Defining resilience in transport

An absolute and rigid definition to resilience for the transport sector and associated infrastructure is not possible or practical. A locally appropriate approach to defining and quantifying resilience is more appropriate. The resilience of an asset cannot be decoupled from the context of its local setting, community, and end users. 

Clear vision and integration across asset lifecycle

Every infrastructure investment should deliver a positive resilience outcome, with a specific focus on end-users and communities. However, this needs to be defined in the project outcomes. A clear vision, supported by a collaborative approach to deliver safe and sustainable transport networks is needed to bolster the resilience of the entire system. A process for systems thinking, driven by brave and innovative policy and procurement processes is needed. 

It is important to recognise that, often, communities are the end users of infrastructure. As an industry, care should be taken when applying a broad-stroked macro approach to planning and design. While this helps frame the challenge at a high level, it is critical not to lose sight of the localised context of transport infrastructure, the host community and end users. Ultimately, end user consideration in planning, design, delivery and operation of infrastructure will drive asset resilience. 

The role of transport to improve resilience to broader interconnected systems and community resilience

Transport infrastructure is a foundational aspect of modern life and is crucial to our community's connectedness and resilience. Every infrastructure investment should, beyond being designed to be resilient at an asset level, be delivering positive resilience outcomes for end-users and host communities.

A narrowed focus on the resilience of specific infrastructure assets and aspects should be avoided in the pursuit of broader systemic resilience. 

Planning and investing in resilience

As discussions on climate resilience progress, it's clear that the cost of adaptation and resilience-building must be weighed against the long-term cost of inaction. It is essential to have a clear understanding of vulnerability and risk in this assessment. Evidence is now available to demonstrate the positive return on investment from increasing resilience of transport infrastructure through avoidance of losses and reduction in costs throughout the infrastructure lifecycle.

Conducting a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of resilience investments, along with evaluating the long-term impacts of climate change on value and service levels, will enable more informed decision-making and prioritisation. This approach not only enhances the visibility of asset resilience but also extends its benefits across the broader value chain. Achieving strategic resilience and decarbonisation objectives requires collaboration across value chains and project lifecycles. Government agencies actively seek and welcome innovative solutions from the industry, recognising its unique position to develop and deliver alternative and ingenious approaches that support both resilience and decarbonisation. However, for these innovations to be accepted and widely adopted by agencies and organisations, they must meet thorough safety, longevity, and cost considerations and assurances.

Early action leads to greater payback

A whole-of-life perspective, carefully considering the cost of adaptation as well as the cost of doing nothing (accepting risk), is critical to making informed decisions around integrating resilience into infrastructure systems. 

Currently, across the sector, planning for systemic resilience starts too late. The opportunity for maximised, long term, resilience benefits are found at the very first stages of planning and design, greatly decreasing as a project evolves through its lifecycle. The opportunity to effectively plan and deliver resilient infrastructure rests on proactively assessing planning and design through a whole-of-life lens, accurately considering the complex and compounding effects of the changing climate.

Next section