This information is provided free of charge to the public. It may be reused provided that it is accurately reproduced and the source is credited. Persons using this information agree to save harmless Her Majesty in right of Canada and all her representatives against any claim resulting from its use.
Any policy views, whether explicitly stated, inferred or interpreted from the contents of this publication should not be represented as reflecting the views of the Rural Secretariat, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada or the Government of Canada.
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2004
To obtain additional copies, please contact:
Rural Research and Analysis Unit
Rural Secretariat, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
1341 Baseline Road, Tower 7, 6th floor,
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
Fax: 1-800-884-9899
E-mail:
rs@agr.gc.ca
ISBN 0-662-40648-6, Nº de catalogue A114-17/2005E-HTML
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Publication Number 10042/E
Également offert en français sous le titre :
Revue et analyse : Outils et méthodes d’investissement en infrastructure pour les collectivités septentrionales et rurales du Canada
Agriculture et Agroalimentaire Canada Nº de publication 10043/F
Executive Summary
Given limited human and financial resources, rural and remote municipalities must make
sound decisions regarding infrastructure investment. Sound decision-making can lead to
substantial cost savings and improved service provision.
The objective of this study is to identify tools that can improve decision-making with
regard to infrastructure investments in rural and remote communities. Once the search
for infrastructure investment tools was complete, an analysis of the most promising tools
was undertaken. The search and the analysis that followed had a purpose that was two-fold: 1) to find the most promising tools for use by rural and remote communities and 2)
to detail gaps and opportunities that may be addressed by Federal and Provincial
governments.
The search process found more than 200 tools. They are outlined in Appendix B (colour
coded by investment stage). These tools cut across infrastructure types and community
needs. More than 50 of the most promising tools were short-listed using a rating system
that identified ease of implementation and impact on communities. This ranking was
done twice (once by the research team and once by an independent panel of community
developers and planners - The Ground-Truthers). Once the ranking process was
complete, the Federal-Provincial Steering Committee reviewed the list of selected tools.
After some discussion, and noting that further information on some of the tools would be
difficult to acquire, further analysis was completed on a number of tools and groups of
tools outlined in section 5.2.3 of this report.
Results
Three comprehensive tools that provide assessment, planning, and implementation of
infrastructure investments were found, they include The National Infrastructure Guide,
Alberta's MIMS and Ontario's REDDI program.
A wide range of reference materials was available from various sources. While these
instruments offer sound advice, most lacked focussed efforts to provide usable
infrastructure investment tools to communities.
There is a wealth of easily implemented planning tools. The most important of these
appears to be the regional planning structures.
Many implementation tools were found. However, given the range of uses and the
number of tools identified it was difficult to assess each of these tools specifically.
There appear to be some gaps (performance evaluation tools are lacking).
Conclusions
For the most part, there is a wide range of infrastructure investment tools that are for use
by communities in rural and remote areas.
The greatest need appears to be a requirement to inform communities of the tools that are
available to them. If a community does not realize that a particular tool exists, it is of
little use.
Another need is the requirement for further training of community leaders and
administrators in the use of such tools. In order to be implemented, most tools require a
minimal amount of expertise in terms of technical understanding or financial ability.
This is the case regardless of the degree to which communities used outside expertise to
assess, plan and implement infrastructure investments. A concerted effort to develop
human capital in rural and remote areas would be beneficial.
While there are only a limited number of tools that are directed toward aboriginal and
extremely remote communities, the tools that do exist can apply or be reworked to assist
these areas. Remote communities face significant financial limitations concerning
infrastructure assessment, planning and implementation. Aboriginal communities have
additional requirements regarding cultural norms and specific societal needs.
1. Overview
The effort to prioritize, evaluate and implement infrastructure improvements in a
community can be arduous, especially in rural and northern locations. Limited resources
are often unable to meet the unlimited requests for physical and social infrastructure,
while jurisdictional overlaps and gaps may intensify the frustration. For this reason it is
essential to identify and assess various tools and methods that can assist community
decision-makers in their efforts to prioritize, evaluate and implement the most
appropriate infrastructure investments in a community.
This study identified and assessed over 200 tools and methods that could be used in rural
infrastructure investment planning and implementation. The entire grid of tools was
presented to a group of users and community development professionals in a Ground-Truthing Session (See
Appendix A). This group was asked to identify "low hanging
fruit": tools that were easy to implement and/or that would have a high impact. Once a
short list of tools was established the Federal-Provincial Steering Committee was asked
to determine which tools should be assessed further. Roughly 50 tools were selected for
further analysis. Criteria used to assess these tools included potential benefits and costs,
as well as the "fit" with requirements for rural and remote communities.
What became apparent as the research progressed was that there are many easily
available, high impact tools for rural communities to use in planning and implementing
various infrastructure investments. However, it is often the case that community
planners and authorities are not able to implement these tools. This is generally the
result of a lack of information about the actual tools or limited understanding and
training regarding the tools' implementation. It is clear that the current resources
dedicated to develop the new infrastructure investment tools is sufficient, though greater
emphasis could be placed on ensuring communities are aware of these tools, their
benefits and costs. In addition, greater emphasis on training and advice regarding the
actual use of these tools would be beneficial.
Below we offer a more thorough description of our research and its findings.
2. Community Challenges & Opportunities
Every community has an inherent commitment to provide residents with opportunities to
live, learn, work and play. Part of this commitment is met through infrastructure
investments in healthcare, transportation, sewer / water, communication, education,
economic development and recreation.
Given limited revenue availability, increasing capital costs and seemingly insatiable
needs by residents, communities are steadily strained to provide adequate services. To
alleviate this problem community leaders need tools that will allow them to provide the
most necessary services in a cost efficient manner.
These limitations are particularly acute when viewed from the perspective of remote
communities, jurisdictions with extremely low population densities and aboriginal
communities. Remote communities have little capability to partner with neighbouring
towns and villages to ensure adequate service to residents. Areas with extremely low
population densities often lack the tax revenue to provide adequate levels of service and
limited potential to agglomerate services given the critical mass required for
infrastructure investments in areas like healthcare and education. Aboriginal
communities have particular cultural needs and norms that may require extra efforts in
planning and implementation of infrastructure investments.
Regardless, all communities must take stock of their assets, both physical and social. All
communities must prioritize the needs of their residents. All communities must establish
a plan that will meet those needs in an efficient and effective way. All communities
must ensure adequate financing, sufficient human resources, and cost-effective
procurement once the plan to invest in a particular piece of infrastructure is put into
action. Finally, all communities must monitor the viability and performance of the
infrastructure item once it has been built.
Tools exist to assist communities in these efforts. Our objective is to identify such tools
and assess their applicability to rural areas.
3. Purpose of the Study
To identify and assess the tools that are available to help rural and northern communities
with physical and social infrastructure investments. Such infrastructure investments can
enable growth, facilitate change and empower communities.
4. Research Approach
4.1 Introduction
Given a relatively short time frame, the research team along with a Federal-Provincial
Steering Committee agreed that electronic searches of the Internet and scientific
publications would give us a wide net to find possible tools in a short time. Personal
contacts were also made as potential tools were identified. As the research team and
staff identified tools they assessed each tool's primary use and attempted to assess its
effectiveness by checking for various factors that are listed in detail below.
Once this list of tools was compiled the research team reviewed all of the tools and
attempted to identify the most easily implemented tools and those that offered the highest
positive impact. A short list was then presented to a group of Ground-Truthers (tool
users and rural planners) for further feedback. Next, the designers/providers of each of
the tools in the short list were contacted for any information on evaluation of their tools
and for a list of representative users. The feedback from these tool providers and their
users, along with the information gathered during the Ground-Truthing Session and the
grid creation process, were summarized. The information gleaned from these sources
was used to develop our final conclusions and recommendations.
4.2 Literature Review of Methods & A Search for Tools
The main objective of this part of the study was to identify methods, tools and
information originating or implemented in various jurisdictions, including: Canada;
United States; Australia; New Zealand; United Kingdom; and other member countries of
the EU. In order to identify as many titles as possible from these jurisdictions, three
different sources were employed: Internet sources, scientific journals and personal
communication (by phone or e-mail).
Once identified, each title was catalogued according to the following information:
- Name/Type of Tool
- Description of the Tool
- Title / Name of Policy / Program /Publication
- Author / Contact Person
- Date
- Country / Region
- Stage of Investment (Reference, Planning or Implementation)
- Type of Infrastructure (Transportation, Utility, Social)
- Purpose
- Prioritization
- Needs assessment
- Financial models
- Benefit/Cost analysis
- Social impact
- Other
- Availability
- Accessibility
- Current Uses / Success Stories
- Restrictions on Use
- Advantages
- Disadvantages
- Barriers
- Community
- Capacity Required
- Applicability to Rural Canada
- Location (Metro, Rural, Remote)
- Aboriginal Context
- Value of Info / Tool
- Web Source
Items 1 through 6 can be considered solely categorization elements. Items 7 to 9 provide
more explanation of each tool/method and attempts to categorize them more consistently.
Items 7 through 22 allow some assessment of each tool that assists in creating the short
list of tools/methods that will be more fully examined in the assessment section of this
study.
4.3 Assessment of Tools
Under the direction of the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Steering Committee and the
members of the Ground-Truthing session, the most promising tools were identified.
Each of these tools was analyzed to assess their usefulness in assisting rural and northern
communities in prioritizing, evaluating and implementing infrastructure investments.
The following questions were used to assess each tool:
- How useful is each tool for rural and northern communities? Differentiate among
metro-adjacent rural communities, non-metro-adjacent and remote communities?
- How accessible is the tool? For example, does it require that communities have
high-speed Internet access, or large sums of money?
- Is the tool useful and appropriate for First Nations communities?
- What level of capacity is required to use the tool?
- What are the advantages, disadvantages and barriers of each tool for rural and
northern communities?
- Does the tool apply to single communities only, or is it useful for regions and
communities working together?
- Is the tool applicable to all provinces and territories or only to some? What are
the differences across provinces and territories?
4.4 Detailed Analysis of Short List
In this step a short list of the most promising tools was chosen by the research team, in
concert with the Steering Committee, for further assessment. These chosen tools were
evaluated on the basis that they could be used in a Canadian setting to assist rural and
northern communities in strategic planning, needs assessment, project viability, financing
efforts and project evaluation with regard to rural infrastructure investment efforts.
All of the tools in the grid were subjected to a thorough review. A ranking analysis was
conducted by each researcher, by the research team in concert, and by the participants of
the Ground-Truthing Session (See Appendix A). Emphasis was placed on the following
aspects of each tool:
- Current Success Stories
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Assistance provided to Canadian communities
- Community capacity required
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- Inclusion of smaller more remote communities
Note: These criteria can be considered normative; they were used by the research team to
inform the steering committee as to each tool's:
- Ease of implementation
- Impact on communities.
These last two criteria were used to evaluate "low hanging fruit" that scored well for ease
of implementation and impact. See Appendix A for the graphs showing the relative
scores of each short-listed tool (includes that research team evaluation and the Ground-Truthers' evaluation).
4.5 User-Based Analysis of Short List
To improve our assessment of the tools in the short list the remaining project time was
budgeted to work through the tools in order to collect more information. Short listed
tools were fleshed out and our evaluation confirmed, in consultation with:
- Company, developer, provider of tool
- One or more users of tool at community level
- Any independent evaluations, assessments of tool
5. Results
5.1 Summary
The final Grid is made up of 203 tools, categorized by type of infrastructure (see
Appendix B). Applicable tools were found in Canada, the United States, Australia, New
Zealand and Europe. Most of the tools were applicable to more than one type of
infrastructure. There were 92 transportation related tools, and 85 utility related tools.
Only 10 of the utility tools were not also transportation tools. There were 58 tools that
were used on all types of infrastructure, 100 that address social needs like hospitals and
schools, 88 tools that dealt with technology infrastructure like web access and 99 that
dealt with other types of infrastructure.
Because of the repetition of tools across types of infrastructure we also looked at the way
the tool was used as a key categorization. Tools were listed according to their use for
planning and implementation and then within these two general categories, according to
more specific uses. 22 of the tools were comprehensive in nature covering all stages of
infrastructure development. 36 tools were considered reference guides that supported
various stages of investment but were not specific. 45 tools were designed for planning
purposes and 100 tools facilitated infrastructure implementation.
It became apparent that a great many of the tools were planning tools that cut across
types of infrastructure. It can be safely said that there are few gaps in planning tools.
Even among remote and aboriginal communities, the few tools specific to these
communities that we found were focused on gathering local input and information to
make more comprehensive plans. There was also a wealth of reference materials that
informed all stages of infrastructure investment. There were also very comprehensive
infrastructure guides, like the National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure,
which offered tools to help communities plan, implement, monitor and evaluate their
infrastructure investments. The National Guide even contained practical experience
from people on the ground using these tools.
Most of the tools we found were described in detail directly on the World Wide Web.
These tools are easily available and usually affordable in that sense. However, they often
required significant investment in monitoring systems or other investments to be properly
used. It was also clear that by far the biggest cost to implementing virtually all of the
tools was expected to be the training of staff in tool use. Even when costly products like
SASKBIZ are offered to rural communities for free, their use is hindered by lack of
training at the community level.
5.2 Detailed Analysis
5.2.1 Categorization
000 Across All Stages
100 Reference Materials
- 110 Best Practices /Research Inventory / Portals
200 Planning
- 210 Regional Local Planning Process
- 220 Regional Planning Structures
- 230 GIS for Regional Planning
300 Implementation
- 310 Indicators / Development / Project Selection
- 320 Financial Tools
- 330 Training / education
- 340 Procurement Tools
- 350 Asset Management / Asset Mapping / Life Cycle Analysis
- 360 GIS for Engineering / Infrastructure
5.2.2 Selected tools
The Detailed Grid (see Appendix C) includes 52 tools, categorized by investment stage.
000 Across All Stages
- 001 National Guide
- Formal Planning Tools
- Strategic Planning
- Information Management
- Weighting And Ranking Priorization Models
- Business Case Approaches To Priorization
- 002 REDDI
- Project Implementation - Putting Plans into Action
- Tracking Progress
- 003 MIMS
- MIMS Self-Assessment
- MIMS RFP Template
- MIMS Spatial Recommendation
- MIMS Data Gathering Cost Tool
- MIMS Data Dictionary
- MIMS Specifications
- MIMS Application
100 Reference Materials
- 110 Best Practices / Research Inventory / Portals
- 111 InfraGuide CD (Reference material for the National Guide)
- 112 Infrastructure Investment and Economic Growth - research paper
- 113 Infrastructure Management - planning guide
- 114 Publication Storehouse - www.civicinfo.bc.ca
200 Planning
- 210 Regional / Local Planning Process
- 211 Community Self Assessment
- 212 Social Accounting Matrix (SAM)
- 213 Village Appraisals for Windows Software Package
- 214 Village Appraisals
- 215 Aboriginal Community Management Plan Development
- 220 Regional Planning Structures
- 221 Empowerment Zone & Enterprize Community (EZEC) Program
- 222 CFDC's, REDA's, REDB's
- 230 GIS (Regional / Local Planning)
- 231 Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
- 232 SASKBIZ
- 233 CommunityViz
300 Implementation
- 310 Indicators / Development / Project Selection
- 311 Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM's) Quality of Life
reporting system
- 312 CMHC/Environment Canada's Sustainable Community Indicators
Program (SCIP)
- 313 Inventory of National Rural Health Research
- 314 Social Benchmarking and Indicators
- 315 Benchmarking Local Government Services in Canadian
Municipalities
- 316 Community Inventory
- 317 Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide
- 318 Aboriginal Infrastructure Program
- 320 Financial Tools
- 321 ACFA Debt Limit Worksheet
- 322 ACFA Loan Calculator
- 323 ACFA Borrowing Manual
- 324 Municipal Financing of Infrastructure
- 325 Infrastructure Costing Model
- 326 The Maintenance of Infrastructure and its Financing and Cost
Recovery (See also #354)
- 327 P3 Guide - Industry Canada
- 328 Capital Budgeting
- 330 Training and Education
- 331 Service Excellence Programs/Training
- 340 Procurement Tools
- 341 Contracting Templates and Procurement Guides
- 350 Asset Mgmt / Asset Mapping /Life Cycle
- 351 Assets Map
- 352 Infrastructure Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines
- 353 Asset Management Planning
- 354 The Maintenance of Infrastructure and its Financing and Cost
Recovery (See also #326)
- 355 Sustainable Building Assessment Tool
- 360 GIS (Engineering / Infrastructure)
- 361 Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
5.2.3 Description & Analysis of Short-Listed Tools by Investment Stage
In this section, each tool is described briefly and an analysis is detailed. The analysis
includes success stories, costs (direct, indirect, and community capacity required)
benefits, and applicability to Canadian communities (especially smaller, remote, and
aboriginal communities). The analysis also includes each tool's potential impact and
ease of implementation according to the Ground-Truthers' evaluation.
The following descriptions and analyses are taken primarily form the websites that were
searched. Given time constraints and contact limitations, telephone interviews were
conducted for only a few of the tools noted below. These include the National Guide to
Sustainable Infrastructure (001), the Municipal Infrastructure Management System (003)
and SaskBiz (230).
Verification and further investigation of the remaining tools was completed through e-mail query, and should not be considered extensive or complete. Tool users were
contacted in a cursory manner; third-person information was often used, as most direct
users were unavailable. No independent performance evaluations of the short-listed tools
were reviewed, since none were found. Notwithstanding these caveats, the text below
gives a brief summary of the tools and the benefits that may accrue from there use, as
well as an indication of the requirements that communities would need to implement
them.
001 National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure
-Description
The National Guide is a comprehensive tool that contains best practices regarding
several areas of infrastructure development including municipal roads and
sidewalks, potable water, storm and wastewater management, decision-making
and investment planning, environmental protocols and transit. Currently 30 best
practices have been published under the program and more topics are being
considered. Content was created through consultation with stakeholders from
Canadian municipalities. The National Research Council (NRC) and the
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) provide funding for this program.
Its official title is "Coordinating Infrastructure Works: A Best Practice By The
National Guide To Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure".
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- There is no question that the content of the guide is of the highest quality,
however, designers of the guide understand that the greatest obstacle to
success is uptake and use of the information contained in the guide by
communities and infrastructure practitioners across Canada.
- To date, the guide has been most often used in urban centers, and those
communities in close proximity to urban agglomerations.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- FCM and NRC have covered the direct costs of developing the guide.
- These direct costs have been defrayed by volunteer efforts to establish the
guide. Professional infrastructure practitioners, community researchers
and municipal officials share their information and best practices in the
guide. As well, users of the guide are invited to share their expertise and
experiences.
- There is a commitment of time required by community officials to study
the guide and understand its best practices.
- Note that infrastructure professionals are available to assist communities
in implementing the best practices in communities across Canada.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Given that infrastructure investments are long-term in nature, mistakes
can be costly. For this reason the guide's approach is to allow users to
learn from the experience of others. In doing so, the guide provides best
practices that may allow community leaders to avoid costly mistakes and
reduce any unwarranted costs to the taxpayers in a community.
- Proper planning can produce dividends, both monetarily and in terms of
resident satisfaction with service provision within a community.
- The guide also allows community leaders to verify the recommendations
of hired experts and practitioners, and leads decision-makers toward the
simpler, more inexpensive solutions to infrastructure problems.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- The guide uses Canadian expertise to develop best practices for the
Canadian experience.
- Community capacity required
- There is a need for users of the guide to be knowledgeable regarding the
particular type of infrastructure being managed. This may be in-house
expertise or take the form of hired consultants and engineers.
- Limited computer skills would be an asset since the guide is available in
web-based and CD-based versions. However, it is also available in hard
copy.
- A pilot project is being developed that would allow potential partner
organizations to use the content of the guide to develop curiculaum for
training efforts across Canada. This project may include teaching
materials, sample exercises and an e-learning component that could allow
for distance education and certification of community infrastructure
practitioners.
- The guide's staff understands that the training needs are twofold: an
immediate need to educate and inform current practitioners of best
practices in the field ("tailgate" sessions); and a more long-term approach
that would allow use of the materials to teach planners and engineers in
university programs (McGill University already uses the material).
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- The guide does not specifically call for co-operation among communities.
However, it is very unlikely that the guide would dismiss such efforts,
especially if benefits are readily available from such co-operation.
- The guide promotes networking between and among infrastructure experts
and practitioners across Canada. This allows interested individuals to
understand that all Canadian communities have similar problems
regarding infrastructure provision, and allows those individuals to work
toward common solutions.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While there are no specific aspects of the guide relating to aboriginal
communities, aboriginal communities would benefit from its use.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- The guide relates to all communities, there is no specific element of this
tool regarding remote communities. However, some limited
understanding of specific infrastructure is presumed to be present in the
community.
002 REDDI (Project Implementation / Tracking Aspects)
-Description
The Rural Economic Development Data and Intelligence (REDDI) program
provides five separate tools to assist in infrastructure decision-making and region
development: 1) Socio-economic insight, 2) Analyze your economy, 3) Set
strategies. 4) Implement projects, and 5) Track progress. However, only two
aspects of this comprehensive tool have been selected for more detailed analysis,
they are: Project Implementation and Tracking. The project implementation
component allows communities to build business plans regarding their
infrastructure investments. The tracking tool allows for performance
measurement of each investment. This program is exclusively administered in
Ontario, although its uses as an infrastructure investment tool could be applied
across Canada.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Because the REDDI website and its contents are funded by the
Government of Ontario, this tool can be used by communities at no cost.
- The Province will provide Economic Development staff to assist in
planning and monitoring efforts (for Ontario communities).
- The Province will also provide some training (for Ontario communities).
- There is a commitment of time and effort required by communities that
use this tool.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Improved planning and tracking can produce dividends, both monetary
and in terms of resident satisfaction with service provision, within a
community.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- REDDI is focused on helping rural communities in Ontario. However, the
contents can be applied to rural and urban communities across Canada.
- Community capacity required
- There is a need for users of this tool to be knowledgeable regarding the
particular type of infrastructure being planned or monitored.
- While extremely user-friendly, there is some need for limited computer
skills since REDDI is available through the Internet.
- While a high-speed Internet would be advantageous, saving time with
regard to this tool, these benefits can be considered minimal and such an
investment would not be necessary.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- This tool does not specifically call for co-operation among communities.
However, the Government of Ontario would likely be amenable to assist
in instances where additional benefits can be attained and limited
disruption will occur from co-operation between municipalities.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While there are no specific aspects of this tool relating to aboriginal
communities, aboriginal communities would benefit from its use.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- The tool relates to all rural communities in Ontario, there is no specific
element of this tool regarding remote communities.
003 Municipal Infrastructure Management System - Alberta
-Description
Municipal Infrastructure Management System (MIMS) is a web-based tool
designed to assist communities in collecting and evaluating data that will inform
infrastructure investment decisions. It is made up of seven separate tools: 1)
MIMS Self-Assessment, which allows a community to review its current
resources and identify gaps in its data gathering capabilities. 2) MIMS RFP
Template, a document that can serve as a guide in hiring consultants to collect the
required data. 3) MIMS Spatial Recognition outlines best practices regarding
data collection and maintenance. 4) MIMS Data Gathering Cost Tool allows
communities to estimate the costs of data collection, depending on population
base and data requirements. 5) MIMS Data Dictionary, which can assist
communities in identifying core data requirements, intended for development of
inventory and management systems. 6) MIMS Specifications outlines a set of
guidelines with the purpose of establishing common data gathering standards. 7)
MIMS Application, which stores all of a community's infrastructure data in a
central location; it has reporting and graphical capabilities, which provide
information about your municipality's inventory, condition, functional adequacy
and lifecycle status.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- At least 59 users of the MMS tool set, 49 Alberta municipalities and 10
engineering firms.
- The City of Fort Saskatchewan uses MIMS in conjunction with GIS and
other asset management tools.
- The Oldman River Intermunicipal Services Agency (ORISA), is a shared
planning resource that serves 18 communities and municipalities in
southern Alberta. ORISA, and its member communities are working with
MIMS staff to align land use information with MIMS databases and maps.
This will allow an integrated planning effort, land use and infrastructure,
for most of rural southern Alberta.
- The town of Legal, Alberta is a community situated one hour north of
Edmonton. It is an example of a small community (population is rough
1,000 people) that has implemented the MIMS tool set.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- There is currently no direct cost to municipalities within Alberta for
acquiring the MIMS tool set. However, MIMS is looking to becoming a
self-funding entity, thus there are plans to charge back some or all of the
organization's operating costs to communities that use the service.
- The Government of Alberta has covered the cost of development in
partnership with municipal associations, and the support of the Consulting
Engineers of Alberta.
- Municipalities are likely to already have the computer hardware required
to run the tool set.
- There are costs of collecting data and maintaining the database. In
addition, municipalities are required to sign a licensing agreement in order
to employ the MIMS software.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Four questions can be answered using the MIMS tool set:
- What infrastructure do I own?
- What is the condition of my infrastructure?
- Where is my infrastructure ... in relation to other important
information including land parcels, etc.
- How much money can I expect data collection and data entry to
cost?
- Answers to these questions can assist municipalities in understanding the
data requirements needed to make informed decisions regarding
infrastructure investments
- As a result, the MIMS tool set can assist municipalities in meeting the
service needs of a community with the appropriate infrastructure
investment. This is done by better informing planning activities and
ensuring the implementation of the most cost-effective investment
strategies.
- As well, given the attrition and the possibility of employee turn-over, the
specific information of each piece of infrastructure may be better stored in
a database, rather than in the mind of the local engineer or administrator.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- MIMS is focused on helping communities in Alberta. However, the
contents can be applied to communities across Canada.
- Community capacity required
- MIMS is designed for communities with population of at least 400 people.
The tools are designed for small to medium-sized communities. For the
most part, the interface with existing software packages is relatively
straight-forward.
- Administrative and engineering staff with database and data collection
experience would be beneficial. As well, high-speed Internet would be
beneficial, but is not necessary
- Although additional expertise is often required to assist in database
building and proper data collection procedures, for example, closed-circuit cameras can be used to inspect water lines, but outside expertise
would likely be needed to interpret the images.
- An existing infrastructure inventory would be a head-start for
communities.
- Six types of training sessions are available from MIMS staff. They range
from a simple overview to a full coarse on the functioning of GIS. The
time required is between a half-day and one-and-a-half days. Training is
moving from in-community sessions to regional sessions, usually held in
Edmonton or Calgary.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- This tool does not specifically call for co-operation among communities.
However, the Government of Alberta would be amenable to assist in
instances where additional benefits can be attained and limited disruption
will occur from co-operation between municipalities.
- Note the ORISA example above.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While there are no specific aspects of MIMS relating to aboriginal
communities, aboriginal communities would benefit from its use.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- MIMS is focused on serving the needs of all communities in Alberta; as a
result there is no specific element of this tool regarding remote
communities.
110 Best Practices / Research Inventories & Searchable Web Portals
-Description
This category is a combination of several of the best reference materials found in
the search for infrastructure investment tools. The list in Appendix C consists of
two journal articles and one searchable web portal:
"Investing in Rural Infrastructure" - a paper that examines the relationship
between infrastructure investment and economic growth.
"Local Tools for Smart Growth" - a paper that outlines best practices regarding
needs assessment, infrastructure costing, taxation and project funding, as well as
public consultation procedures. A number of case studies are cited in the paper.
The paper also contains sections on strategic planning and transportation.
www.civicinfo.bc.ca - a searchable website that allows individuals and
communities to obtain information regarding the prioritization, evaluation and
implementation of various infrastructure investments. While there are a number
of other searchable websites listed in the general grid (Appendix B), this
particular website was deemed to be a representative example of this type of tool.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- No specific success stories are noted here.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Given that these resources are already in the public domain, no direct cost
is applied to communities that use these tools.
- However, there is an extensive time commitment involved in search out
and reviewing the documents / search engines outlined in this category.
- There is one drawback that exists: such enormous volumes of information
are easily accessible, which may lead to information overload.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- The benefit from this type of resource is the increased human capital that
can be gleaned from this type of tool.
- Greater dissemination of best practices will encourage more informed
choices in infrastructure investment at the community level.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Reference material and search engines contained in this category originate
from various locations around the world. Each has particular resonance to
the Canadian experience.
- Community capacity required
- Some reference materials will require technical training to understand,
although the greatest requirement is a willingness to learn.
- Use of search engines will require computer literacy and a web
connection.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While we have found no specific aspects of these resources relating to
aboriginal communities, they may exist in some searchable form. Note
that aboriginal communities would still benefit the use of these resources.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- These resources can be used in any community.
210 Regional / Local Planning Process [planning / capacity]
-Description
This category contains several different types of tools that can assist in the
planning process, and allow communities to determine there current
infrastructure situation, with particular emphasis on identifying gaps and critical
maintenance requirements. The four tools that have been chosen for further
assessment are:
- Community Self-Assessment
- Social Accounting Matrix
- Village Appraisals (for Windows and non-computer use)
- Aboriginal Community Management Plan Development
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- Because these tools are most often used for overall development planning,
no success stories that pertain specifically to infrastructure planning were
found.
- While these four tools were chosen, there are many tools that outline a
planning procedure and a tremendous amount of know-how in this area, in
Canada and around the world.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- These tools require a substantial commitment of time and money on the
part of the community that under take them. The actual expenditure will
depend on the data requirements and the extent of the survey being
proposed. It is very likely that communities would hire professional help
in developing surveys and plans.
- Not only are there significant direct expenditures, there is also a
requirement that residents give of their time and effort to complete
surveys and offer input into consultation processes.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Identifying your community's current situation regarding infrastructure or
development, and establishing real goals and action plans are activities
that will pay dividends. Residents will better understand where their
community is headed and why.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- While some of these tools are from Europe, most are straight forward
planning tools, applicable in any country.
- Community capacity required
- Money, time, commitment to the process are all needed, this may not be
available in some communities
- If communities decide to go it alone (without professional assistance), a
great deal of community expertise will be required regarding the process
and the particular infrastructure types.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- While not overtly stated as an aspect of any of the tools noted above,
given the resources required and the regional nature of some infrastructure
investments, this type of co-operation may be wanted and needed.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While Aboriginal Community Management Plan Development is titled as
an aboriginal assistance program, the instructions provided appeared to
apply to any community.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- These resources can be used in any community.
220 Regional Planning Structures
-Description
This category contains examples of regional planning authorities. While the
search used many of these organizations as sources, it was not until the
compilation of search material that these organizations were categorized as a type
of tool. Just a few examples of these organizations include REDA's in
Saskatchewan, REDB's in Newfoundland and CFDC's across Canada. Of course,
this list omits many of the general and sector-specific regional planning
authorities that are apparent in each province in Canada and in most sub-national
jurisdictions in developed countries.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- While regional development planning structures have been noted as
successful examples, there are many infrastructure specific success
stories. These include hospital boards, education boards, transportation
planning boards, land-use planning initiatives, as well as gas-line, potable
water and other utility co-operatives.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- These tools are often supported by provincial or federal dollars.
- They do require a substantial commitment of time and money on the part
of the communities involved.
- The actual expenditure will depend on the infrastructure being planned
and the number of communities involved.
- It is very likely that communities or groups of communities would hire
professional help in developing surveys and plans.
- Not only are there significant direct expenditures, there is also a
requirement that each community may be asked to forego some powers
that may have previously been the purview of the individual community.
- Residents and community leaders must give of their time and effort to
ensure that such structures are established and sustained.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Often communities are unable to afford adequate levels of infrastructure.
If communities work together service levels may be expanded by
spreading out the fixed costs of the infrastructure investment.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- These structures exist in most parts of Canada.
- Community capacity required
- A willingness to work with neighbouring communities.
- Some form of technical expertise is usually required.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- This is the essence of these structures.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While such structures are not specifically designed for aboriginal
communities, they are applicable in such instances. They may also foster
co-operation between aboriginal and non-aboriginal communities.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- These structures can be used in any community. However, more remote
communities may need to partner with federal or provincial government
to establish such structures.
230 GIS for regional / local planning
-Description
This category includes Geographical Information Systems (GIS) that can assist
communities in identifying needs and planning potential infrastructure
investments. Three separate GIS tools that are detailed here are: Arcview
software, SaskBiz, and CommunityViz.
Arcview is one particular software maker that designs GIS applications for use in
community planning efforts, including infrastructure planning. CommunityViz,
alligned with ESRI Canada, this software assists communities in making better
land use decisions. SaskBiz allows site selection for potential businesses in
Saskatchewan. It can also be used to compare physical and social infrastructure
across communities or administrative regions. Planners may use this information
to gain an understanding of the existing infrastructure in a community or set of
communities. The following analysis focuses primarily on the SaskBiz tool:
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- The main focus of SaskBiz is to promote Saskatchewan locations to
potential investors. The tool provides quality information to would-be
investors so that sound decisions can be made regarding investment in,
and operation of, new businesses.
- SaskBiz also enables local and regional planners to identify the strengths
located in their community and those attributes that might be found in
neighbouring locations. This can lead to better planning in regard to
economic and community development, as well as infrastructure
investment.
- SaskBiz provides up to 40 separate statistical indicators regarding:
governance, demographics, economic base, financial data, labour criteria,
amenities and utilities, on most locations in the province. In addition,
there are text descriptions covering geography, history, economic base,
community attractions and other themes are included for hundreds of
communities and administrative areas. However, most northern
communities have not provided any text information. In the coming
months SaskBiz staff are intending to make a concerted effort to assist
northern communities in uploading text descriptions of their community
or area. There are also GIS capabilities that allow users to search for, and
view, information in a map form.
- Training and support services can be obtained through SaskBiz staff. The
staff will provide website-user orientation (usually a 2-hour session) and
support to information providers (those that provide the information for
up-loading on the website).
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Federal grants, provincial funding and private sector contributions to
establish SaskaBiz have totaled between $800,000 and $1 million.
- The SaskBiz tool is provided free-of-charge to municipalities in
Saskatchewan. Communities can find information that is needed in
community development and infrastructure planning at no charge. The
data is presented in tabular and map form. This type of information may
require some interpretation, thus staff or outside expertise may be
required.
- SaskBiz staff does the uploading of data, text and maps, but communities
must provide the text information. This may also require some staffing
commitment on the part of the community or administrative area.
- Once an understanding of the current situation is achieved, the planning
process itself may also require further commitments of staff and
resources.
- Note: CommunityViz is commercial, user-pay software.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Generally, GIS tools provide a visual understanding of the current and
future state of infrastructure in a community.
- As an example, the "SmartMap" included in the SaskBiz tool can show
several levels of data concerning various statistical themes.
- Maps, tables & charts (outputs) facilitate presentation, education, and
consultation.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- GIS tools are available across Canada, though are more readily available
in communities with greater population density. SaskBiz covers
communities across Saskatchewan, though there is an effort to enhance
the participation of northern communities.
- Community capacity required
- Human capital: computer literacy, understanding of the software, in-house
or hired technical capabilities.
- Depending on the type of GIS software, significant dollars may need to be
expended. This is especially the case if commercial software is employed.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- SaskBiz allows communities to work together in understanding the
current state of affairs in a given geographical area. Reeves and mayors
of a particular region can see the amenities available to their combined
residents. For example, one community may have a swimming pool,
while another has a skating rink. Community leaders may decide to share
recreational facilities rather than invest in new recreational infrastructure;
this would lead to a more efficient and effective outcome for both
communities.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While such tools are not specifically designed for aboriginal communities,
they are applicable in aboriginal communities.
- As mentioned above, there are plans to assist northern communities to
become more fully involved in the SaskBiz process in the coming months.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- These structures can be used in any community with adequate funding.
311 FCM's Quality of Life Reporting System
-Description
This tool allows communities to assess the effectiveness of their social and
physical infrastructure. It includes eight criteria: community affordability, quality
of employment, quality of housing, community health, community safety,
community stress, community participation, and population resources. While
currently applied in urban municipalities, this tool could be used in rural areas.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) currently conducts a
"quality of life" report for cities in Canada. The report is well received
and FCM is considering requests to expand the report to rural
communities.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Time and effort to fill out the survey.
- Development dollars may be required to establish the rural version of this
tool.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- The tool provides a snapshot of issues facing Canadian communities. It
allows communities to direct dollars to areas of greatest need.
- The tool provides context for informed infrastructure decisions balancing
social, environmental and economic concerns.
- As mentioned, the tool is currently offered in select urban municipalities,
but the effort may be extended to rural areas.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Yes, though this is currently an urban tool.
- Community capacity required
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- Completed surveys may show that there is some overlap or gap in
infrastructure provision in a particular region. Communities may band
together to address these needs.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- The rural version of the survey would need to address issues that are
important to aboriginal communities. To the degree that this can be
accomplished, it will become an important needs assessment tool for
aboriginal communities.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Design of the rural survey would also need to take into account issues
facing remote communities in Canada.
317 Local Agenda 21
-Description
This is an assessment and participatory planning tool that focuses on ecological
sustainability of cities and towns. It is a global effort that was established by the
UN Conference on Environment and Development in 1991. Currently, the world
headquarters of this UN initiative are located in Toronto, Canada. There are
regional offices around the globe.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- There are various incarnations of this environmental sustainability tool in
a number of regions of the globe. While it is focused on developing
nations, there are some communities in the US and the EU that use this
tool for environmental planning.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- The time and effort to collect and assess data, and plan for environmental
sustainability regarding potential infrastructure investments.
- Development costs are borne by the UN; however, there are several
publications and tools that are available on a user-pay basis.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Gives communities a framework with which to establish local
environmental plans.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Yes. However, the tool has been focused on environmental sustainability
in developing nations. As well, it is particularly suited to urban centers
rather than rural and remote areas.
- Community capacity required
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- The environmental aspects from this tool could be folded into a regional
planning effort.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- Because this tool is global, this tool is likely not to overlook the cultural
sensitivities that aboriginal communities may have regarding the
environment.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Not designed for this specific purpose, but it would be applicable.
323 Borrowing Manual
-Description
This tool assists communities in understanding the funding requirements of
various infrastructure investments. It includes a loan calculator (determines
borrowing costs of a particular loan amount) and a debt limit worksheet
(determines maximum amount of debt that a community can service).
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- Alberta municipalities use this tool to determine borrowing costs and debt
capacity.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Minimal time and effort.
- Data entry is very simple, and the tool completes the calculations.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- This tool allows communities to accurately measure the amount of debt
they will need to carry for one or more infrastructure investments.
- It also details the overall ability of a community to carry debt.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Community capacity required
- Some financial understanding would be helpful.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- Only in situations where two or more communities decide to finance a
shared infrastructure item.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- Not specifically designed for aboriginal communities, though it is
applicable to those situations.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Not designed for that purpose, but applicable nonetheless.
326 Maintenance of Infrastructure & Financing
-Description
This tool outlines planning, programming, budgeting, and management of
infrastructure maintenance, as well as efforts to finance such maintenance. The
tool is focused on cities in developing countries, but could be reworked to apply
to rural settings in Canada.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- It is very likely that planning or technical professionals would be hired to
undertake the planning and establishment of this type of infrastructure
maintenance program in rural and remote communities.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Residents can be assured that existing infrastructure is being maintained
and that a plan is in place to oversee maintenance costs and schedules of
potential infrastructure investments into the future.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Yes, though the tool has previously only been used in urban settings in
developing nations.
- Community capacity required
- Some technical and financial expertise would be beneficial.
- An understanding of particular pieces of infrastructure is needed.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- To the extent that infrastructure items are shared, like transportation and
other linear infrastructure, inter-community co-operation may apply.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- Not specifically designed for aboriginal communities.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Not specifically designed for remote communities.
327 Industry Canada's Guide Book for P3's
-Description
This tool outlines the efforts that must be undertaken to establish an effective P3
borrowing plan. It includes information on several topics: Team and project
development, choosing a P3 model, developing an implementation plan, selecting
a partner, as well as negotiation and legal issues. This publication was released
by Industry Canada in 2001. The information in this publication has been
reprinted numerous times by provincial and private organization during the
intervening period.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- The town of Maple Ridge, B.C. has used this tool as a basis to write their
own guide. While specific examples of communities using the tool were
not identified, the availability of the information would suggest that
communities have used this approach.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Significant costs accrue in each stage of the process to find a suitable P3
partner.
- It is very likely that professional assistance would be required to
undertake the efforts laid out in this guide.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- This tool provides a step-by-step process for implementing P3
partnerships. This type of funding can alleviate current-year budget
pressures, but this benefit may come at the cost of some local autonomy.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Community capacity required
- A substantial degree of financial and expertise is necessary.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- Where extremely large investments, that may cover more than one
municipality, are needed, a P3 solution could be proposed on a regional
basis.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- Federal funding of infrastructure on reserves may render this tool not
applicable.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Most P3 partners are looking for positive returns and easily monitored
investments. Remoteness may be a discouraging feature to potential
investors.
330 Training & Education
-Description
Tools in this category provide human resource improvements, from both an
infrastructure and general skills perspective. The tool found under this category
is the Service Excellence Training Programs provided in Manitoba. Because this
is a community-development training tool, a more general approach to the topic
was used in the analysis outlined below:
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- The Ground-Truthers suggested that there is a gap in the efforts to provide
usable training and education tools to rural and remote communities.
- There is also a tendency for communities to overlook this aspect of
infrastructure provision. Given the fiscal constraints that face
communities and the costs associated with training and education it is not
surprising that communities may forego such expenses in lieu of other
expenditures that may provide more concrete results.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Substantial costs can be expended on training and education.
- Direct costs include enrollment and registration fees, as well as the cost of
transportation to attend such courses,
- Total costs may vary depending on the amount and specificity of the
training.
- Training must be provided to staff, as well as community leaders and
decision makers
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- A more informed staff and executive will allow communities to develop
and implement infrastructure plans using in-house resources. This can
limit expenditures on outside expertise.
- Given a critical mass of skills, staff member may be "hired-out" to
surrounding communities to defray the costs of training and education.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Community capacity required
- This is an effort to improve community capacity. However, it does
require a significant budgetary and time commitment.
- Community leaders must be committed to ongoing training and education
into the future, a one-time training exercise will not suffice.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- As mentioned above, if a community's staff members are particularly well
trained they can be outsourced to neighboring communities.
- Co-operative efforts may allow training courses to be conducted on a
regional basis, rather than having remote communities send staff to urban
centers for educational purposes.
- Co-operative efforts to send several staff members from a number of
communities can defray the costs associated with training and education.
However, each individual and community will have differing human
resource goals.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- No training and education tools were found that specifically relate to the
needs of aboriginal communities.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Smaller communities may not have the capability to afford proper training
for staff members.
340 Procurement Tools
-Description
Tools in this category allow community leaders and municipal administrators to
improve purchasing capabilities. The tool examined under this category is the
Canadian Construction Association's (CCA) collection of contracting templates
and procurement guides.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- Ground-Truthers suggested that this is an important gap in the efforts to
provide usable tools to communities.
- Currently, smaller communities do not use standardized contracts or
practices when tendering and procuring construction or maintenance
services. Efforts to inform all communities concerning proper
procurement procedures are available, but often go unused, especially in
smaller communities.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- The tool is provided free of charge by the CCA to communities in Canada.
- There is a small commitment of time and effort that is required to use this
tool.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Costs savings are readily available from improved tendering and
procurement procedures. As well, use of this tool may result in a greater
degree of on-time delivery and increased quality regarding infrastructure
construction and maintenance.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Community capacity required
- Some understanding of contracting, negotiating and a degree of financial
expertise is needed.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- Two or more communities may work together to put forth a tendering
process on similar pieces of infrastructure. In such a situation it would be
helpful for those communities to use the CCA guidelines as a basis on
which to establish this type of co-operative effort.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- Aboriginal communities would benefit significantly from adoption of this
tool. Currently very few use standardized procedures. The CCA has
taken steps to allow for cultural differences in their tendering and
contracting templates.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Small and remote communities can benefit from use of this tool. These
communities are likely to receive a greater number of tenders using the
CCA guidelines, resulting in more competitive bids.
350 Asset Mgmt / Asset Mapping / Life cycle
-Description
This category applies to various tools that allow communities to monitor and
manage particular infrastructure items that may be approaching the time when
repair or replacement might be necessary. The following tools have considerable
potential for adoption under this category:
- Strengthening Rural Communities:Tool #6 - Asset Maps (Australia)
- New Zealand Infrastructure Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines
- Asset Management Planning - (UK)
- The Maintenance of Infrastructure and its Financing and Cost Recovery
-Tools to Support Participatory Urban Decision Making (UNCHS)
- Sustainable Building Assessment Tool - (South Africa)
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- It is clear that a well-monitored piece of infrastructure is likely to be
better maintained, and there is a greater potential for such items to provide
greater benefit to the community in which they exist. Infrastructure that is
poorly maintained or fully depreciated can result in extra costs and
significant service impositions. It is in the interest of a community to
ensure its existing infrastructure is checked regularly, is well maintained
and is replaced on a reasonable schedule. As well, when planning new
infrastructure, the efforts required to maintain and eventually replace the
infrastructure must be considered.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- These tools generally require a high degree of technical proficiency. This
may include GIS, financial modeling or planning expertise. As such, it is
likely that communities would need to hire an outside professional to
undertake some of the efforts involved.
- Most are publicly available, and Internet accessible, so that direct costs of
acquisition are minimal.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Greater capability to monitor, manage and reassess infrastructure items
and plans allow community leaders to keep abreast of changes in the
infrastructure situation of their community. As a result, cost savings and
improved service provision is likely to accrue to the residents.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Community capacity required
- A substantial degree of financial and technical expertise may be necessary
to employ these tools in an effective manner.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- Because these tools focus on a particular piece of infrastructure, it is
likely that inter-community co-operation would be minimal. Only when
shared infrastructure is being assessed or monitored would such co-operation be involved.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While not designed to apply specifically to aboriginal communities,
aboriginal communities can benefit from their use.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Smaller communities may not be able to afford to implement these types
of tools.
360 GIS for engineering / infrastructure
-Description
This category includes Geographical Information Systems (GIS) that can be used
on a daily basis by engineers and employees to work on particular infrastructure
projects. The tool identified under this category is Arcview, though other
commercial software systems are available.
-Analysis
- Current Success Stories
- This type of tool is currently used with great success in numerous larger
municipalities in Canada. It is used to enumerate, monitor, and assess
various types of infrastructure. It can also layer infrastructure so that each
piece of a community's infrastructure can be tracked. For instance,
transportation, utilities, recreational facilities, hospitals, and schools can
be delineated one map. The map can include various data ranging from
utilization rates to maintenance schedules. Maps can be produced that are
simple or complex, geographically specific or wide-angle representations.
- Implementation and operational costs: direct and indirect
- Expenses can be substantial. Requirements include: hardware, software,
staff and training.
- Collection of data may also be arduous, depending on the complexity of
the system and data required.
- Professional assistance may be required.
- Net benefits that accrue, and to whom
- Improved operation of infrastructure can result in significant cost savings
to the community.
- Service levels may also improve from implementation of this type of tool.
- Applicability to the Canadian Experience.
- Community capacity required
- Some technical understanding of GIS systems is required.
- When greater complexity is required, dedicated staff may be warranted.
- A substantial degree of expertise in infrastructure operation is also
necessary.
- GIS training can be obtained through post-secondary institutions, though
familiarity with particular software can be gained through short courses
provided by the software developer or a third party.
- Promotion of inter-community / inter-jurisdictional co-operation
- GIS tools are meant to foster inter-community co-operation, however they
may assist communities in aligning operations of various modes of
transportation, gas-lines, electrical lines and other linear infrastructure.
- Potential for aboriginal participation
- While GIS tools are not specifically designed for aboriginal communities,
they are applicable in such instances.
- Inclusion of smaller, more remote communities
- Affordability is an issue.
6. Conclusions
6.1 Low-Hanging Fruit & Gaps
The three tools contained in the "0000" categorization (the National Guide, REDDI
components and the MIMS program) can be considered low-hanging fruit. All of these
tools are currently being implemented by Canadian communities, and are thus deemed to
be low cost. They offer a wide range of utilities and are considered user-friendly.
Actions that may improve the efficacy of these tools include:
- Greater awareness of the tools themselves.
- Improvement in overall computing skills of staff and, to a lesser degree,
community leaders through increased training and education.
- Emphasis on short-course regarding the particular software employed by or
encompassing the tool.
- Additional resources dedicated to providing direction to community leaders
so that they may better understanding all of the aspects of each tool. This is
likely to entail short courses and one-on-one sessions, rather than a broad-based educational effort.
- Enhanced understanding of technical features of the specific infrastructure
pieces.
The reference materials portal (1000) categorization contains several useful publications.
While easily accessible for most communities, they offer less significant benefits than
most tools. This is because they are informational tools rather than utilities that are
ready for implementation. As for the searchable web sites, there appears to be greater
benefits here, though only to the extent that community authorities and administrators
can find and use the information that they require. Information overload is a concern
with this type of tool.
In order to gain the most from these tools, a community will need to dedicate the
following:
- A commitment to improving the skill base of its staff and community leaders.
- Time and a limited amount of resources to study and understand the reference
materials.
- Staff time and computer capabilities (hardware, software, internet access) to
allow searchable portals to be used to the fullest in an effort to identify best
practices relating to infrastructure investments.
There were many tools identified under the planning category (2000). Of note are the
significant benefits that can result from the planning classification that concerns regional
planning structures. These regional structures allow for co-operation among municipal
governments and between levels of government. While the analysis focuses on regional
economic development structures, the greatest benefit may result from implementing
more sector-based structures (eg. Regional Transportation Authorities, Regional
Healthcare Authorities, and Regional Education Authorities).
To use these types of tools to their greatest potential, communities must:
- Fully commit to a planning process as it relates to infrastructure investment.
- Provide staff with adequate resources to develop such a plan. This may
include time, money, computer equipment, and Internet capabilities. In
addition, education of staff members in the area of planning best practices and
computer training would be needed.
- Further commit to work with other communities in order to establish regional
planning efforts to assess needs, implement actions and evaluate performance
of infrastructure investments on a co-operative basis.
While a wide-range of tools was found in the implementation (3000) categorization,
there appears to be several gaps. Based on the Ground-Truthing Session, the
procurement guide, the borrowing manual and some of the life-cycle management tools
appear to be the most useful implementation tools for rural and remote communities.
While a wide range of benchmarking tools and indicators were identified and assessed,
performance evaluation tools seem lacking.
Community leaders looking to implement these tools need to:
- View infrastructure investments as a long-term commitment rather than a
one-time expenditure.
- Understand that staff and executive training are long-term investments not
just expenditures.
- Expand staff training to foster technical, computer and financial expertise.
- Commit to fiscal responsibility and performance evaluation as the normal
course of business.
6.2 General Observations
- Additional revenues (improved tax-fields, federal and provincial grants and other
forms of income) are needed to ensure that rural and remote communities have
wherewithal to undergo the substantial changes required to improve their planning,
assessment, implementation and performance evaluation of new and existing
infrastructure investments.
- None of the tools identified contained barriers to aboriginal communities and remote
municipalities. However, there were only a few tools that were specifically designed
for aboriginal communities and remote communities.
- Tools are only beneficial when utilized properly. Throughout this project researchers
were told that:
- Often tools that are made available are under-utilized, even those that are
relatively simple to employ. Community administrators and authorities
must be better informed of such tools and a concerted effort to educate
potential users of the benefits of existing tools is needed.
- When tools are more complex, local authorities and administrators may
require assistance to implement their use. There is a need for advisory
services so that communities can achieve the greatest benefit from new
and existing tools.
- A very important requirement for communities to make better use of
existing tools is for the provision of greater training and advisory support
services.
APPENDIX A
Ground-Truthing Session
Regina, Saskatchewan
January 19, 2004
MEETING NOTES
INTRODUCTIONS:
Ground-Truthers:
*1) Craig Pollett, Executive Director, Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of
Municipalities
ph: 709-753-6820
e-mail: cpollett@nlfm.nf.ca
2) Bob Grodzik, Manitoba Govt, working in Winnipeg Regional Government
ph: 204-945-5720
e-mail: bgrodzik@gov.mb.ca
3) Manley McLachlan, Executive Director, Saskatchewan Construction Association
ph: 306-525-0171
e-mail: manleym@scaonline.ca
4) Dennis Belliveau, IRAP Officer, Construction Industry, National Research Council
ph: 306-525-0171, Ext 14
e-mail: dennis.belliveau@irap.nrc.ca
5) Bland Brown, working with municipalities around the province re: the Guide.
Formerly, City Manager for Regina
ph: 306-949-9536
e-mail: bland@sasktel.net
6) Bill Spring, Saskatchewan Industry & Resources (Our Host)
ph: 306-787-2225
e-mail: bspring@ir.gov.sk.ca
*Mr. Pollett could not attend as a business matter arose at the last minute. He will be
sending a review of the Grid in the coming days.
Research Team:
Ken Perlich, Rob Greenwood & Derek Brewin
REVIEW:
Ken reviewed the project, its methods and procedures, as well as work to date.
ROUGH RANKING:
1) National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure (27)
2) GIS for engineering / infrastructure (27)
3) Municipal Infrastructure Mgmt System - Alberta (26)
4) Indicators [eg. FCM-Quality of Life Reporting System] (24)
5) Best Practices / Research Inventories / Portals (24)
6) Asset Mgmt / Asset Mapping / Life cycle (22)
7) Regional / Local Planning Process [planning / capacity grouping] (20)
8) CMHC Borrowing Guide (20)
9) Local Agenda 21 (19)
10) Project Implementation / Tracking [REDDI] (19)
11) Regional Planning Structures [REDA's, CFDC's, REDB's] (18)
12) Costing Model (18)
13) Health Impact Assessment Tool (18)
14) Toolkit for Telecomms (17)
15) CMHC Guide Book for P3's (17)
16) Maintenance of Infra. & Financing (17)
17) GIS for regional / local planning (16)
Bracketed numbers at the right signify the research team's overall ranking or the tool
(out of a total score of 30).
SWOT:
1) National Guide
Impact = 8
Ease of use = 6 (or better depending on capacity of municipality and use of consultants)
2) GIS for Engineering / Infrastructure
- Utility mapping is a good opportunity, but as a planning tool … not so
much.
- Weaknesses: lack of data and skilled practitioners.
- If data and design are in place, becomes a more powerful tool.
- Not the best for remote municipalities.
- We have a technology that outstrips the skill level of local operators.
- Is there enough commitment to get GIS out to communities in a form that
can be used -- needs to be more than just usable.
- Manley's story: …"But the dogs won't eat it."
- Start with people => process => technology, do not start with technology.
Impact: 8 if used
Ease: 3 (hard to get people to use at the local level) -- as low 1
3) MIMS
- Nobody is expert on this item at the GT Session.
- May be a data tool only.
- Address issues with current users
- Saskatchewan may have some of these pieces (check it out)
- Research Team should ask current users (eg. Municipalities) if they are
satisfied with the tool.
- Benefits that accrue from use
- Why do they like (dislike) the tool
- Size and location of municipality
- Scope of use: data only?
Impact: No Rating
Ease: No rating
4) Indicators
- Maybe no application to rural
- Quality of Life - noise, smell, all others are issues that count on every
decision by a municipality (including infrastructure decisions)
- Something about baby-boomers spending on flooring
- Quality of life indicators can be important to decision-making at a
political level.
- Important measure of more than just physical infrastructure
- Quality of life is one aspect of overall indicators
- Quality of life indicator will not stand on its own (need
others)
Impact: 4 to 7 on overall indicators
Ease: ? - depends on indicators established
5) Best Practices Portals / References
- Bland hands out the "Infraguide" CD
- Impact and ease depends on the user-friendliness
- Reliability of the source (i.e., quality info)
- At the community level, it is hard to get people with time and expertise to
interpret the information found in these sources.
- How do we hold eyes to screen, or get eyes to screen
- Key: network; person to talk to
Impact: 5
Ease: 5
6) Asset Management et al
- Huge impact, but tough to implement.
- May be related to MIMS in scope.
- Aboriginal infrastructure is pretty new (much of it has been built very
recently) … therefore window of opportunity.
- Blends with GIS.
Impact: 8
Ease: 3
7) Regional / Local Planning Process
- Some ability to plan in communities is necessary.
- Tough for small communities to perform this type of planning.
- Critical to all the other tools, but how do you manage this type of tool?
- A political challenge.
- How to avoid top-down control? Especially when funding is from above.
- Grassroots: most important aspect.
Impact: 7
Ease: 6
8) CMHC Borrowing Manual
- This item should be grouped into a package of financial tools, including:
- The borrowing manual
- P3's (see CCDC)
11) Regional Planning Structures
- Collaboration is tough, needs to happen.
- Who's putting the money in?
- Could cause a skewed impact across the region.
- Too much current turf protection right now.
Impact: 7
Ease: 4 -- Political and political barriers to overcome
NEW ITEMS:
*Training and education
For local administrators and operators and counselors, on municipal government an
infrastructure
Relates to ease of impact
Impact: 9.5
Ease: 8 (just time and money)
*Procurement (CCDC as an example)
Impact: 6/7 maximize dollars spent
Ease: 8
*Other: Project implementation -- lots of need
GAPS:
Aboriginal population is growing at a faster rate than the total population of Canada
(especially in rural and remote areas) … why are there no specific infrastructure
decision-making tools for aboriginal communities?
When asked whether any of the above tools were inappropriate for use in aboriginal
community, the ground-truthers did not see any barriers to such use. However, they
did note that aboriginal communities had specific social and cultural needs that may
be overlooked by traditional decision-making tools. (eg. Aboriginal employment
may be as critical a factor in an infrastructure investment decision as the overall cost
or the rate of return.)
| THE CHALK BOARD: |
| Bob: |
implementation and evaluation tools are limited in the Grid. |
| Manley: |
Remote/Aboriginal
Most of the tools here are irrelevant …need to understand culture and
environment; huge cultural and social differences in aboriginal
communities:
- Funding sources differ
- No taxes
|
| Denis: |
Remote doesn’t mean no road links; can have remote road links. |
| Bob: |
Investment in physical infrastructure has social impacts |
| Manley: |
Procurement
Interpretation Guides / Standard contracts are available through the
Canadian Construction Documents Committee (CCDC). Generally rural and
remote communities have very limited knowledge of the procurement and
contracting aspects of infrastructure investment. |
| Bland: |
Assessment of need by communities for each tool. |
| Denis: |
Where is "use of consultant" as a tool? [fits under ease of
implementation] |
Research Team's Preliminary Rating
#12 - Insufficient information given.
Ground-Truthers' Rating
#3 - More information is needed to make an appropriate assessment.
#4 - Ease of implementation depends on indicators used.
#8 - Combine this tool with other financial tools (with #15) and reassess.
#9 - Omitted. #10 - Omitted. #12 - Omitted. #13 - Omitted. #14 - Omitted. #16 - Omitted.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Research Team recommends that the following tools be selected for further
research:
|
1) National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure
|
x |
|
2) GIS for engineering / infrastructure
|
x |
|
3) Municipal Infrastructure Mgmt System - Alberta
|
x |
|
4) Indicators [eg. FCM-Quality of Life Reporting System]
|
x |
|
5) Best Practices / Research Inventories / Portals
|
x |
|
6) Asset Mgmt / Asset Mapping / Life cycle
|
x |
|
7) Regional / Local Planning Process [planning / capacity grouping]
|
x |
|
8) CMHC Borrowing Guide
|
COMBINE w/ #15 |
|
9) Local Agenda 21
|
x |
|
10) Project Implementation / Tracking [REDDI]
|
x |
|
11) Regional Planning Structures [REDA's, CFDC's, REDB's]
|
x |
|
12) Costing Model
|
OMIT |
|
13) Health Impact Assessment Tool
|
OMIT |
|
14) Toolkit for Telecomms
|
OMIT |
|
15) CMHC Guide Book for P3's
|
COMBINE w/ #8 |
|
16) Maintenance of Infra. & Financing
|
x |
|
17) GIS for regional / local planning
|
x |
|
18) Training & Education Tools (GT Session)
|
x |
|
19) Procurement Tools [CCDC standards] (GT Session)
|
x |
|
Date Modified: 2005-09-26
|
|
[
|
|
|
| ]
[
|
|
|
| ]
|
