1 / 4

National Spatial Framework: Infrastructure Planning from a Business Perspective

Lucinda Turner, Head of Infrastructure at CBI, discusses the need for a more cohesive long-term planning approach in the National Spatial Framework. Key drivers include economic, social, and environmental alignment, with challenges focusing on growth areas, access, and regional potential. Tensions arise between certainty and flexibility, prioritization and wish lists, and public versus private funding. The debate also includes political objectives, coordination, funding linkage, and the role of the private sector for a successful framework. The emphasis is on practical delivery, evidence-based decision-making, and stakeholder engagement for a sustainable infrastructure plan.

marenda
Download Presentation

National Spatial Framework: Infrastructure Planning from a Business Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. National Spatial Framework -a business perspective Lucinda Turner Head of Infrastructure, CBI

  2. Key Drivers need for more joined up approach longer-term strategic planning aligning objectives: economic/social/environment importance of delivering infrastructure key challenges: growth areas, surface access etc maximising regional potential bottom up as well as top down learning from other countries?

  3. Some potential tensions... certainty v flexibility / innovation prioritisation v wish lists clear priorities v picking winners public v private funding (different approach?) political objectives v second guessing the market co-ordination v bureaucracy catalyst v constraint / pull v push tackling inequality v investing in success balance v anodyne result ambition v ability to deliver

  4. Is it workable? format & focus? level of prescription eg location / project specific? timescales & review? who to lead / skills? link to funding? involvement of private sector? evidence base & prioritisation? securing broad buy-in? interaction with other processes - RSS, RES, etc? ...delivery, delivery, delivery

More Related