thesis about infrastructure development

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, the impact of infrastructure development on economic growth in sub-saharan africa with special focus on ghana.

Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction

ISSN : 1366-4387

Article publication date: 19 June 2019

Issue publication date: 23 October 2019

This paper aims to assess the impact of infrastructure development on Ghana’s economic growth.

Design/methodology/approach

Using data obtained from the World Bank’s World Development Indicators, the United States’ (US) International Energy Statistics and the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Factbooks from 1980 to 2016, an autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) framework is used to determine the long- and short-run impact of the selected infrastructure stock and quality indices on Ghana’s economic growth.

Findings indicate a statistically significant relationship between infrastructure development and economic growth. Additionally, electricity-generating capacity is identified as the infrastructure stock index that has the greatest positive impact on Ghana’s economic growth. The study reveals that electricity-distribution loss has a significant negative effect over both long- and short-run periods.

Research limitations/implications

Commercial petroleum export from Ghana since 2010 has been a key contributor to economic growth. Although its aggregate effect is included in the annual GDP figures adopted for the study, the authors would have wished to assess its impact on GDP as an independent standard growth determinant. However, because of a lack of available data over this study period, petroleum exports could not be adopted as an independent standard growth determinant. Additionally, an aggregated index of infrastructure stock and quality could not be derived because of the small size of data available. Hence, this study did not assess its impact on Ghana’s economic growth.

Practical implications

The research provides pragmatic guidance to policymakers to focus their efforts on expanding electricity-generating capacity while simultaneously taking steps to curb electricity transmission and distribution losses. These two related actions offer the greatest positive impact on infrastructure development and, as a consequence, Ghana’s economic growth.

Originality/value

This paper represents the first attempt to empirically study the relationship between infrastructure development and Ghana’s economic growth. A key contribution to the existing body of knowledge includes strong evidence of a positive effect of infrastructure development upon Ghana’s economic growth. Results also reveal that the greatest positive impact on economic growth is derived from electricity-generation capacity. However, the study also uncovers a negative, but statistically significant, relationship between road and economic growth.

• Infrastructure development
• Economic growth
• Autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL)
• Electricity-distribution losses
• Electricity-generating capacity

Owusu-Manu, D.-G. , Jehuri, A.B. , Edwards, D.J. , Boateng, F. and Asumadu, G. (2019), "The impact of infrastructure development on economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa with special focus on Ghana", Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction , Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 253-273. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-09-2018-0050

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2019, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

The Impacts of Transportation Infrastructure on Sustainable Development: Emerging Trends and Challenges

1 School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China; nc.ude.tih@gnawiqul (L.W.); nc.ude.tih@euxlx (X.X.)

Xiaolong Xue

2 School of Management, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China; nc.ude.uhzg@uyezgnaw

Transportation infrastructure has an enormous impact on sustainable development. To identify multiple impacts of transportation infrastructure and show emerging trends and challenges, this paper presents a scientometric review based on 2543 published articles from 2000 to 2017 through co-author, co-occurring and co-citation analysis. In addition, the hierarchy of key concepts was analyzed to show emerging research objects, methods and levels according to the clustering information, which includes title, keyword and abstract. The results expressed by visual graphs compared high-impact authors, collaborative relationships among institutions in developed and developing countries. In addition, representative research issues related to the economy, society and environment were identified such as cost overrun, spatial economy, prioritizing structure, local development and land value. Additionally, two future directions, integrated research of various effects and structure analysis of transportation network, are recommended. The findings of this study provide researchers and practitioners with an in-depth understanding of transportation infrastructure’s impacts on sustainable development by visual expression.

1. Introduction

Transportation infrastructure, as a complex network, connects cities and accommodates human activities coupling the social, economic and environmental systems with the urbanization and population growth. Additionally, the transportation network contributes to the socioeconomic development and the increased quality of life through generating inter- or intra-city connections during urbanization [ 1 , 2 ]. In addition, goals such as low-carbon, resilient and sustainable development should not be ignored when the transportation network is expanded [ 3 ]. In detail, transportation infrastructure among cities leads to urban aggregation and diffusion, greatly boosting the regional and national economic development [ 4 , 5 ]. However, the irrational planning of transportation infrastructure also generates negative effects, such as the ecological destruction, increased traffic accidents, climate change, CO 2 emissions and lower transport efficiency [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Therefore, it is necessary to identify multiple impacts of transportation infrastructure from existing studies.

Recently, the impact of transportation infrastructure has been a hot topic, and the economic effect of transportation infrastructure has been receiving more attention and debate [ 12 ] because of the pursuit to direct economic growth of both regions and sectors [ 13 ]. To review multiple impacts of transportation infrastructure, scientometric studies have been used to analyze the literature and reveal trends in some specific topics such as transport phenomenon [ 14 ] and public transport [ 15 ]. However, in the field of transportation, existing scientometric studies mainly focus on statistical results, lacking the exploration of visual and network structure analysis. Therefore, this paper analyzed the co-author, co-occurring and co-citation network based on the collected literature expressed by visual graphs. The software Citespace was used to build the author and literature collaboration network and the co-citation analysis based on the expanded data from the citation dimension. This expansion increases the potential data source and improves the accuracy of review analysis. More importantly, scientometric study based on network visualization is an effective way to identify representative researches in the network structure and find the phenomenon and regularity compared with traditional literature analysis.

In this paper, we present a scientometric and systematic review that explores the literature related to the impact of transportation infrastructure in the database of Web of Science from 2000 to 2017. The aims of this study are identifying the research trends in the field of the transportation infrastructure and finding the hot research topics through the visualization map built by the literature. This paper is divided into three main parts. Section 2 introduces the basic concepts, characteristics and multiple impacts of the transportation. Theoretical analysis provides an in-depth understanding of the impact mechanism of transportation infrastructure according to existing studies. Section 3 introduces the scientometric method in this paper. This method provides a means of visualization to identify the information in the map based on the software Citespace. Section 4 analyzes the scientometric results, including co-author, co-occurring and co-citation analysis. Finally, according to the identified cluster data, this paper systematically summarizes representative studies and important categories related to the effect of transportation infrastructure. Multiple analysis greatly increases the accuracy of the results.

2. Transportation Infrastructure

2.1. the definition and characteristics of transportation infrastructure.

As one of the main urban elements, transportation infrastructures such as roads, highways, railways, airports, bridges, waterways, canals and terminals play important roles in the transmission of materials and the flow of population during urban agglomeration and diffusion [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Just as stated in the definition given by OECD (2013), transportation infrastructure is a critical ingredient in the economic development at all levels of the income, supporting personal well-being and economic growth. From the perspective of function, transportation infrastructure is a kind of large-scale public work which has the importation influence on countries’ politics, economy, society, science, technology development, environmental protection, public health and national security. Besides, as a part of transportation system apart from the operating system and transport vehicles, the plan and construction of transportation infrastructure are complex. Grimsey and Lewis think it is easier and more meaningful to identify infrastructure than to define the infrastructure, and the key to identifying the infrastructure is indicating its characteristics [ 19 ]. For example, during construction, it has characteristics of large investment scale, long construction period, complicated risk, and many stakeholders [ 20 ].

Transportation infrastructure has the fundamental features of general infrastructure, such as high risk, high investment, complex organization and low income [ 21 ]. Additionally, it has another two special characteristics: geographic network and spatial externality [ 22 ]. On the one hand, transport infrastructure is a network infrastructure that constitutes the channel between nodes, regions or node-region. This promotes the spatial transfer of production factors and mobility of goods. On the other hand, the externality means that positive or negative effects on external subjects are generated when one economic entity produces or consumes. In terms of positive externalities, transport infrastructure as a public investment could directly promote economic growth and also indirectly increase the economy through spillover effects such as knowledge spillover effect and technology spillover effect. Meanwhile, environmental pollution and urban noise often happen because of the building of transport infrastructures, driving the generation of negative spillover effects. The existence of complex characteristics and significant roles drives the generation of multiple impacts of transportation infrastructures on the economy, society and environment.

2.2. The Multiple Impact of Transportation Infrastructure

The transportation infrastructure represents the motivator of economic growth and social welfare [ 23 ] through improving production performances and investment performances for the private sectors [ 24 ]. More specifically, the construction of transportation infrastructure could reduce the travel cost, attract foreign investment and expand trade of shared resources [ 25 ]. In terms of the social overhead capital, transport infrastructure plays a decisive role in industrialization and has obvious spillover effects on regional innovation, factor reallocation and manufacturing productivity [ 26 ], which promote the aggregation of industries, population and economy [ 16 ]; this is often called the economic distributional effect. However, some empirical studies have shown that the expansion of high-speed railway networks promotes the development of central cities but causes the economic growth rate of prefecture-level cities along the rail line to decline, which is referred to as the siphon effect [ 27 ]. Although different results were found based on various data sources or research objects, the empirical study is the most common and effective method to identify the positive or negative effects of transportation infrastructures.

Meanwhile, excessive infrastructure construction could put huge pressure on the natural and ecological environment when meeting the need for economic development and social improvement [ 28 ]. Transportation infrastructure provides the fundamental conditions for economic activities, while some spillover effects happen concomitantly [ 29 ], such as CO 2 emission generated via domestic and global production networks [ 30 ], ecological destruction because of the biological habitat fragmentation [ 11 ] and the change of water flow and declining water quality [ 31 , 32 ]. Since the United States published the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in 1969 [ 33 ], environmental problems have become a significant part of the law, and many topics have received wide attention. For the transport sector, apart from cost-benefit, design and investment analyses, environmental impacts such as CO 2 emission and air quality are the main evaluation criteria [ 34 ]. In addition, some universal and systematic methods have been used to evaluate environmental performances, such as the multi-criteria model, meta-analysis [ 35 ], ecological footprint index [ 36 ], and value equilibrium analysis [ 37 ]. From the perspective of the environment, the effects of the transportation infrastructure are almost all negative, so minimizing the environmental impact has been the main research topic. Additionally, transport infrastructure assumes important social responsibility [ 38 , 39 ]. Although more jobs and optimized income distribution occurs after huge capital investments in infrastructure projects, health hazards, land expropriation and wildlife damage problems should not be neglected.

The multiple impacts of transportation infrastructures have received huge attention. However, the economic externality is still the most important and popular topic, which often ignores the environmental and social aspects [ 40 ]. Since the sustainable development topic has been a point of focus, the sustainable evaluation of transportation infrastructure has been increasingly valued. Based on the traditional cost-duration-quality decision model [ 41 ], plenty of indicators and methods have been extended to identify and assess transportation sustainability. For example, some multi-criteria models based on panel data have been extended, such as the multivariate co-integration approach [ 23 ], fuzzy logic evaluation [ 42 ] and the decoupling model [ 43 ]. In addition, optimizing the network structure and analyzing the spatial relationships of infrastructure operation are the key ways to promote the urban sustainability [ 44 ]. The complex characteristics and multiple impacts of transportation infrastructures have promoted studies on the identification and modelling of transportation sustainability. However, existing studies have mainly depended on experience to review the published articles. In addition, systematic and scientometric analysis could show complete and clear research status in this field.

In the field of transportation, many reviews have been published to identify the research status, while most reviews have mainly depended on researchers’ backgrounds and experiences. To build an overview of existing studies with a relatively complete literature, the scientometrics method was used to find out the scientific regularity related to the effects of transportation research based on mathematical statistics and computing techniques [ 45 ]. In addition, scientometric analysis mainly depends on bibliographic data to identify the research trends and literature relationships [ 46 ]. The scientometric method was used in this study to build a visual information graph for further data mining using the software Citespace ( http://cluster.cis.drexel.edu/~cchen/citespace/ ). The visualization process of the bibliography is meaningful for discovering the potential information based on the graphical representation of data using shapes, colors and images [ 47 ]. This method reduces the difficulty in analyzing a large literature, and effectively finds the regularity and the hidden information in existing studies. In this section, the data overview and research path of the scientometric method are presented.

3.1. Data Overview

The Web of Science (WOS) database was used to collect published literature data related to the transportation infrastructure. Apart from WOS, Google Scholar’s database is extensive, but its citation information is incomplete and inconsistent [ 48 ]. Therefore, it is difficult to use for scientometric analysis. In addition, WOS contains the most important and influential journals in the world [ 49 , 50 ]. The impact of transportation infrastructure includes many categories, such as human, economic and environmental. Therefore, in this section, a comprehensive data overview is presented to show the trend of existing studies. In addition, “transport infrastructure” and “transportation infrastructure” were used as keywords to collect the data, initially.

This paper analyzed all collected literature in the WOS core database from 2000 to 2017. The search code SS = (transport* infrastructure*) was used in the WOS core collection. Here, “*” denotes a fuzzy search and “SS” means an article subject search. A total of 2543 bibliographic records were collected in October, 2017, and there are 14 related records filtered by being highly cited in the field, as shown in Table 1 . Highly cited papers are the top one percent in each of the 22 Essential Science Indicators (ESI) subject areas per year, which indicates scientific excellence. We can see that this literature is distributed over recent years, and almost all records are related to the environmental dimensions. It is notable that the highest cited article was published in 2012 and is about biofuel application in transportation vehicles. Additionally, Figure 1 shows the top 20 research fields related to transportation infrastructure, including engineering, transportation, business economics, environmental sciences, computer science, geography, public administration, urban studies, and so on. This means the studies related to transportation infrastructure range from the technological level to the management level, providing more challenges and opportunities to interdisciplinary research.

The top 20 research fields of the transportation infrastructure.

Top highly cited research categories.

The data overview above shows the overall research trends and fields. According to the research scope and objects, some keywords are chosen to filter the results that are more related to the spillover effects of the transportation infrastructure network. Then the words (SS’ = effect* or affect* or influence* or impact*) were selected to refine the results, and a total of 1568 bibliographic records were searched. This step refined the records referring to the impact of transportation infrastructures or other effects on transportation infrastructure. Finally, the main keywords (SS’’ = railway* or rail* or road* or highway* or expressway* or freeway*) were used to further refine these results in accordance with the specific research objects of this paper, and got 764 records. Figure 2 shows the distribution of 1568 bibliographic records related to the two-way influence of transportation infrastructure and the records related to the influence of railway or road. In addition, the final 531 papers were used for further review analysis. Multi-step data filtering benefits a narrow data range, promoting study depth and guaranteeing the data integrity. It is clear that the distribution trend of is similar between the original data and the filtered data, which means the impact of railway and road could follow the path of the development of transportation infrastructure. In addition, research about the impact of railways and roads accounts for around 20–40% of research on transportation infrastructure during the timespan. In other words, the analysis of railways and roads partially represents the transportation infrastructure.

The number of articles on impact of transportation infrastructure.

3.2. Scientometric Method

Scientometric analysis is a systematic method to identify and analyze the published literature, and it has become increasingly frequently used to obtain a deeper understanding of a research area [ 51 ]. In addition, this analysis has been recognized as an efficient method to identify the hidden information in published bibliographies [ 52 ]. In the field of transportation, scientometric analysis has been used as a quantitative approach to identify research phenomena and trends [ 14 , 15 ], but these previous studies did not systematically analyze the research network or recognize the hidden research trends and relations. The software CiteSpace can visualize the emerging trends, transient patterns, substantial theoretical and methodological contributions in scientific literature from the perspective of a social network [ 53 , 54 ]. The accessible graphs based on network analysis and clustering algorithms are able to show the knowledge more logically and systematically [ 55 ]. Therefore, CiteSpace was used to identify and analyze the main effects of transportation infrastructure on sustainable development based on the literature. In this study, some scientometric techniques were used, such as fundamental information analysis (author, institution and country) and network analysis (subject, keywords and co-citation). According to these analysis results, the research challenges and trends were further systematically analyzed.

In detail, the research procedure of this study includes three main parts, according to the collected bibliographic data, as shown in Figure 3 . Firstly, 2543 records were collected to perform the data overview, including the highly cited analysis and the top 20 research fields. After the filtering, 2056 records were analyzed by CiteSpace software to show representative people, institutions, countries and relationships among them. Then the dual-map overlay and keyword network of the literature were analyzed to show representative research subjects and issues. Additionally, references in the collected literature were analyzed to build the co-citation network, which generates the clustering information to expand the data source. Finally, according to the clustered information, the research status and trend were summarized systematically to generate the hierarchy of key concepts. All of these steps reviewed the bibliographic information from different dimensions to find the respective research issues.

Research procedure of this study.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. co-authorship analysis.

According to the author collaboration analysis, the domain authors have a relatively large number of links to other authors in the network, which means the domain authors have higher academic relevance [ 56 ]. In this study, 2056 valid bibliographic records were collected from 2000 to 2017. The co-authorship network is shown in Figure 4 , where each node represents an author and links between authors denote collaboration established through co-authorship of articles. In this network, excessive links were removed by Pathfinder using network pruning [ 57 ], and eventually 189 nodes and 173 links were identified. In addition, the node size represents the frequency of published references and the node color accounts for different collaboration modularity.

Comparison of author collaboration networks.

According to the cluster information from 2000 to 2017, the network density is 0.0097 and the cluster modularity Q is 0.8626, which means the network of co-authors is fragmented. Only a few closed circuits exist in the network, such as the Mulley C group, Flyvbjerg B group and Ogilvie D group. As shown in the left-bottom graph of Figure 4 , many authors collaborated with one or two productive authors. For example, Flyvbjerg Band Van Wee B were both productive and central authors in the community. All centralities of these groups are small, which indicates that in the timespan 2000–2010, important collaboration groups were not formed by author centrality. In order to determine the timeliness of the study, the research period was limited to 2010–2017. In addition, the right-bottom graph of Figure 4 shows the author collaboration network during this period. In this network, 1899 valid records are included and there are 185 nodes and 172 links. The network density is 0.0101, which is similar to the left graph. The network modularity and network structure only change slightly. It is notable that the author clusters change slightly, which means these central authors play significant roles in this field. Overall, from the perspective of timespan, author collaboration groups remained stable and relatively separate from the increased cumulative number of works in the published literature.

Apart from the collaboration analysis, author productivity is an important criterion to show the roles of authors or teams. Based on the 2056 collected bibliographic records, the top 10 most productive authors were identified in Table 2 . This shows that the main research fields of the hot authors include transportation, business economics and environmental management. More importantly, the collaboration links among most productive authors were more frequent and the productive authors generally led to modularity. For example, the productive author Flyvbjerg Bent cooperated with another productive author Van Wee Bert and the productive authors Ogilvie David, Flyvbjerg Bent and Mulley Corinne generated co-author modularity, as shown in Figure 4 , which means that the productive authors were often cited and focused upon.

Top ten most productive authors.

4.2. Co-Author’s Institution and Country Analysis

As shown in Figure 5 , the institution network includes 280 nodes and 236 links from 2000 to 2017. The node size represents the amount of published literature from one institution. According to the collected information, the studies related to transportation infrastructure were rich at institutions such as Delft University of Technology (50 records), University of Sydney (33 records), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (29 records), University College London (28 records), University of Oxford (28 records) and Chinese Academy of Sciences (25 records). This indicates that transportation infrastructure research was active and advanced. In addition, institution nodes with high betweenness centrality are shown in Figure 5 . The size of the colored circle represents the amount of published literature in one institution, and different colors show the number in different years. Institutions with high centrality play important roles in the institution network, such as Delft University of Technology (centrality = 0.24), University of Illinois (centrality = 0.17), Georgia Institute of Technology (centrality = 0.14), Shanghai Jiao Tong University (centrality = 0.12) and University of Florida (centrality = 0.10), and they drove the research collaborations among different institutions. Apart from the Delft University of Technology, the top productive institutions did not have higher relative centrality. This means that institutions that published more articles did not play an equally important role in the collaboration network. The institutions with higher centrality would have greater potential.

Institution collaboration network.

Furthermore, Figure 6 shows the country collaboration network in 2000–2010 and 2010–2017; clusters are displayed in different colored circles and they are arranged vertically in the order of their size. In addition, the colored lines represent co-citation links among different countries. During 2000 to 2010, as shown in the left graph, the top 5 countries with the highest centrality include USA (centrality = 0.65), England (centrality = 0.4), Sweden (centrality = 0.36), Italy (centrality = 0.21) and Japan (centrality = 0.14), which means that they occupied key positions in the collaboration network. During 2010 to 2017, as shown in the right graph, the top 5 countries with the highest centrality include USA (centrality = 0.53), England (centrality = 0.31), Germany (centrality = 0.17), Australia (centrality = 0.15) and the People’s Republic of China (centrality = 0.1). We can see the centralities of USA and England experienced a decrease and the roles of Germany, Australia and the People’s Republic of China became increasingly significant. Additionally, apart from the top central countries, Spain, Netherlands and Canada had higher published frequencies, which indicates their higher relative potentials. According to the clustering results, we can see the change of research interests. The labels of clusters were generated by log-likelihood ratio method in the software. It is notable that during 2000–2010, an overview of popular topics included infrastructure surveillance, local development and evidence; during 2010–2017 those consisted of transportation decision, regional development and infrastructure surveillance. In addition, the clustering members experienced an increase and transfer.

Comparison of country collaboration network.

4.3. Co-Occurring ANALYSIS

4.3.1. discipline analysis.

Every citation and cited work was assigned to a specific research discipline according to the journals in a global map of science generated from over 10,000 journals indexed in the WOS [ 58 ]. Therefore, this study built an overlay map to show the dual-map of the science sketch database that perfectly described the interdisciplinary research. Figure 7 shows the main disciplines of collected citing articles and cited articles. The left part of the graph shows the distributed disciplines of citing articles and the right part describes that of cited articles. In addition, the color curves represent the fluctuant relations. It is clear that the journals of citing articles related to transportation infrastructure are mainly distributed in disciplines such as mathematics, systems, economics and physics. Cited articles’ journals are mainly distributed in the areas of ecology, computer, social education and economics. The distribution of cited articles indicates the application fields and research foundations. More importantly, transportation infrastructure papers are published in almost all major disciplines, which means transportation infrastructure studies play important roles in multidisciplinary research. Additionally, the dual-map overlay shows the information about the field studies more macro compared with article clustering analysis. Thus, Figure 8 shows the interdisciplinary co-occurring network of the literature based on the WOS discipline categories. We can see that the top frequent disciplines include Engineering, Transportation and Business & Economics. The links among different nodes mean the existence of collaboration among different disciplines. Interdisciplinary research is quite obvious in the field of transportation infrastructure.

A dual-map overlay of the literature’s journals.

Inter-disciplinary co-occurring network of the literature.

4.3.2. Co-Occurring Keyword Analysis

Keywords catch the core content of a paper, and in this section, the collected keywords show the situation and development of research using the software CiteSpace. According to the 2056 valid records collected, the keyword co-occurring network includes 225 nodes and 1092 links shown in Figure 9 . The node size represents the frequency of a keyword in all records and links among nodes indicate different keywords occurring in the same record. The t-SNE view was used to lay out the keyword map. The t-SNE technique is a perfect visual method for this map, and gave a complete and clear description. Among the top 50 hot keywords, the most frequent keywords include model (frequency = 176), impact (frequency = 120), system (frequency = 109), growth (frequency = 94), investment (frequency = 86), network (frequency = 85), accessibility (frequency = 80), city (frequency = 74) and policy (frequency = 72), in addition to transportation infrastructure (frequency = 225). More importantly, China (frequency = 86) and the United States (frequency = 52) are two representative country keywords, which means that in these two countries, studies related to transportation infrastructure attracted more attention. In addition, some keywords with high frequency had a relatively high centrality, such as city (centrality = 0.15), network (centrality = 0.14), investment (centrality = 0.12) and impact (centrality = 0.09). To indicate the change of hot topics, we divided the timespan into 2010–2010 and 2010–2017, as shown in Figure 9 . The top three keywords are model, infrastructure and impact. The related keywords experienced a significant increase; in particular, keyword impact-related topics included climate, urban studies, land use, resilience and accessibility, which indicated this role. However, this network only shows information based on the collected records, and its difference from the co-citation network is the limitation of this relatively incomplete data. Therefore, the co-citation analysis further solves the data incompleteness in the next section.

Keyword co-occurring network diffusion.

4.4. Co-Citation Analysis

Co-citation analysis has been defined as the frequency with which two articles are cited together in another article [ 59 ]. In this section, co-citation analysis identifies the underlying intellectual structures of the knowledge in the field of transportation infrastructure according to references. The co-citation network was generated based on 2047 valid records between 2000 and 2017, and the top 50 most cited publications in each year were used to construct a network of references cited in that year. As shown in Figure 10 , the synthesized network contains 879 references and 174 co-citation clusters after the clustering process. This network has a modularity of 0.8934, which is considered to be very high, suggesting that the specialties in science mapping are clearly defined in terms of co-citation clusters. The mean silhouette is 0.3855, which is relatively low, mainly because of the numerous small clusters. The major clusters that we focus on in this paper were sufficiently high. The areas in different colors indicate the time at which co-citation links in those areas appeared for the first time. Areas in green were generated earlier than areas in yellow. Each cluster can be labeled by title terms, keywords, and abstract terms of articles citing the cluster. We can see that studies related to new application, cost overruns and case study appeared earlier, and urban transportation and public-private partnerships appeared more recently. In addition, cluster areas of new transport infrastructure, cost overruns and evidence study are relatively bigger, which means that these studies received more attention. According to the LLR, labels of the largest 62 clusters were summarized as shown in Appendix A and the most active citer can be checked in Appendix B .

A landscape view of the co-citation network.

In addition, the timeline visualization in CiteSpace depicted clusters along horizontal timelines. As shown in Figure 11 , each cluster was displayed from left to right and clusters were arranged vertically in descending order of their size. The colored curves represent co-citation links added in the year of the corresponding color. Large-sized nodes or nodes with red tree rings received particular attention because they were either highly cited or had citation bursts, or both. We can see that the three most-cited references in a particular year are displayed. The labels of these references were placed in the lowest position. The cluster labels were generated based on terms identified by Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) [ 60 ]. Figure 11 shows the top 2 largest clusters, listed as cluster#0 and cluster#1. The periods in which the clusters were sustained were different, which means that the difference of topic activity. For example, topic #0 (cost overrun) was active during the period from 2008 to 2017 and most of the top active topics were active about 20 years. Furthermore, the top ten largest clusters include cost overrun, quantitative spatial economics, prioritizing highway defragmentation location, local development, land value, regional economic growth, new transportation infrastructure, public-private partnerships, infrastructure change region, recent laboratory research and microbial engineering. All of these clusters have relative network sub-structures and research status, and trends hide in these references. For example, for the cluster around spatial economics, 2011 to 2012 was the most active timespan for citers.

A timeline visualization of the largest clusters.

The analysis above shows the research base and fronts that mine the potential research challenges and trends. In addition, main research topics were further analyzed according to the selected and filtered data above. Table 3 shows the temporal properties of major clusters. We can see that most of the representative references are related to the spillover effect of the transportation infrastructure. For example, Cluster #0 (cost overrun) is the largest cluster, containing 94 references from 2011 to 2017. The mean year of all references is 2008 and the year of the most representative cited articles in this cluster is 2008, too. The timeline visualization reveals the top three cited references from the period of 2000 to 2017. As shown in Figure 11 , the three most representative cited references (Priemus Hugo, Banister David and Khadaroo Jameel) occur in 2008. We can see that the period 2008 to 2016 was full of high-impact contributions—large colored citation circles and red citation bursts. We chose the top three cited circles and nine references to analyze the main research topics. Similarly, in the other five clusters, the top three circles and nine representative references were chosen to further analyze the hot research status and research trends. Appendix C shows the high-impact members of the other clusters. These authors may be not the most highly cited authors, but they play important roles in the corresponding fields.

Temporal properties of the major 6 clusters.

4.5. Hierarchy Analysis of Key Concepts

The co-citation network above was divided into 174 co-citation clusters. These clusters were labeled by index terms from their own citers. These keywords show the most representative research topics related to transportation infrastructure. The left part of Figure 12 shows the word cloud based on cluster labels filtered by the same or similar labels of clusters. In this figure, the keyword size represents the frequency of cluster labels. It is clear that the main research topics include economic, region or urban development and spatial effect analysis. However, the cluster data only analyzed the label information, and did not identify other potentially relevant information. Therefore, a report of automatically generated narratives was used to analyze the word cloud distribution further, as shown in the right part of Figure 12 . The narratives include the main subjects in the titles and abstracts of the top references in the top 62 clusters that are relatively complete. We can see that hot research topics consist of urban development, project, economic, cost and policies. In particular, we identified some potential topics that were excluded in the left graph, such as land, risk, panel data and policies. By means of the two-step summary, potential keywords could be easily identified.

Word cloud distribution of co-citation cluster results. (Tool: Tagxedo ( www.tagxedo.com ). Data source: Labels of the top 62 clusters, narrative summary report of the co-citation network.)

Additionally, key concepts identified from the titles of citing articles in Cluster #0 were algorithmically organized according to hierarchical relations derived from co-occurring concepts. Figure 13 shows the main concept tree of Cluster #0. The largest branch of such a hierarchy typically reflects the main concepts of scholarly publications produced by the specialty behind the cluster. The main logical categories include transport infrastructure, projects, cost overruns and impact. The category “Transportation Infrastructure” mainly focuses on improving the project performance separately from the traditional and important problem “Cost Overrun”. In particular, the category “impact” emerged gradually as an independent branch, which was driven by the increasing quantity and complexity of transportation infrastructure. It is notable that the transportation infrastructure branch highlights the characteristics (large, resilience, spatial and complexity), research methods (modeling, econometric and network mapping) and research questions (quality, risk, performance and PPP). In other words, sub-categories in this figure indicate the characteristics, questions, objects, dimensions and methods related to transportation infrastructure. The identity of category labels based on the title data obeys the logical tree algorithm of the software Citespace. This figure not only shows the main research topics but the logical relationships among these topics.

A hierarchy of key concepts in Cluster #0.

To understand the hierarchy better, the key concepts in the top 7 Clusters (#0–#6) were identified in one hierarchy. Figure 14 summarizes the concept tree generated by Citespace according to the reference titles in Cluster #0–#6. The categories colored blue were identified automatically. For the systematic expression of the hierarchy, some branches colored green are used to conclude the fragmented research questions. In addition, this hierarchy filtered the repeating keywords and deleted words which cannot indicate the main research questions, such as “analysis”. However, the sub-category concepts of the branch “analysis” were distributed in other branches. Meanwhile, some sub-categories of the branch “transportation infrastructure” were distributed in the summative branches such as the “objects” and “methods”. We can see from Figure 14 that the main branch is “impacts”, in which the “spillover effects” and “countries” are listed separately. This means the topic of spillover effect is the intensive research issue, and there are many countries analyzing the impacts of transportation infrastructure on the national scale. In addition, the “impact” category summarized some detailed topics such as land use, urban development and spatial effect. Compared with Figure 13 , this hierarchy identified more specific topics, such as rail and road research. Although the amount of data in Figure 14 is about seven times greater than in Figure 13 , the hierarchy framework becomes more clear and systematic after filtering out repeated data. More importantly, this systematic hierarchy can help to identify the hottest and most representative research issues quickly.

A hierarchy of key concepts in Cluster #0–#6.

5. Conclusions

This scientometric review based on over 2500 publications from 2000 to 2017 presented the systematic knowledge structure related to impacts of transportation infrastructure on sustainable development. Due to the complex impact mechanism, the identification process needs an in-depth understanding and clear expression. Although reviews related to transportation infrastructure have received attention, the scientometric review with visual expression provides a better way to explore the potential information hidden in knowledge network compared with the traditional review. In this paper, the presentation of scientometric and systematic reviews includes four main steps. Firstly, co-author analysis was used to identify the highly productive authors, institutions and countries to show the overall research status. Then, the co-occurring analysis was used to identify and visualize the overall research trends based on discipline and keyword information. Next, citing articles and cited references were modulated to find co-citation relationships and modularity labels by timeline visualization. Finally, after the modularity, the cluster information was analyzed further to conclude the hierarchy concepts of the main clusters, which accurately identified key points. These four steps analyzed the research status and emerging trends of transportation infrastructure’s impacts on sustainable development from multiple perspectives, such as author information, collaborative relationships and reference relationships. In addition, compared with the traditional literature review, this scientometric analysis shows the representative information clearly based on a visual map. Importantly, this visual expression provides an easier way to understand the complex collaboration network of literature.

The main research findings are as follows. First, collaboration links among the most productive authors were more frequent than other authors. Moreover, the productive authors generally led to modularity. Second, institutions with high centrality play important roles in the institution network, such as Delft University of Technology, University of Illinois and Georgia Institute of Technology. In addition, countries occupying key positions include USA, England and China. Third, the hot topics related to transportation infrastructure include cost, performance, quality and investment issues from the project level. In addition, from a more macro perspective, economic, social and environmental effects of transportation infrastructure were all caught. Fourth, according to the hierarchy analysis, specific research objects, methods and multiple effects of transportation infrastructure were identified. It is noticeable that spillover effects of transportation infrastructure include some dependent sub-categories, such as spatial, regional, economic and environmental effects. These more macro keywords indicate the complexity of impact mechanisms. In addition, transportation infrastructure has huge impacts on land, urban development, human life and city networks.

However, there are also some limitations that need further improvement in this study. A limitation of using bibliographic databases is that the WOS lacks the information of books and reports in public sources, thus necessitating the integration of multiple data resources. In addition, due to the limitations of the analysis tool, our study could not analyze the information hidden in the references’ context. Additionally, the determination of search keywords mainly relies on the subjective judgment of the authors, which might lead to data being missing or incomplete. Given these limitations, multiple analysis was exerted in this work to make up for the data limitations. In this study, the titles, keywords and abstracts could be credibly representative of the main context. Our findings not only reveal research trends, but future research directions. In the future, two directions—integrated study of various spillover effects and network effects of mega transportation infrastructures such as railway and road—will be valuable research issues. By conducting further research in these directions, an improved understanding of the significance of the transportation infrastructure will be obtained, and the planning of transport networks will be conducted under proper advice. In conclusion, this study provides valuable information for both researchers and practitioners to understand the significant and complex impact of transportation infrastructure. It is clear that in both technological issues and management issues, the impact assessment is the key step to justifying the research in the field of transportation infrastructure. This scientometric review will lead to the construction of a theoretical framework to guide this practice.

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (Grant No. 71390522, No. 71671053, No. 71271065, No. 71771067). This research was also supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2016YFC0701800 and No. 2016YFC0701808).

Appendix C. High-Impact Number in Top 10 Clusters

Author contributions.

Luqi Wang and Xiaolong Xue contributed to the conceptualization and methodology. Luqi Wang and Zebin Zhao analyzed the data and results. Luqi Wang and Zeyu Wang wrote and edited the draft. Xiaolong Xue and Zebin Zhao contributed to the project administration and funding acquisition.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• NATURE CAREERS PODCAST
• 20 May 2024

Infrastructure projects need to demonstrate a return on investment

• Dom Byrne 0

Dom Byrne is a freelance radio and podcast producer based in Brighton, UK.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

How to Save Humanity in 17 Goals: build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation (SDG 9)

Power networks are humankind’s biggest engineering achievement to date, says Sinan Küfeoğlu. But ageing infrastructure in advanced industrialised economies, coupled with the fact that around one billion people in the world lack continuous power access, particularly in Global South countries, could threaten the delivery of Sustainable Development Goal 9 by 2030, he warns. The goal promotes resilient infrastructure, inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and innovation.

Speaking in a personal capacity, Küfeoğlu, a senior policy manager at the UK government gas and electricity market regulator OFGEM, lists some of the hurdles ahead, based on his work as an energy systems researcher in Finland, UK, US, and Turkey, where he grew up.

Many funding proposals, he says, pack in “buzzwords” such as green, sustainable, holistic, inclusive, and circular economy, but governments and other infrastructure project funders are often poor at measuring impact, and undertaking return-on-investment and cost-benefit analyses.

How to Save Humanity in 17 Goals is a podcast series that profiles scientists whose work addresses one or more of the SDGs. Episodes 7-12 are produced in partnership with Nature Water , and introduced by Fabio Pulizzi, its chief editor.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01462-1

Fabio Pulizzi 00:10

Hello, this is How to Save Humanity in 17 Goals , a podcast brought to you by Nature Careers in partnership with Nature Water . I’m Fabio Pulizzi, chief editor of Nature Water .

Welcome again to the series where we meet the scientists working towards the Sustainable Development Goals, agreed by the United Nations and world leaders in 2015.

For almost a decade, in a huge global effort, thousands of researchers have been using those targets to tackle the biggest problems that the planet faces today.

In episode 9, we look at Sustainable Development Goal number 9: infrastructure, industrialization and innovation.

And we meet an electrical engineer who sees efficient energy provision as central to a country meeting these aims.

Sinan Küfeoğlu: 01:02

I am Sinan Küfeoğlu. I am working as a senior policy manager at the UK Office of Gas and Electricity Markets, OFGEM.

Previously I worked at Oxford, Cambridge, University College London, Alto University in Finland, on various energy, economics and policy-related subjects.

I'd like to clarify that the perspectives I express are my own as a researcher, and do not necessarily represent or reflect the official or unofficial stances or views of OFGEM, or the UK civil service.

Goal number 9 is about building a resilient infrastructure and promoting sustainable industrialization and fostering innovation.

So it has kind of three pillars: ifrastructure, industrialization and innovation.

For the infrastructure in SDG number nine, the three main themes are to provide transportation, information and communication infrastructures.

So these are the enablers for a sustainable development in industrialization and innovation.

You know, without transport, without information, and without communication, we can't enable economic activity, industry and innovation.

So these are the main pillars picked up by the SDG number 9.

I’m originally from Turkey. When I was a little child, Isaac Newton was my hero. That is why I was quite interested in physics. That was my favourite topic in the school.

And when I started university in Ankara, in the Middle East Technical University, I wanted to study electrical engineering, just to continue all this. Faraday’s works, Maxwell’s work, you know, I started being more and more interested in this electricity and energy fields.

At the age of 14, I gave a seminar on the the importance and future of nuclear energy to the city representatives in my city in Turkey.

So I was quite interested in energy related subjects. That's why I studied electrical engineering in Turkey.

Then, I wanted to do research and get into academia. That is why I moved to Finland to do my Masters and PhD, again in electrical engineering.

But when I finished my PhD, I said: “Okay, this is a time for a bigger challenge to see, you know, to be exposed to the outer world.”

Because Finland is more of a reserved place. You know, well, it’s a happy country. Yeah, everyone, let's say in my university, Aalto University, we were all electrical engineers.

Imagine a corridor. Forty people, they're all electrical engineers, and they look at the world from the same perspective, from the same window.

So I wanted to change that, to expose myself for differences and different, you know, problems, peoples, backgrounds.

That’s why I moved to UK. And in Cambridge, I found exactly that sort of environment. I, for example, from this school of electrical engineering, I moved to business school, in Cambridge.

So in there I worked with business people, finance people, people from sciences, humanities, backgrounds, any backgrounds.

And I started working with companies, industry, the public authorities, the companies from all around the world, and getting questions from them. You know, a company approaches you and says: “Okay, we have this problem. Can you do research for us?”

I say, “Okay, yeah, we can do this. And we need these skills and experiences.”

They fund us. They go around our network, find the necessary skills. Altogether truly interdisciplinary research. We come up with answers. And we publish our answers. In a short time period, we can see the real impact in the world. And that is what motivates me the most, to see the impact what I do, what I publish in the end.

After that, I experienced the same thing in Oxford, now with the World Bank, EBRD, OFGEM, the civil service, we do regulations of policymaking, and everything we do, whatever we change, immediately, the next day, there’s enough impact in the orders of hundreds of millions, even billions of pounds.

So this is quite, you know, tempting and motivating. And energy is the enabler of everything.

Sinan Küfeoğlu 05:54

The biggest infrastructure challenge, I think, as a power engineer, I can say the access to electricity, the power network.

Because power network, in my opinion, is the biggest engineering achievement of humankind to this date, because it enables other sectors and other economies to continue.

And five, seven years ago, in Cambridge, we published a paper on the future of power distribution in the world, and investigated what parts of the world has access to continuous power, what kind of netoworks they have.

So around 1 billion people in the world right now lack continuous power access.

And the concentration of these people are mainly in the Global South. So there is an equality problem as well, as well as technical problems of accessing electricity.

So in my opinion, this is the biggest challenge to provide electricity to everyone, so that they will have an economy, they can create jobs and businesses and they can sustain their more than social lives.

In addition to electric power, I can say, access to clean water and sanitation is another infrastructure problem.

Because it is necessary to, as I said, sustain daily lives of, you know, dignified human beings. And again, this concentration of lacking access to clean water and sanitation is almost geographically the same with the lack of access to power.

So these two are going you know, side by side, I think, in terms of challenges.

So solving one will naturally solve the other I guess, if the necessary actions are taken. As SDG number 9 reminds me of transportation, it says information and telecommunications.

But transportation wise, I think the world is at okayish levels. So we can connect and travel to all, to even the remotest areas in the world.

It is fine, I think. Information, well it comes to telecommunications and internet. Yes, we should just distribute the Internet to all regions in the world.

Some companies, you know, are doing this, some widespread big projects that are promising that anyone on Earth can access to internet. I hope that will work out.

In terms of telecommunications, 2G network is almost everywhere on Earth. But the adoption of 4G is slower and 5G is much lower. I’m sure those will increase in time as well, as we achieve 2G.

So, you know, information and telecommunications are okayish in terms of when you compare with other problems in the infrastructure.

Sinan Küfeoğlu 09:03

When we talk about infrastructure, everyone thinks of investments. What would happen in the future? What we should do more to add on top of the existing one. But people tend to miss the thing that the existing infrastructure is aging as well.

For example, in the energy network, the usual lifetime of you know, equipment is around like 50-60 years, if you're lucky, 70 depending on the quality of the manufacturing.

So replacing the existing infrastructure, the aging infrastructure, is another big challenge. I remember back in the day, we went to a factory in Turkey. I was in the university there.

And they wanted to change the electricity infrastructure to a new one, to a smarter one, you know, Smart Grid, Smart Energy Systems.

Yep. Popular ones, Let’s do that. So that was the year 2010. We went to that factory. And I saw that the equipment for installed back in 1920s.

They were German-made, still working after 90 years, you see. But they had to be replaced maybe after 60 years. So they made it to 90 years. So these are huge costs, you see.

Sinan Küfeoğlu 10:22

In the developed world, while the infrastructure is ageing, and it needs to be replaced, this is the biggest challenge.

And the industry, it’s transforming into, you know, more digitalized, more green industries, more sustainable.

Whereas in the developing countries, they still lack businesses infrastructure. So basic infrastructure should go there first.

I remember back in the day, we had a chat with the retired senior officer of one of the biggest oil companies in the world.

I asked him a question said that, you know, he gave a speech about sustainability. Imagine an oil company former CEO talking about sustainability. That’s a bit ironic. I said, “Okay, you say were going to create a sustainable world in the in the future.” And I said, “In that sustainable world, there is no place for you, you know, oil companies. What are you going to do in terms of business.”

And he laughed at that bit and said, “I understand your enthusiasm, young man, but about a billion people lack energy right now in the world. And we are the first ones, the oil and gas companies, to reach these people before the electricity goes to them.”

So you know, the industrialization, the needs, they change rapid, vary widely between geographies. I think when we talk about the challenges the solutions, we should we should address what we’re talking about and where we’re talking about.

Sinan Küfeoğlu 12:00

So, the solution for this industrialization challenge, the practical and sensible solution, would be to provide decentralized and smart systems to the developing countries, and less developed countries.

For example, these solar systems, you know, solar PV systems, together with energy storage assets, and clean water and sanitation assets, they could be deployed, so that these regions will have the sufficient amount of basic infrastructure to run their daily errands.

And these self-sufficient mini and micro infrastructure could be a solution in these underdeveloped regions.

As long as financing mechanisms exist and provided to these regions, that's another problem. We know financing mechanisms. For the developed world the challenge is digitalization and ageing infrastructure.

So in one hand, we are going to incorporate more digital solutions. In the other we are going to green it by decarbonizing it. In the meantime, of course, we will replace the ageing infrastructure with the new ones.

Sinan Küfeoğlu 13:24

We had this kind of a trend, maybe 20 years ago, saying that, “Okay, let's decentralize everything, our energy systems. Why not go for micro grids, mini grids, self sustaining cities, self sustaining university campuses? Everything should be self sufficient.”

You have self-sufficient homes. These ideas emerged everywhere in the world. So we wanted to decentralize these power systems, for example. But after 20 years, two decades, when we see now that we are creating more bigger, gigantic centralized entities, rather than decentralization.

For example, it happened in the UK 20 years ago, when we’re talking about mini grids, micro grids right now, we are creating this future energy system, future system operator.

So it's going to be bigger, heavier in terms of physics, and more, you know, authorities and technical capabilities will be concentrated on the centralized entity.

So everything is going for centralized entities. So that’s, that’s a kind of a big irony in the developed world. I think. that should be mentioned here.

Sinan Küfeoğlu 14:39

There are various innovation challenges. First, we can mention of this research and development expenditure.

Again, there's this inequality in the developed world. The, you know, a higher percentage of GDP is being spent for research and development.

Whereas in developing countries it is almost half of that, or maybe lower than half of that.

Similarly, the number of researchers and academic activities in the developed world is much, much, much higher than the developing countries.

So that means that the gap in between is going to get larger, bigger, when time passes. So, when we, you know announced these SDGs, back in 2015, the main idea was to support, you know, these developing countries so that there’ll be more research and development innovation activities, so that the gap would be smaller.

But the numbers tell us exactly a different opposite way. So, more research and development activities are concentrated in the developed world, less in the developing world.

The other thing, in innovation, I think we should mention something really, really important here is the viability of innovation. Because the countries are, you know, funding the research work. Projects are the projects, and everything.

What I’ve witnessed in my professional career, I’ve been quite active in Brussels back in the day, attending, you know, European Commission meetings about funding announcements, all these you know, Horizon projects etc.

In many chats, I realized that they don't run proper return-on-investment analysis, cost-benefit analysis. So in the developed world, I can say that the biggest challenge with innovation is that people tend to use these buzzwords.

What are these buzzwords? Green, stainable, holistic approach, inclusive, circular economy. So as long as you bombard your research proposal, or, you know, innovation proposal with these words, you can easily sell it to people, to the funding authorities.

And those authorities don’t measure the impact after that. Imagine, you propose a research project of five years, and you’re funded less than 100 million euros.

And after five years, no one is asking how much of value you created. So how much of this money returned back to the society, returned back to the economies?

And I can give you two solid examples about this innovation challenge. The first one could be blockchain.

Five years ago, it was the biggest hype in the world, especially in the energy world. Everyone said, “Oh, it’s gonna decarbonize the whole world.”

We will say it. Blockchain is the hero. And many countries, primarily Germany, invested a huge amount of money in this in the sphere, funded projects, companies, startups.

But after five years, now we can see that most of those companies failed. They perished from the business world.

They couldn’t create any real value. They couldn’t create revenue streams. And what happened to those fundings? They are just gone, you see. Right now the similar thing is happening with hydrogen, similar big hype, it’s going to decarbonize everything.

You’re going to achieve net zero through hydrogen, and billions of euros are being spent everywhere, in North America, in Europe, even in Britain. But no one is actually, you know, asking the question: “How much of this money is going to return back to the economies also societies as real real value?“

So I think in terms of innovation, when we talk about innovation, we should really highlight and underscore the term viability.

The SDGs are not solid or binding targets. Rather, these are accumulation of numerous recommendations and roadmaps. And so we don’t have to achieve any solid targets by 2030.

They’re not binding, or legally binding. So these are recommendations. But when we asked the questions, “Will we achieve SDG number nine by 2030? The answer is yes and no. Both.”

Because some parts of the world you know, we already talked about the inequalities, you know the geographical differences, they’re going to achieve it maybe some pas have already achieved this, you know, SDG number nine target sub targets, there are various sub targets in there, but some other parts of the world may be they will never achieve it.

What I can say from my kind of professional experience, the ship has already set sail. These SDG ships in particular as SDG number nine, yep, it’s traveling now.

And it has a direction and ultimate kind of target It’s going there. But the main question is who is traveling in the first class, and who is traveling below the deck below the engines, below the sea level.

So some peoples are traveling first class, some people just below the engine rooms. So that is the problem because after all, I’m an engineer, and I believe in science and engineering and I really, really believe in the potential in mankind.

I definitely think that that we are going to achieve these climate goals, the sustainable development goals one way or another, maybe in 2030, maybe in 2050.

But eventually, we will achieve these, but it’s not going to be an equal journey for everybody.

Fabil Pulizzi 21:06

Thanks for listening to this series: How to Save Humanity in 17 Goals .

Join us again next time when we look at Sustainable Development Goal number 10: to reduce inequality in and among countries. See you then

Related Articles

• Engineering

Argentina’s pioneering nuclear research threatened by huge budget cuts

News 07 MAY 24

Allen J. Bard obituary: electrochemist whose techniques underpin clinical diagnostics, materials discovery and more

Obituary 01 MAY 24

It’s time to talk about the hidden human cost of the green transition

Correspondence 16 APR 24

Brazil’s plummeting graduate enrolments hint at declining interest in academic science careers

Career News 21 MAY 24

US halts funding to controversial virus-hunting group: what researchers think

News 16 MAY 24

A DARPA-like agency could boost EU innovation — but cannot come at the expense of existing schemes

Editorial 14 MAY 24

Protests over Israel-Hamas war have torn US universities apart: what’s next?

News Explainer 22 MAY 24

Dozens of Brazilian universities hit by strikes over academic wages

News 08 MAY 24

Recruitment of Global Talent at the Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (IOZ, CAS)

The Institute of Zoology (IOZ), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), is seeking global talents around the world.

Beijing, China

Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (IOZ, CAS)

Full Professorship (W3) in “Organic Environmental Geochemistry (f/m/d)

The Institute of Earth Sciences within the Faculty of Chemistry and Earth Sciences at Heidelberg University invites applications for a   FULL PROFE...

Heidelberg, Brandenburg (DE)

Universität Heidelberg

Postdoc: deep learning for super-resolution microscopy

The Ries lab is looking for a PostDoc with background in machine learning.

Vienna, Austria

University of Vienna

Postdoc: development of a novel MINFLUX microscope

The Ries lab is developing super-resolution microscopy methods for structural cell biology. In this project we will develop a fast, simple, and robust

Postdoctoral scholarship in Structural biology of neurodegeneration

A 2-year fellowship in multidisciplinary project combining molecular, structural and cell biology approaches to understand neurodegenerative disease

Umeå, Sweden

Umeå University

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Why America’s Infrastructure Is So Hard To Fix

James Anderson, a former communications director for New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and associate commissioner for the New York City Department of Homeless Services, established and leads the Government Innovation program at Bloomberg Philanthropies. His work focuses on bolstering the problem-solving capacity of mayors and local governments through developing the data, innovation, and collaboration capabilities they need to effectively lead—and move their communities forward.

A robust investment in public infrastructure has too often been an American unicorn—desirable yet elusive. Even our vaunted highway system wallowed as an aspirational blueprint for a dozen years before President Dwight Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956.

The phrase “infrastructure week” became a running joke during the last administration as promises failed to result in legislation, year after year. When it comes to repairing our roads and bridges, upgrading our power and communications grids, and preparing for a changing future, we have simply failed to live up to the task.

The needs, to be sure, are vast. The toll on the nation’s roads is staggering— 7,500 pedestrians were killed in 2022—demanding greater street and highway safety. One out of three bridges in the U.S. needs repair. Throughout the country, millions of Americans don’t have access to or can’t afford broadband internet service. In excess of 2 million people live without running water or basic plumbing. 

For too long, the American public has had to carry on while these deficiencies have gone unattended. The political will has been weak or inattentive, the rewards too far removed from electoral advantage. Policymakers have long bickered over how and how much to pay for infrastructure improvements.

That’s all the more reason to applaud President Joe Biden and the 117th Congress for defying political inertia and passing not one or two, but three, pieces of legislation that clear a path to American renewal. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, American Rescue Plan, and Inflation Reduction Act dedicated more than $1.2 trillion in federal aid not only to rebuild roads, bridges, and rails, but to expand access to high-speed internet, safeguard drinking water, confront the climate crisis, and ensure underserved communities don’t continue to be overlooked. Thousands of municipalities—from the smallest towns to the largest cities—have an opportunity to realize their dreams, tackle their most urgent needs, and build their way to prosperity. Suddenly, America is on the cusp of strengthening itself from the Heartland out.

The administration has aimed significant amounts of the legislation’s money right at the nation’s local governments. That means mayors, among the most pragmatic and least partisan of our elected officials, are positioned to manage the implementation of much of this extraordinary investment. This has created a paradox: While small towns and cities have never before imagined being eligible for competitive dollars at these levels, winning hinges on the capacity of some of the most stretched civic institutions out there—those same municipalities.  That means that as welcome as this new federal funding is, many communities are simply unable to retrieve it.

Shortly after the President signed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, our team at Bloomberg Philanthropies canvassed small towns across the country to hear directly from their leaders. In focus groups from Alexandria, La., to Greenville, Miss., to Santa Fe, N.M., to Scranton, Penn., local officials repeatedly said they didn’t believe these dollars could get to them. They worried putting precious time and energy into deciphering complex federal applications would yield nothing. With this insight, we galvanized a group of national organizations and subject-matter experts to form the Local Infrastructure Hub . This consortium has spent the last 18 months coaching 1,300-plus mostly small and mid-sized municipalities in how to navigate the intricacies of federal grants and secure for their residents a share of the largest national commitment to modernization in decades.

Here's what we’re seeing: First, demand from America’s small cities is tremendous. Of the nearly 800 cities that have participated in our multi-week grant-writing bootcamps, three-fourths have populations with 50,000 or fewer residents, two-thirds have 25,000 or fewer, and two out of five have no more than 10,000. Second, these towns and cities have entrenched challenges; most have poverty rates exceeding national averages. Third, securing federal funding is foreign terrain. A majority have never before received funding from a competitive federal grant. Even fewer have internal teams or key, anchor partners to develop sophisticated plans and forge the relationships that will marshal a proposal or project to fruition. Yet that’s exactly what this moment is asking of our smaller urban, suburban, and rural communities.

With direct support, however, these jurisdictions are making it happen. Consider Clarkston, Ga., a city of 14,500 residents that is sometimes called “the most diverse square mile in America.” Mayor Beverly Burks , whose part-time role belies her non-stop commitment to the job, was determined to make the city safer for pedestrians and motorists, but had little experience or staff to track down the necessary federal funds. The Local Infrastructure Hub extended a hand. In December, the effort paid off: The U.S. Department of Transportation awarded Clarkston $1 million to put together a comprehensive street safety plan.

Across the board, the program’s results have been just as promising. Through training with experts, peer sessions for local officials, and pro-bono bootcamps, the Local Infrastructure Hub has guided hundreds of successful applications:

• Participating cities have drawn down more than $2 billion and are more than three times as likely to win federal grants than those that don’t participate.
• The average award of the most recently announced Safe Street grant winners was $1.8 million for Local Infrastructure Hub bootcamp participants, compared to $1 million for non-participants nationally.
• In the Reconnecting Communities awards out in March, bootcamp participants averaged grant sizes of $95 per resident, three times the $31 per resident for non-participating city winners.

Among the recipients we assisted was Montgomery, Ala. Its $36.6 million award benefits residents along the Selma-to-Montgomery Trail, who have been marginalized by segregation, redlining, and highway construction. “The impact has been as much psychological as anything else,” Mayor Steven Reed recently shared. “This is important for people who have been promised signs of progress. It shows their community did matter, and their history is not just being used for a photo opp.” Thankfully, with the commitment of our partners at the Ballmer Group , Emerson Collective , Ford Foundation , The Kresge Foundation , Waverley Street Foundation , The U.S. Conference of Mayors , National League of Cities , Results for America , Delivery Associates , and others, this work will continue.

But civil society can only do so much. The truth is, the federal government needs to be more thoughtful about the capacity challenges facing small cities. One agency that’s made advances is the U.S. Department of Transportation, which distinguishes itself by offering two kinds of grants: planning and implementation. Implementation awards are trending to larger municipalities, those that have devoted time and study to these issues. By introducing a planning grant, the Department has enabled everyone else to have a shot to advance, even without “shovel ready” projects at the outset. It’s a model that should become a permanent feature in the way all government agencies do business with America’s localities.

Agencies can’t stop there, though. Technical assistance, and, critically, support for local innovation, data, and project management muscle should be built into federal investments. A typical city chasing federal dollars faces a daunting job. Applicants first need to choose from a stack of more than 400 grants. They must develop project plans, assemble data, and develop financing strategies. They must engage civic groups, private sector stakeholders, and other elected officials to generate more ambitious proposals and forge durable coalitions that can drive a project to completion. The applications are time intensive and difficult. The smaller the town, the less likely it has a strategic planning unit, let alone a grant writer. We have met dozens of fire chiefs, city managers, mayors, even code enforcement officers, who work double time just to compete for an award.

It is time for the federal government to acknowledge that not all municipalities are equally positioned to dream big and effectively implement for their residents. This is especially true in places left behind, which will either catch up or fall further back in this era of federal investment. Strengthening municipal governments and their capacity to innovate, partner, and deliver should be a national, congressional priority. It’s the civic infrastructure on which our physical infrastructure will either be built or crumble.

The Biden Administration and the 117 th Congress did something radical: Together, they decided to invest in the ideas and aspirations coming from Main Streets across America, rather than from inside the Beltway. Philanthropy and civil society stepped in to help municipalities succeed. The job is hardly finished, though. Future federal investments must ensure localities have the tools and resources to bring that money home, and to put it to effective use. Only then can we all move forward, together.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• Javier Milei’s Radical Plan to Transform Argentina
• The New Face of Doctor Who
• How Private Donors Shape Birth-Control Choices
• What Happens if Trump Is Convicted ? Your Questions, Answered
• The Deadly Digital Frontiers at the Border
• Scientists Are Finding Out Just How Toxic Your Stuff Is
• The 31 Most Anticipated Movies of Summer 2024
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

Leveraging Islamic Finance for Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure

Asset-based and risk-sharing instruments – the backbone of Islamic finance – ensure that financiers become stakeholders in a project’s success. A hybrid financing model that makes use of both conventional and Islamic finance could accelerate investment in sustainable infrastructure in developing countries.

JEDDAH – Today’s world is confronting a host of complex development challenges, from climate change and rapid urbanization to widening inequality, debt sustainability, and a persistent digital divide. But, as the COVID-19 pandemic made plain, many developing countries lack the sustainable and resilient social-sector infrastructure required to address such complex and overlapping crises. More worryingly, these countries – particularly the least-developed among them – are unable to close their infrastructure gaps, owing to shrinking fiscal space, heavy debt burdens, and inadequate levels of official development aid.

By 2040, the global infrastructure-financing gap will have widened to an estimated $15 trillion – a massive shortfall that can be attributed to a few key factors. Many developing countries simply do not have the financial resources for expensive and time-consuming large-scale infrastructure projects. And private actors often shy away, owing to the perceived high risks of investing in infrastructure projects in developing countries. Together, these factors pose a significant obstacle to building desperately needed infrastructure.

The good news is that multilateral development banks (MDBs) and other stakeholders are increasingly aware of the need for swift action to overcome these challenges. MDBs are under pressure from their shareholders to become better, bigger, and more effective. An independent review of MDBs’ capital-adequacy frameworks – an important initiative commissioned by the G20 – recommended the expanded use of innovative finance. More recently, the G20 Independent Expert Group on strengthening MDBs released a multi-volume   report that, among other things, calls for increasing private-sector engagement in development finance by broadening existing risk-sharing instruments and pioneering new ones such as asset-based vehicles.

Asset-based and risk-sharing finance could be transformative, because, unlike the conventional way of raising funds through debt, these models have the added benefit of forging partnerships and fostering a collaborative environment. Financiers become stakeholders, meaning that both parties have skin in the game and a vested interest in the project’s long-term viability and sustainability. This mitigates the risk of moral hazard often associated with debt-based models.

These principles form the foundation of Islamic finance, although its participatory nature extends beyond sharing risk, as it focuses on long-term partnerships and encourages a commitment to the social and environmental sustainability of a project throughout its lifecycle. The Islamic Development Bank (IsDB), of which I am president, embodies this approach. Over the past 50 years, we have approved more than $182 billion in funding for development projects related to renewable energy, the social sector, and – given our recent focus on driving green economic growth and developing human capital – sustainable and resilient infrastructure.

Islamic financial markets, valued at $3.25 trillion and with ample liquidity and appetite for asset-based and risk-sharing bankable projects, could thus be a powerful tool for mobilizing infrastructure investments in developing countries. In particular, a hybrid financing model that makes use of both conventional and Islamic finance could scale up investment in infrastructure projects. The IsDB has a proven track record of success in co-funding infrastructure projects with other MDBs and the private sector. Completed projects include Dakar’s Blaise Diagne International Airport (with the African Development Bank) and Jordan’s Queen Alia International Airport (with the International Finance Corporation).

SPRING SALE: Save 40% on all new Digital or Digital Plus subscriptions

Subscribe now to gain greater access to Project Syndicate – including every commentary and our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – starting at just $49.99 .

Subscribe Now

Infrastructure financing mobilized through asset-based and risk-sharing financial instruments requires a well-developed and robust financial sector with strong legal and regulatory frameworks capable of protecting investors; robust domestic capital markets; and transparent monitoring and impact reporting. That is where MDBs come in. They can help develop and strengthen the financial infrastructure needed to attract private capital to developing countries.

Moreover, MDBs could boost investor confidence and help create a pipeline of bankable projects by taking collective action. The Global Collaborative Co-Financing Platform , recently launched by ten MDBs (including IsDB) and headed by the World Bank, is a step in the right direction.

Investing in sustainable and resilient infrastructure can mitigate the effects of climate change, yield long-term economic benefits, and improve people’s quality of life. But raising the necessary capital will require harnessing the potential of asset-based and risk-sharing finance. The IsDB is committed to playing a leading role in such efforts, but other MDBs and private investors must also embrace this approach. Only by working together to close the global infrastructure-finance gap can we build a more equitable future for all.

The Fragile Fraternity of China and Russia

May 20, 2024 Nina L. Khrushcheva

The Case for Ukraine’s NATO Accession

May 21, 2024 Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Ilona Sologoub

The Dangerous Retreat into Protectionism

May 21, 2024 Carl Bildt

What the China Pessimists Are Getting Wrong

May 21, 2024 Yu Yongding

The Global Economy Is More Vulnerable Than It Seems

May 20, 2024 Bertrand Badré & Yves Tiberghien

New Comment

It appears that you have not yet updated your first and last name. If you would like to update your name, please do so here .

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Email this piece to a friend

Friend's name

Friend's email

• Feedback/general inquiries
• Advertise with us
• Corporate Subscriptions
• Education Subscriptions
• Secure publication rights
• Submit a commentary for publication
• Website help

Please provide more details about your request

We hope you're enjoying our PS content

To have unlimited access to our content including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, PS OnPoint and PS The Big Picture, please subscribe

Reckoning With a New Authoritarian Bloc

Is Europe Too Big for Further Enlargement?

The Sino-American Trade War Benefits China’s Competitors

Is the Quad Becoming a Potemkin Alliance?

The High Costs of the New US Tariffs on Chinese EVs

Every time one set of protectionist measures against China disappoints, the United States escalates its economic war in the hope that additional restrictions will prove more effective. Yet by slapping massive tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, America has laid bare its own hypocrisy and economic vulnerabilities.

How G7 Leaders Can Unlock Financing for Africa

With many African countries trapped in perpetual cycles of debt, financing investment in sustainable development has become increasingly difficult, if not impossible. The situation demands that wealthy countries step up and offer debt relief and cancellation, in addition to more concessional and long-term financing.

The Threat of Trumpflation and a Fed War

Is China Too Old to Get Rich?

✕ Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Email required

Password required Remember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.

Reset Password Cancel

• PS Economics Newsletter
• PS Politics Newsletter
• Promotional emails

By proceeding, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions .

Sign in with

Your Institution

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up notification.

To receive email updates regarding this {entity_type}, please enter your email below.

If you are not already registered, this will create a PS account for you. You should receive an activation email shortly.

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

FACT SHEET: Biden- ⁠ Harris Administration Kicks Off Infrastructure Week by Highlighting Historic Results Spurred by President   Biden’s Investing in America   Agenda

Administration releases updated map showcasing 56,000 infrastructure projects and unveils new Investing in America state-by-state fact sheets

When President Biden signed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in November 2021, he committed to delivering once-in-a-generation investments to rebuild America’s infrastructure and competitiveness. Today, his Administration is cutting ribbons and breaking ground on projects across the country to rebuild our roads and bridges, deliver clean and safe water, tackle legacy pollution, expand access to high-speed internet, and build a clean energy economy for all Americans. While “Infrastructure Week” became an empty punchline during the prior Administration, President Biden is delivering an “Infrastructure Decade” that will benefit communities for generations to come. As this year’s Infrastructure Week kicks off, the Administration celebrates the historic progress of President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, which continues to unlock economic opportunity, create good-paying jobs, boost domestic manufacturing, strengthen supply chains, and grow the economy from the middle out and the bottom up.

To date, the Administration has announced nearly $454 billion in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding, including over 56,000 specific projects and awards, across over 4,500 communities in all 50 states, D.C., the territories, and for Tribes. To highlight the wide-ranging impact of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the White House has released an updated map showcasing the more than 56,000 projects and awards that are identified or now underway.

Today, the Administration is also highlighting progress across President Biden’s entire Investing in America agenda — which includes the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, the American Rescue Plan, and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The President’s agenda has driven over $866 billion dollars in private sector manufacturing and clean energy investments in the United States, and the Administration is releasing new state by state fact sheets that spotlight investments and projects in all 50 states, the territories, and Washington DC.

This Infrastructure Week, the Administration also continues to call on Republicans in Congress to extend funding for the Affordable Connectivity Program, a Bipartisan Infrastructure Law program that has lowered internet bills to enable more than 23 million households—1 in 6 households across the country—to access affordable high-speed internet. Without action from Congress, millions of Americans will see their internet bills increase or lose internet access at the end of May.

HISTORIC PROGRESS ON INFRASTRUCTURE: BY THE NUMBERS

Thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law alone, the Administration has already:

• Launched improvements on over 165,000 miles of roads and launched over 9,400 bridge repair projects – making our roadways safer and reconnecting communities across the country;
• Provided funding to deploy nearly 3,000 low-and zero-emission American-made transit buses and funded over 5,000 clean school buses in 600 communities across the country, prioritizing disadvantaged areas;
• Delivered funding for over 450 port and waterway projects to strengthen supply chains, speed up the movement of goods, lower costs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions;
• Deployed investments in over 300 airport terminal projects to modernize and expand terminals—over 100 of which are under construction or complete;
• Launched over 4,100 projects to help communities build resilience to threats such as the impacts of climate change and cyber-attacks;
• Financed over 1,400 drinking water and wastewater projects across the country;
• Deployed funding that will help replace up to 1.7 million toxic lead pipes;
• Removed hazardous fuel material from nearly 15 million acres of land through the Infrastructure Law and other sources to protect communities from wildfires;
• Funded nearly 500 projects for water recycling, storage, conservation, desalination, and other purposes to improve drought resilience across the West;
• Provided funding to over 200 states, Tribes, and territories and launched over 60 projects to improve the resilience and reliability of America’s electric grid and deliver cheaper and cleaner electricity—representing the largest single investment in electric transmission and distribution infrastructure in the history of the United States;
• Enabled over 23 million low-income households to access free or discounted high-speed internet service through the Affordable Connectivity Program;
• Funded 12,000 miles of middle-mile high-speed internet infrastructure across 370 counties, promoting the security, resilience, and affordability of our nation’s regional networks;
• Provided funding to more than 280 Tribal governments to connect over 65,000 Tribal households with high-speed internet;
• Implemented new rules to expose internet junk fees, enabling 300 million Americans to shop for home and mobile internet plans that best meet their needs and budget;
• Plugged nearly 8,000 orphaned oil and gas wells to address legacy pollution;
• Allocated funding to 95 previously unfunded Superfund site projects, including the longstanding backlog of projects, to clean up contaminated sites and advance environmental justice; and
• Provided funding to 180 programs that advance President Biden’s Justice40 Initiative , which set a goal that 40% of the overall benefits of certain federal clean energy, climate, and other investments flow to disadvantaged communities.

To highlight this progress and to connect with communities across the country, senior White House officials and members of the President’s Cabinet have made over 500 trips to underscore how the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is delivering for communities across the country.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS ACROSS KEY SECTORS

As we celebrate “Infrastructure Week,” the Biden-Harris Administration is highlighting its progress implementing the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law across key sectors:

• Roads & Bridges : The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests over $300 billion in repairing and rebuilding America’s roads and bridges – the largest investment since President Eisenhower’s investment in the interstate highway system. This funding is already improving safety, strengthening supply chains, and reconnecting communities across the country. To date, the Biden-Harris Administration has launched nearly 13,000 bridge repair projects and funded improvements on over 257,000 miles of roads. After signing the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021, President Biden visited the Blatnik Bridge in Superior, Wisconsin, and Duluth, Minnesota, highlighting the kinds of aging infrastructure his Administration sought to rebuild. This January, the President returned to Wisconsin to show the effect of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: over $1 billion was awarded to rebuild the Blatnik Bridge , a key corridor connecting the Twin Ports, to accommodate heavier trucks and bikers and pedestrians. To date, the Biden-Harris Administration has also announced over $3.5 billion to reconnect and rebuild disadvantaged communities that were divided by transportation infrastructure decades ago and have long been overlooked. These projects include “The Stitch” in Atlanta, Georgia , which received $158 million to create a 14-acre mixed-use development cap in the Downtown Connector. This investment is reconnecting working-class homes and businesses to downtown, increasing access to jobs, housing, education, and healthcare and creating public parks, plazas, and surface streets for walking and biking.
• Rail: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests $66 billion for rail, the largest investment in passenger rail since the inception of Amtrak and an unprecedented investment in rail safety. President Biden recently announced $16.4 billion for 25 passenger rail projects on the Northeast Corridor to repair aging infrastructure, reducing delays and improving reliability and speed. President Biden has also announced $8.2 billion in new funding for 10 major passenger rail projects across the country, including the Brightline West High-Speed Rail Project that broke ground in April 2024. Connecting Las Vegas, Nevada, and Rancho Cucamonga, California, this project will result in a trip time of just over 2 hours, which is nearly twice as fast as driving. Brightline’s agreement with California and the Southern Nevada Building Trades will ensure that the Brightline West project is built using good-paying union labor.
• Airports: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests $25 billion to modernize and upgrade airports and air traffic facilities nationwide, improving passenger experience through expanding capacity, increasing accessibility, reducing delays, and enhancing safety. To date, the Biden-Harris Administration has announced nearly $15 billion in airport funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. This includes nearly $3 billion through the Airport Terminals Program to over 300 airport terminal projects across 48 states, Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Of these awards, over 100 projects are now underway or complete — like the Missoula Montana Airport South Concourse project , which is already complete and is increasing capacity, accessibility, and energy efficiency thanks to a $17 million investment, and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport , which received a $20 million grant and a visit from the Second Gentleman during the 2024 Investing in America Tour. Additionally, through the Airport Infrastructure Grants Program, the Biden-Harris Administration has announced over 1,000 grants for airport pavement projects. Of those, over 600 projects are already complete. 
• Ports and Waterways: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests $17 billion to upgrade our nation’s ports and waterways. The Department of Transportation and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have together funded over 450 port and waterway projects to strengthen supply chain reliability, speed up the movement of goods, reduce costs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This includes major projects like the Louisiana International Terminal Project , which received $300 million in funding to construct a new container terminal on the Gulf Coast for the Port of New Orleans. The new terminal will be a new alternative for larger vessels compared to inland terminals that have height restrictions, increasing throughput of goods. In April, the Army Corps broke ground on phase 2 of the Norfolk Harbor Deepening project , which received $142 million from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to make the Port of Virginia the deepest port on the East Coast, allowing the port to handle the world’s largest container ships.
• Transit and School Buses: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests nearly $90 billion in public transit – the largest investment in transit in our Nation’s history. To date, the Biden-Harris Administration has funded nearly 3,000 low- and zero- emission transit buses through the Department of Transportation and over 5,000 clean school buses through the Environmental Protection Agency. The Administration is also funding long-awaited capital projects through the Capital Investment Grant program – like the Phoenix Northwest Extension Light Rail project, which received $158 million to extend Phoenix’s light rail by 1.5 miles and connect it with new housing and retail space. This extension, estimated to serve 2 million passengers per year, was completed earlier this year.
• Electric Vehicle Charging, EV Batteries & Critical Materials : The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law makes the first-ever dedicated federal investment in EV charging, with $7.5 billion in available funding. Thanks to this investment and the President’s vision for a national network of EV chargers, the number of publicly available charging ports on America’s roads has surpassed 182,000 , over a 90% increase since President Biden took office. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law also invests over $7 billion to support the domestic manufacturing of batteries and the extraction, refinement, and processing of the critical materials that power them. Of this funding, $3.5 billion has been announced to date, and already five manufacturing plants have broken ground. Late last year, the Department of Energy made an additional $3 billion in funding available. 
• Clean Water: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests over $50 billion government-wide for the largest upgrade to the nation’s water infrastructure in history. This funding places us on a path to meet the President’s commitment to replace every toxic lead pipe in America and works to close the wastewater gap for 2 million people who lack basic sanitation. These funds have already financed over 1,400 drinking water and wastewater projects across the country, including over 800 projects that will deliver clean water for Tribal communities that lack basic water services. Within this total, the Environmental Protection Agency’s State Revolving Funds require that at least 49% of funding for clean water and lead pipe replacement go to disadvantaged communities as grants and forgivable loans, advancing the President’s Justice40 initiative. This month, President Biden visited Wilmington, North Carolina, to announce another $3 billion to replace lead pipes , part of a historic $15 billion in dedicated funding for lead pipe replacement. To date, the Administration has deployed funding that will help replace up to 1.7 million toxic lead pipes. That includes Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which has received $42 million to replace lead pipes, putting the city on track to replace every lead pipe by 2026. Major clean water projects under construction include the Lewis & Clark Rural Water System , which is building over 300 miles of water pipeline to deliver clean water to over 350,000 people in rural Minnesota, South Dakota, and Iowa. The Department of the Interior has been able to accelerate completion of the project by a decade thanks to $142 million from the Infrastructure Law.
• High-Speed Internet: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests $65 billion to help ensure that everyone in America has access to affordable, reliable high-speed internet—regardless of their income, race, or zip code.  Over the last year, all 56 states and territories have developed their plans for how they will spend more than $40 billion in funding to connect every unserved location within their borders. That funding comes atop $1 billion for middle-mile infrastructure, which will build more than 12,000 miles of fiber across 370 counties, and $2.3 billion for rural high-speed internet, with 121 awards going to 356 states and territories across the country. For example, in Colorado, Montana, Missouri, Michigan, and Mississippi, construction is underway on projects that will connect rural communities to high-speed internet. These projects, funded with $59 million from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, will connect 10,500 people, 1,600 farms, and 295 businesses directly to fiber networks. The Department of Commerce has also awarded 148 Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program (TBCP) grants, serving over 280 Tribal Governments, which will connect more than 65,000 Tribal households, subsidizing thousands of devices, and funding digital inclusion activities for Tribal communities. Together, these investments mirror the federal government’s historic investment in rural electrification during the 1930s, when the U.S. connected nearly every home and farm in America to electricity and millions of families and our economy reaped the benefits. And, to ensure consumers know what they are paying for, the Administration implemented new rules to ensure internet providers are transparent about their pricing and network performance – by requiring internet service providers to have a “nutrition label” that describes their plan at the point of sale – enabling 300 million Americans to comparison shop for the home or mobile internet plan that best meets their needs and budget.
• Modernizing the Grid and Deploying Clean Energy: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law includes more than $62 billion in funding at the Department of Energy to advance our clean energy future by investing in clean energy demonstration and deployment projects, developing new technologies, and modernizing our power grid. This includes an investment of over $20 billion to upgrade the nation’s grid—a critical component to achieve President Biden’s goal of delivering a 100% carbon-pollution free power sector by 2035. To date, the Department of Energy has announced over $5.6 billion in funding for over 60 projects and provided funding to over 200 states, Tribes, and territories. In April 2024, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced up to $331 million through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for capacity contract negotiations with the Southwest Intertie Project-North (SWIP-N) . SWIP-N is a new 285-mile transmission line from Idaho to Nevada that will bring over 2,000 megawatts of needed transmission capacity, enough to power 1.7 million homes. In January 2024, the Department of Energy finalized the terms of $1.1 billion in credit payments for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant in California, helping keep this source of clean power operating while preserving over 1,000 good-paying clean energy jobs.
• Superfund and Brownfields Cleanup : The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law delivers the largest-ever investment in tackling legacy pollution, including $5 billion to clean up Superfund and brownfield sites to restore the health and economic vitality of communities that have been exposed to legacy pollution for far too long. In February, the Biden-Harris Administration announced the final round of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding of over $1 billion to start new cleanup projects and continue work at 100 Superfund sites across the country. Examples include funding to clean up the US Finishing/Cone Mills Superfund site in Greenville, South Carolina, where a century of industrial operations have polluted the area’s groundwater. As part of the President’s Justice40 Initiative, 82% of Superfund funding from the Infrastructure Law has been directed to disadvantaged communities. In addition, over 20 brownfield sites have completed cleanup efforts and over 100 have been made ready for redevelopment through Infrastructure Law funding to date.
• Orphaned Wells and Abandoned Mine Lands: Orphaned oil and gas wells and abandoned coal mines left behind by industry continue to pollute millions of Americans’ air and water with methane and other pollutants, and pose physical safety risks to communities. Through a total investment of $16 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Department of the Interior is helping fund cleanup efforts at these sites across the country . With this funding, nearly 8,000 orphaned wells have been plugged so far, with tens of thousands more to be plugged using Infrastructure Law funding. States and Tribes are also making progress addressing Abandoned Mine Lands. For example, the Administration has funded the cleanup of the Truetown Discharge abandoned mine land site in Athens County, Ohio, which is the largest acid mine drainage in the state and discharges toxic waste into the watershed. This project will treat 1.4 million gallons of acid mine drainage daily and convert the waste into professional-grade paint for sale through a partnership with Ohio University, helping deliver clean water and support economic development for the community.
• Resilience: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests over $50 billion in an “all hazards” approach to protect our infrastructure and communities from physical, climate, and cybersecurity-related threats. To date, the Administration has funded over 4,100 projects to build resilience to these threats , ranging from restoring critical waterways and forests to enhancing long-term drought resilience across the American West to reducing wildfire risk. Together, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act include $15.4 billion to support drought-prone communities to address the ongoing megadrought in the West. In fact, earlier this year a historic consensus-based agreement was finalized to conserve water resources in the critical Colorado River System through President Biden’s leadership. Already, President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has provided more than $3 billion for 475 Western drought resilience projects. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has also made major investments this year in reducing wildfire risk ahead of another fire season, including $400 million announced from the U.S. Forest Service in February to address 21 designated priority landscapes, to safeguard communities from the ongoing wildfire crisis, which is exacerbated by climate change. For example, the Four Forest Restoration Initiative in Arizona has treated over 130,000 acres of at-risk forest land in FY 2023 alone to reduce wildfire risk. 

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.

• Africa Collective

Business Insider Edition

• United States
• International
• Deutschland & Österreich

Top 10 African countries with the largest private infrastructure investment

Private infrastructure investment has enormous potential for addressing the infrastructure deficit in low- and middle-income nations, particularly African countries. This is why it has been a key area of focus for foreigners looking to invest in the African market. For decades now, a great deal of low- and middle-income nations have had to manage inadequate infrastructures, limiting their economic potential.

• Business Insider Africa presents the 10 African countries with the largest private infrastructure investment.
• 68 countries received investments across 322 projects, with some achieving their first private participation in infrastructure transactions in over a decade.
• This list is courtesy of a report from the World Bank.

Recommended articles

While governments play an important role in infrastructure development, the limited availability of financial resources necessitates the engagement of private investors.

This is where private infrastructure investment becomes pivotal in the economic development of these countries. Private investors offer cash, expertise, and flexibility to infrastructure development, augmenting public funds and easing fiscal limitations.

Furthermore, their profit-driven strategy promotes accountability and encourages innovation, resulting in cost-effective and high-quality infrastructure solutions.

Any economy is based on its infrastructure, which includes its water supply, electricity systems, transportation networks, and telecommunications.

DON'T MISS THIS: List of African countries with more press freedom than the land of the free

A lack of infrastructure may be a major obstacle to Africa's growth, hindering industrialization and making it more difficult to access basic services. Fortunately, this is a problem that private investors have taken an interest in, and over the years they have made significant contributions.

A report by the World Bank, noted that the private sector infused $86B into infrastructure development in low- and middle-income nations in 2023. This unfortunately represented a 5% decline in investment compared to the year prior.

“In 2023, 68 countries received investments across 322 projects, compared to 54 countries and 260 projects in 2022. Guinea Bissau, Libya, Papua New Guinea, São Tomé and Príncipe, and Suriname achieved their first private participation in infrastructure (PPI) transactions in more than a decade,” the report reads.

With that said, here are the 10 African countries with the highest private infrastructure investment.

10 African countries with the largest private infrastructure investment

Follow business insider africa.

Thanks for signing up for our daily insight on the African economy. We bring you daily editor picks from the best Business Insider news content so you can stay updated on the latest topics and conversations on the African market, leaders, careers and lifestyle. Also join us across all of our other channels - we love to be connected!

Top 10 African countries with the least private infrastructure investment

Interview with isua botman, co-founder of connectx, top 10 african countries with the most rocket projectors, 5 ways to make money as a student in nigeria in 2024, america likely to name kenya major non-nato ally, the french are training terrorists in benin - niger alleges, 5 best airport hotels in africa in 2024, biden to visit africa in february if he wins election, the billion-dollar question: can nigeria's coastal highway drive economic transformation.

The US revives aviation deal with Nigeria

Ivory Coast ranks as the best-rated sovereign in Sub-Saharan Africa - report

South Africa ranked No. 1 destination for important meetings in Africa, Nigeria falls to 14th

Nigeria raises interest rate to tame galloping inflation.

‘All hands on deck’ in Antigua and Barbuda as small island States chart course to resilient prosperity

Facebook Twitter Print Email

Leaders from small island developing States worldwide will converge on the shores of Antigua and Barbuda in the Caribbean this weekend to deliver a bold new plan of action to build resilience on the road to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

UN_News_Centre

The Fourth International Conference on Small Island Developing States ( SIDS4 ) will bring together governments, the UN, civil society, the private sector and leading youth voices to turn new ideas into action, raise new pledges of support and discuss the key challenges that lie ahead for the vulnerable group of nations.

Living on the edge

There are 39 SIDS , from conference hosts Antigua and Barbuda to Vanuatu in the South Pacific, which were recognised as a special case for support during the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development , also known as the game changing first Earth Summit.

They are located in some of the world’s most disaster-prone regions, acutely vulnerable to sea level rise, climate shocks and natural disasters. SIDS have small domestic markets and are vulnerable to economic shocks and downturns.

Other challenges include rapid population growth putting pressure on basic services and job availability, while they are literally on the frontline of climate change and prone to environmental fragility.

Many SIDS lack sufficient resilience to deal with the rising incidence of natural disasters, something which the people of Antigua and Barbuda are all too aware of having suffered the devastating impact of hurricanes Irma and Maria which barrelled across the Caribbean in 2017.

Survival at stake

In an interview with UN News, the country’s Prime Minister, Gaston Browne, said they were among the worst of the external shocks “literally decimating our economies and damaging our infrastructure, our buildings, our homes”.

He insisted that global collaboration to drive down global warming was essential if small island States are to survive the decades ahead:

Other common challenges include high import and export costs, limited natural resources, population density that is significantly higher than the global average, high debt and limited access to low-cost borrowing.

In 2014, SIDS met and agreed on The SAMOA Pathway for action, expanding the UN body that stands up for the interests of landlocked developing countries and least developed nations to include small island States.

Time to deliver

The UN Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States in charge of that Office, UN-OHRLLS , Rabab Fatima told UN News ahead of SIDS4 – which runs from 27 to 30 May – that it will “deliver a bold new plan of action to build the resilience of 39 small island nations in tackling the world’s most pressing challenges and achieving the SDGs ”.

She highlighted the consensus that has already formed around an agreed programme of action which delegates will take back to their respective capitals when they leave Antigua and Barbuda at the end of next week.

This new agenda will set out the sustainable development aspirations of small island States for the decade ahead.

Renewed vows

“ We are going there to renew our commitment to strengthen resilience and foster prosperity, collectively, ” said Ms. Fatima, who is also Special Adviser to the SIDS4 conference.

“ We need all hands on deck, ” she added. “Therefore, NGOs, civil society, government and the private sector, all of them have a role to play.”

She said the new strategy would help build resilience, scale up climate action, mainstream disaster risk reduction, strengthen safe and healthy societies, promote science, technology, innovation and digitalisation, increase prosperity, employment, equality and inclusivity and build partnerships.

To do this, there needs to be more support from the international community assembly in Antigua and beyond.

NGOs, civil society, government and the private sector, all of them have a role to play. — Rabab Fatima

Fighting climate change on the frontline

But, with limited resources and greater vulnerability, how can SIDS think long-term when transitioning to renewables from fossil fuels, for example, might not be in their short-term interests?

Ms. Fatima said that island nations had been at the forefront of setting ambitious targets to make that transition.

“Many island nations have launched roadmaps towards meeting 100 per cent energy generation from renewable resources by 2030,” including the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Antigua and Barbuda.

In the Pacific, countries like Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and the Federated States of Micronesia have made major investments in solar, wind and hydropower projects with support from financial institutions, including the Asian Development Bank.

Caribbean islands Jamaica and Grenada have seen growth in rooftop solar, wind farms and other renewable energy projects.

Hope over fear

So, what are the positive takeaways the top UN official for small island State development would like to see emerge from Antigua and Barbuda?

“In addition to furthering the global agenda for sustainable development, my overarching hope is that the SIDS4 conference acts as a catalyst for good change , resulting in noticeable transformation in the lives of those who reside in small island developing States,” said UN-OHRLLS chief Ms. Fatima.

My overarching hope is that the SIDS4 conference acts as a catalyst for good change, resulting in noticeable transformation in the lives of those who reside in small island developing States.  — Rabab Fatima

She called for concrete action plans to address the urgent problems that SIDS face and the strengthening of partnerships among international organisations, development partners, civil society and SIDS.

Policy commitments are also on the wish list from other nations and organisations taking part to help SIDS reach the 2030 SDGs, “which could entail pledges to offer funding, technical assistance and capacity building”.

Ms. Fatima hopes that SIDS will be empowered to take charge of their own development plans and given the tools and support needed to put resilient and sustainable plans into action.

“I think judging the success of SIDS4 will be based on its capacity to spur significant action, gather resources and promote constructive change for the benefit of the people living in small island developing States .”

UN News will have a team in St. Johns, the capital of Antigua and Barbuda, to give you a front row seat to all the action. From your mobile phone or computer, follow the key events and discussions as the delegates SIDS4 work towards an agreed, focused, forward-looking and action-oriented political outcome document.

Color Scheme

• Use system setting
• Light theme

Development in the Latah Valley put on hold for a year as strained infrastructure examined

New development in the Latah Valley will immediately be put on hold for a year, after an emergency vote Monday evening by the Spokane City Council.

The one-year ban on projects on undeveloped land in almost all of the Latah-Hangman and Grandview-Thorpe neighborhoods was approved 5-2, with Council members Jonathan Bingle and Michael Cathcart voting against.

The moratorium will apply only to new development applications and does not halt projects already in the pipeline.

It’s the second moratorium in two years as city leaders scramble to make up for lost time, with infrastructure in the area of the city lagging behind a growing population for decades, straining roads and raising safety concerns if residents were forced to evacuate during a fire.

Opponents believe that another pause on development in a quickly growing area would contribute to an ongoing housing crisis and they worry that more moratoriums will be coming, as a year is not enough time to build the needed infrastructure to relieve pressure.

Bingle acknowledged the area’s insufficient infrastructure, but noted that the city is facing a budget crisis and argued the money is not available for the upwards of $50 million in investments needed to fix many of the major problems.

Instead of pausing development, mechanisms may be available to fund those projects through future development, including the tax increment financing system that was leveraged to develop Kendall Yards , Bingle argued.

In 2007, the Spokane City Council approved tax increment financing for that project, with 75 percent of increased city and county taxes generated by the site for 25 years being siphoned to pay for infrastructure like sewers, streets and water mains that the developer needed to build homes and businesses on the land north of the Spokane River.

Supporters argued that additional time when few new buildings would be constructed could be used to draft a specific plan for improvements. They said it could also help to modify future development standards to pump the brakes on growth in areas that cannot handle it and include higher standards for fire mitigation for projects that are allowed.

In September 2022, the City Council approved a surprise moratorium that lasted six months, during which the city heavily modified development fees meant to pay for future infrastructure improvements, such as removing bottlenecks in local roads and building a fire station. But supporters of the new moratorium believe those fees are insufficient to make up for decades of neglect and worry that the area is at high risk during a wildfire.

The ordinance was sponsored by Council members Paul Dillon and Lili Navarrete, who represent the affected area of the city. Monday’s passage is the fulfillment of a campaign pledge of Dillon, who had met with residents in the Latah Valley and argued a further moratorium was needed.

'Luxury cruise ship' spotted on Spokane’s South Hill

The Gallery at Spokane is the area’s newest senior living community and among the most luxurious.