economic returns.

Infrastructure that is sustainable reduces or avoids some of the pitfalls of the build-and-forget approach. It better embeds the service delivery ethos required to extact the maximum value for ratepayers and the wider community.

How far along the sustainable infrastructure journey is your organisation?

Categories
Economics Infrastructure Lytton Advisory

When does infrastructure planning fail?

Top 10 Traps & Tips: Why Infrastructure Projects Fail - ArcBlue.com

Decision-makers do not get it right all the time.  Understanding potential avenues of failure provides a good basis for being able to identify risks associated with failure and develop strategies to avoid them.  Avoidable errors always seem more egregious than unforced ones. Infrastructure planning can often fail due to a variety of reasons.  

Lack of long-term vision: Infrastructure projects often have long lifespans, and it is important to have a clear vision of the future needs of the community in order to plan effectively. If the infrastructure is not designed to meet the needs of the community in the long term, it may become outdated or inadequate.

Insufficient funding: Infrastructure projects can be expensive, and if there is not sufficient funding available to complete the project, it may not be feasible to proceed. This can be especially challenging when infrastructure projects are designed to serve a large, diverse community with a variety of needs.

Political considerations: Infrastructure projects can be influenced by political considerations, such as the interests of local politicians or the preferences of specific groups within the community. This can lead to projects being implemented that do not fully consider the needs of the community as a whole.

Poor coordination: Infrastructure projects often involve multiple stakeholders, including government agencies, private companies, and community organizations. If these stakeholders are not effectively coordinated, it can lead to delays, cost overruns, and other problems.

Environmental and social impacts: Infrastructure projects can have environmental and social impacts that are not fully considered during the planning process. For example, a highway project may disrupt natural habitats or displace communities, leading to negative consequences for the environment and local residents.

Technological advancements: Infrastructure projects may be designed and built using technologies that become outdated or inferior to newer alternatives. This can lead to problems with the performance and maintenance of the infrastructure, and may require costly upgrades or replacements.

Planning frameworks that do not address these issues imperil successful delivery of infrastructure over time.

How do you manage planning risk in your organisation? I would be keen to read your views in the comments.

Categories
Economics Lytton Advisory Policy Waste Management

Can local governments help create markets for recycled waste?

Governments need to act to encourage plastic recycling markets - Today's Environmentalist

Local governments are typically involved in collection and disposal of municipal and household waste.  To what extent are local communities required to participate in the full product lifecycle and how can this occur?

There are several ways that local governments can help create markets for recycled waste.  

Developing policies and regulations that require businesses and residents to recycle certain materials, such as plastic or cardboard. This creates a demand for recycled materials and encourages businesses to invest in recycling infrastructure.

Providing financial incentives for businesses that recycle, such as tax credits or grants, to encourage them to invest in recycling technology and infrastructure.

Working with local organizations and businesses to identify and create new markets for recycled materials. This could include partnering with manufacturers who use recycled materials in their products, or working with retail businesses to sell recycled products.

Promoting the use of recycled materials through marketing and outreach efforts, to educate the public about the benefits of recycling and encourage them to support businesses that use recycled materials.

Providing infrastructure and resources to support recycling, such as collection and processing facilities, to make it easier for businesses and residents to recycle their waste.

Collaborating with regional and national organizations to facilitate the exchange of recycled materials and create larger markets for recycled products.

To what extent is your local government participating in these approaches?

Categories
Cost Benefit Analysis Economics Infrastructure Local Government Lytton Advisory Policy

Five CBA Epiphanies

Healthcare business graph and data of Medical business growth, .Businessman analyzing data and growth chart, investment, financial and banking, Medical business report on global network.

I have been doing cost benefit analyses for a few years now. The concept is deceptively simple but provides a solid framework for insightful decision making.

It is a tool used to assess potential costs and benefits of a decision or project, usually in monetary terms. It is commonly used to evaluate the feasibility and potential impact of projects, policies and regulations.

Recently I have been thinking about the usefulness of the approach given that many major project often seem to float past this analysis.

Here are five epiphanies that might help CBA evangelists:

The true value of a decision lies not just in its financial cost and benefit, but also in its impact on people and the environment.

CBA forces us to weigh the pros and cons, but it’s important to remember that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify and may have long-term effects that are not immediately apparent.

It should not be the sole factor in decision-making, as there may be intangible or ethical considerations that cannot be easily measured in financial terms.

CBA is a useful tool, but it is important to remember that it does not account for future uncertain events. Therefore, it should be used in conjunction with other decision making tools for a comprehensive evaluation.

Cost-benefit analysis can be misleading if it only looks at short-term financial gains and ignores long-term social and environmental costs. A more holistic approach should be used that accounts for all the potential impacts of a decision.

These are just some of the insights about CBA, but there are more that might be organisational or project relevant.

Is CBA a key driver of your organisation’s project appraisal process or just another compliance element in developing business cases?

Categories
Lytton Advisory

Linear Infrastructure in Vancouver

Last month Lytton Advisory visited Vancouver, the largest city in Western Canada.  A coastal city with an extensive natural resources hinterland, it has long been a hub for trade and a gateway for travellers to and from Asia.  

Unsurprisingly, linear infrastructure has been been a factor in its progress. The scope of this is shown by key examples such as:

  1. Lions Gate Bridge (picture above): This bridge connects the North Shore of Vancouver with downtown and is a key transportation link for both vehicles and public transit. Without this 1938 link Vancouver would simply not be the city it is today. A shrewd investment by the Guinness family, which speculated on the land on the northern shore before providing the funding. An example of a possible PPP.
  2. SkyTrain: Vancouver’s rapid transit system, which includes the Expo and Millennium Lines, provides residents with fast and reliable transportation to key destinations throughout the city.
  3. Stanley Park Causeway: This roadway provides a direct link between Stanley Park and downtown Vancouver, making it easier for residents and visitors to access the city’s largest park.
  4. Trans Mountain Pipeline: This pipeline carries crude oil and petroleum products from the Alberta oil sands to the West Coast of Canada, where it is then exported to international markets.
  5. Burrard Street Bridge: This bridge is a major transportation link for vehicles and cyclists, connecting downtown Vancouver with the city’s residential neighborhoods to the south.
  6. Stanley Park Seawall: This popular greenway provides a scenic route for cyclists and pedestrians around Stanley Park and is a key feature of the city’s green infrastructure. Highly recommended cycling through an extensive urban park.

These examples are a few of the key linear infrastructure facilities that support the city of Vancouver and contribute to its quality of life and economic growth. The diversity of investment in this kind of infrastructure hints at the different needs to create the kind of distinctive city that is Vancouver. 

Categories
Lytton Advisory

Cycling in Vancouver

Vancouver is known for its progressive approach to cycling as a means of transportation. Over the past decade, the city has invested heavily in cycling infrastructure, including dedicated bike lanes, bike parking facilities, and educational programs to encourage cycling among its residents. Lytton Advisory recently experienced some of this great public infrastructure.

One of the key initiatives in Vancouver’s approach to cycling is the creation of the city’s extensive network of bike lanes. These lanes provide a safe and dedicated space for cyclists, making it easier for people to choose cycling as a mode of transportation. The city also has a bike-share program that provides affordable and accessible rental bikes for residents and tourists, making it easier for people to cycle around the city.

In addition to infrastructure, Vancouver also focuses on education and awareness to encourage cycling. The city runs programs to teach people how to cycle safely, as well as promoting cycling as a means of exercise and recreation. The city also participates in events such as Bike to Work Week, which encourages people to try cycling to work, and promotes the benefits of cycling as a mode of transportation.

Finally, Vancouver has also focused on making cycling accessible to a wider range of people, including families with children and people with disabilities. The city has installed family-friendly bike lanes and has worked with organizations to make cycling more accessible to people with disabilities.

Vancouver’s approach to cycling is a comprehensive one that includes investments in infrastructure, education, and accessibility. Through these efforts, the city is promoting cycling as a safe, accessible, and sustainable means of transportation, making it easier for people to choose cycling as their preferred mode of transportation.

Categories
Cost Benefit Analysis Economics Lytton Advisory Waste Management

Why is cost benefit analysis important in waste management?

Cost-benefit analysis is a tool that can be used to evaluate the costs and benefits of different options for managing waste. It helps decision makers understand the trade-offs involved in different approaches to waste management and make informed choices about how to allocate resources.

There are many factors that can be considered when conducting a cost-benefit analysis of waste management options. These may include the upfront costs of implementing a particular solution, such as the cost of purchasing equipment or constructing a new facility. Other costs to consider might include ongoing operating costs, such as the cost of fuel or labor, as well as the potential costs of environmental impacts or regulatory fines.

On the other hand, the benefits of a particular waste management approach can include reduced environmental impacts, improved public health, and economic benefits such as the creation of jobs or the generation of income through the sale of recycled materials.

By comparing the costs and benefits of different options, decision makers can choose the solution that offers the greatest net benefit, or the greatest benefit after accounting for the costs. This can help them make informed decisions about how to allocate resources and achieve their waste management goals in the most effective and efficient way possible.

How often does your organisation undertake cost-benefit analysis?

Categories
Economics Infrastructure Lytton Advisory

Is multi-criteria analysis a valid tool in infrastructure planning?

Multi-criteria Decision Analysis – Participedia

Multi-criteria analysis (MCA) is a valid tool in national infrastructure planning because it allows decision-makers to consider a wide range of factors and objectives in their decision-making process. MCA is a systematic approach that helps to identify, evaluate, and compare alternative options based on a set of predetermined criteria.

There are many factors that can impact the planning and development of national infrastructure, including economic, social, environmental, and technical considerations. MCA allows decision-makers to take these factors into account and weigh them against each other in order to make informed and balanced decisions. This can help to ensure that infrastructure projects are not only economically viable, but also socially and environmentally sustainable.

MCA can also be used to identify trade-offs between different criteria and to prioritise certain objectives over others. For example, a decision-maker might prioritise the economic benefits of a project over its environmental impact, or vice versa. This can help to ensure that infrastructure projects align with the values and priorities of the community and stakeholders involved.

Overall, MCA is a valuable tool because it allows decision-makers to consider a wide range of factors and objectives in a structured and systematic way, which can ultimately lead to better outcomes for all stakeholders involved.

If you use MCA in your organisation, feel free to share your approach in the comments.