WSP and Helen Clark Foundation call for urgent rethink on infrastructure asset management

Titled 'Built to Last: How can we take a more strategic approach to infrastructure asset management in Aotearoa New Zealand?', the report highlights a critical lack of focus on infrastructure renewals with chronic underinvestment leaving assets at risk. It also points out that, in the case of infrastructure owned by central government, there is little transparency around whether agencies are investing adequately in maintenance at all.

Report author Kali Mercier says all the tools and knowledge we need to look after infrastructure assets are already in the toolbox. What is missing are the systems and accountability to ensure that they are used consistently. 

“The real issue at hand is that funds collected through rates, taxes, and user charges - intended for the upkeep of vital infrastructure - are instead being diverted to new infrastructure projects.”

Only one of six central government agencies examined for the report keeps a full asset register, and just two have comprehensive asset management plans in place. 

WSP technical director for asset management Elke Beca says that means decisions are being made without knowing what infrastructure already exists, what condition it is in, or when it will need to be renewed.

“The lack of a full asset lifecycle view in decision-making is short-sighted and costly. As much as 99 percent of the infrastructure we will need in the next 30 years has already been built, according to Te Waihanga, the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission. But without proper maintenance and appropriate budgeting for renewals, we’re  forcing early rebuilds, creating massive inefficiencies, and reducing the reliability and lifespan of our infrastructure.”

“We’re effectively borrowing from the future by underfunding renewals today,” adds Wayne Hatcher, WSP technical director for asset management. “That’s a shortsighted and financially risky move, compromising the infrastructure quality we depend on today and for generations to come.”

With growing acceptance from the Government that strategic asset management is crucial to infrastructure sustainability, the report provides a clear and practical roadmap for driving meaningful and structured improvements.

The report calls for a return to fundamentals, such as depreciation funding – that is, setting aside money each year to match the wear and tear on infrastructure. It also recommends more transparency, including the introduction of an infrastructure ‘scorecard’ to benchmark how well public agencies and local authorities are managing their assets.

“Right now, agencies aren’t even required to break down how much they spend on planned, preventative maintenance versus reactive maintenance. Reactive maintenance is more expensive, and less efficient,” says Kali. “If we can’t measure what maintenance we are currently doing, we can’t manage it - and we certainly can’t improve it.”

The report challenges New Zealand’s cultural tendency to chase the lowest upfront price - arguing that it often results in poor long-term value. 

“Choosing substandard materials or skipping basic upkeep might save money today,” says Kali, “but it almost always costs more in the long run.”

She says a strategic reset is needed - one that sees infrastructure not as a one-off cost but as a long-term commitment. 

“We need a national conversation about what it truly means to look after the infrastructure that all members of our society rely on. Prudent asset management should be celebrated, not sidelined."

Report recommendations include: 

• Make investment decisions about infrastructure assets over their full lifecycle, not just upfront costs.
• Central government should lead by example, maintaining asset registers and developing strategic asset management plans.
• Improve assurance processes and increase public scrutiny to drive compliance with best practice.
• Invest in workforce capability to ensure we have the skills to manage infrastructure well.
• Improve our understanding of the performance and condition of existing assets, to better inform strategic decisions.
• Ring-fence funding for renewals or publicly justify why it isn’t being done.
• Increase transparency around maintenance spending, including a clear breakdown of proactive vs reactive maintenance.