Water industry asset management: a proposed service‐performance model for investment

Abstract

The water industry in England and Wales has developed over the last century, from small organisations serving local communities to large integrated companies in private ownership, overseen by a government regulator. Asset management practice has developed greatly in the 17 years since privatisation, with companies able to plan their operations and investment as they believe appropriate for the provision of customer services, subject to justifying their plans to the economic, quality and environmental regulators. Investment has flowed into the industry to replace deteriorated assets and to improve the quality of drinking water and rivers. The asset base is complex and, with a replacement value of approximately £231 billion at the 2002–2003 price base index suitable approaches are required to ensure that both the water service and the sewerage service are delivered at the most appropriate long‐term cost. The 2004 UK water industry price review was supported by the introduction of a Capital Maintenance Planning Common Framework to help companies understand and explain their maintenance investment requirement. In this paper, a service‐performance model is proposed to improve managers' understanding of the way in which businesses and the environment change over time, taking account of maintenance and other strategic requirements. Although developed with the water industry in mind, the model is equally applicable to other asset‐intensive industries.

Strategic rehabilitation planning of piped water networks using multi-criteria decision analysis

“…Awareness about the need for long-term rehabilitation planning of our aging water infrastructure has risen globally during the past two decades (AWWA, 2001;Burns et al, 1999;Herz, 1998;Kleiner and Rajani, 1999;Saegrov, 2005;Selvakumar and Tafuri, 2012;Vanier, 2001). Infrastructure asset management (IAM) is increasingly applied to rehabilitation planning on the strategic, tactical, and operational levels (Cardoso et al, 2012;Christodoulou et al, 2008;Fuchs-Hanusch et al, 2008;Haffejee and Brent, 2008;Heather and Bridgeman, 2007;Marlow et al, 2010;Ugarelli et al, 2010).…”

The water Utility Adoption Model (wUAM): Understanding influences of organisational and procedural innovation in a UK water utility

“…Companies having investment strategies based on short term planning that conform with regulations (Heather and Bridgeman, 2007), could result in sub-optimal assets in the longer term. None of the innovation opportunities generated in this research could be described as radical opportunities but they are representative of the kinds of micro-scale process changes within organisations that have the potential to change the way in which significant investment decisions are made and delivered.…”

Water Resources in South East England – A Dilemma in Sustainable Development

“…The water service companies operate under long -term licensing arrangements overseen by Ofwat which sets price caps on charges to customers on a 5 -year cycle (Heather and Bridgeman 2007 ). Together these companies possess a complex asset base with a replacement value of some £ 231 billion at 2002 -2003 prices.…”