Piecemeal approach to infrastructure must end, report warns
- 2 days ago
- 2 min read
(by Karma Loveday)
Project-by-project delivery is no longer fit for purpose, according to a new white paper from global engineering firm Egis.
From projects to programmes: how infrastructure can keep pace with a changing world draws on insights from specialists across transport, water, cities, energy and digital infrastructure to argue that networks must be planned and operated as long‑term systems, not as a series of isolated projects. It said climate change, ageing assets and funding pressure are already pushing networks beyond their intended limits. Continuing with the current approach will only increase cost, disruption and risk.
Francois Basselot, managing director of Egis in the UK and Ireland said: “The challenges facing infrastructure today don’t show up one project at a time. What’s driving change affects whole networks, yet we still tend to plan and build as if each project stands alone. When that happens, we’re constantly catching up instead of looking ahead. This report is about changing that way of thinking by moving away from short‑term fixes and towards long-term stewardship of infrastructure, before today’s pressures become tomorrow’s failures.”
The report identified five practical changes to support the shift:
Engaging communities earlier to shape infrastructure around real patterns of use.
Focusing on outcomes rather than assets.
Planning and delivering at system level.
Making better use of data and digital tools to guide long‑term decisions.
Maximising the performance of existing assets through reuse and targeted upgrades.
It argued that together, these shifts would allow infrastructure to evolve over decades, improve overall network performance and reduce the need for costly, reactive intervention.
The report called on infrastructure owners, policymakers and delivery teams to rethink how systems are planned now, moving from reactive intervention to long‑term stewardship before today’s pressures become unmanageable.

Comments