Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Infrastructure
View on Wikipedia
Infrastructure is the set of facilities and systems that serve a country, city, or other area,[1] and encompasses the services and facilities necessary for its economy, households and firms to function.[2] Infrastructure is composed of public and private physical structures such as roads, railways, bridges, airports, public transit systems, tunnels, water supply, sewers, electrical grids, and telecommunications (including Internet connectivity and broadband access). In general, infrastructure has been defined as "the physical components of interrelated systems providing commodities and services essential to enable, sustain, or enhance societal living conditions" and maintain the surrounding environment.[3]
Especially in light of the massive societal transformations needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change, contemporary infrastructure conversations frequently focus on sustainable development and green infrastructure. Acknowledging this importance, the international community has created policy focused on sustainable infrastructure through the Sustainable Development Goals, especially Sustainable Development Goal 8 "Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure".
One way to describe different types of infrastructure is to classify them as two distinct kinds: hard infrastructure and soft infrastructure.[4] Hard infrastructure is the physical networks necessary for the functioning of a modern industrial society or industry.[5] This includes roads, bridges, and railways. Soft infrastructure is all the institutions that maintain the economic, health, social, environmental, and cultural standards of a country.[5] This includes educational programs, official statistics, parks and recreational facilities, law enforcement agencies, and emergency services.
Classifications
[edit]A 1987 US National Research Council panel adopted the term "public works infrastructure", referring to:
"... both specific functional modes – highways, streets, roads, and bridges; mass transit; airports and airways; water supply and water resources; wastewater management; solid-waste treatment and disposal; electric power generation and transmission; telecommunications; and hazardous waste management – and the combined system these modal elements comprise. A comprehension of infrastructure spans not only these public works facilities, but also the operating procedures, management practices, and development policies that interact together with societal demand and the physical world to facilitate the transport of people and goods, provision of water for drinking and a variety of other uses, safe disposal of society's waste products, provision of energy where it is needed, and transmission of information within and between communities."[6]
The American Society of Civil Engineers publishes an "Infrastructure Report Card" which represents the organization's opinion on the condition of various infrastructure every 2–4 years.[7] As of 2017[update] they grade 16 categories, namely aviation, bridges, dams, drinking water, energy, hazardous waste, inland waterways, levees, parks and recreation, ports, rail, roads, schools, solid waste, transit and wastewater.[7]: 4 The United States has received a rating of "D+" on its infrastructure.[8] This aging infrastructure is a result of governmental neglect and inadequate funding.[8] As the United States presumably looks to upgrade its existing infrastructure, sustainable measures could be a consideration of the design, build, and operation plans.
Public
[edit]Public infrastructure is that owned or available for use by the public (represented by the government).[9] It includes:[9]
- Transport infrastructure – vehicles, road, rail, cable and financing of transport
- Aviation infrastructure – air traffic control technology in aviation
- Rail transport – trackage, signals, electrification of rails
- Road transport – roads, bridges, tunnels
- Critical infrastructure – assets required to sustain human life
- Energy infrastructure – transmission and storage of fossil fuels and renewable sources
- Information and communication infrastructure – systems of information storage and distribution
- Public capital – government-owned assets
- Public works – municipal infrastructure, maintenance functions and agencies
- Municipal solid waste – generation, collection, management of trash/garbage
- Sustainable urban infrastructure – technology, architecture, policy for sustainable living
- Water supply network – the distribution and maintenance of water supply
- Wastewater infrastructure – disposal and treatment of wastewater
- Infrastructure-based development
Personal
[edit]A way to embody personal infrastructure is to think of it in terms of human capital.[10] Human capital is defined by the Encyclopædia Britannica as "intangible collective resources possessed by individuals and groups within a given population".[11] The goal of personal infrastructure is to determine the quality of the economic agents' values. This results in three major tasks: the task of economic proxies in the economic process (teachers, unskilled and qualified labor, etc.); the importance of personal infrastructure for an individual (short and long-term consumption of education); and the social relevance of personal infrastructure.[10] Essentially, personal infrastructure maps the human impact on infrastructure as it is related to the economy, individual growth, and social impact.
Institutional
[edit]Institutional infrastructure branches from the term "economic constitution". According to Gianpiero Torrisi, institutional infrastructure is the object of economic and legal policy. It compromises the growth and sets norms.[10] It refers to the degree of fair treatment of equal economic data and determines the framework within which economic agents may formulate their own economic plans and carry them out in co-operation with others.
Sustainable
[edit]Sustainable infrastructure refers to the processes of design and construction that take into consideration their environmental, economic, and social impact.[8] Included in this section are several elements of sustainable schemes, including materials, water, energy, transportation, and waste management infrastructure.[8] Although there are endless other factors of consideration, those will not be covered in this section.
Material
[edit]Material infrastructure is defined as "those immobile, non-circulating capital goods that essentially contribute to the production of infrastructure goods and services needed to satisfy basic physical and social requirements of economic agents".[10] There are two distinct qualities of material infrastructures: 1) fulfillment of social needs and 2) mass production. The first characteristic deals with the basic needs of human life. The second characteristic is the non-availability of infrastructure goods and services.[10] Today, there are various materials that can be used to build infrastructure. The most prevalent ones are asphalt, concrete, steel, masonry, wood, polymers and composites.[12]
Economic
[edit]According to the business dictionary, economic infrastructure can be defined as "internal facilities of a country that make business activity possible, such as communication, transportation and distribution networks, financial institutions and related international markets, and energy supply systems".[13] Economic infrastructure support productive activities and events. This includes roads, highways, bridges, airports, cycling infrastructure, water distribution networks, sewer systems, and irrigation plants.[10]
Social
[edit]
Social infrastructure can be broadly defined as the construction and maintenance of facilities that support social services.[14] Social infrastructures are created to increase social comfort and promote economic activity. These include schools, parks and playgrounds, structures for public safety, waste disposal plants, hospitals, and sports areas.[10]
Core
[edit]
Core assets provide essential services and have monopolistic characteristics.[15] Investors seeking core infrastructure look for five different characteristics: income, low volatility of returns, diversification, inflation protection, and long-term liability matching.[15] Core infrastructure incorporates all the main types of infrastructure, such as roads, highways, railways, public transportation, water, and gas supply.
Basic
[edit]Basic infrastructure refers to main railways, roads, canals, harbors and docks, the electromagnetic telegraph, drainage, dikes, and land reclamation.[10] It consists of the more well-known and common features of infrastructure that we come across in our daily lives (buildings, roads, docks).
Complementary
[edit]Complementary infrastructure refers to things like light railways, tramways, and gas/electricity/water supply.[10] To complement something means to bring it to perfection or complete it. Complementary infrastructure deals with the little parts of the engineering world that make life more convenient and efficient. They are needed to ensure successful usage and marketing of an already finished product, like in the case of road bridges.[16] Other examples are lights on sidewalks, landscaping around buildings, and benches where pedestrians can rest.
Applications
[edit]This section needs additional citations for verification. (August 2025) |
Engineering and construction
[edit]Engineers generally limit the term "infrastructure" to describe fixed assets that are in the form of a large network; in other words, hard infrastructure.[citation needed] Efforts to devise more generic definitions of infrastructures have typically referred to the network aspects of most of the structures, and to the accumulated value of investments in the networks as assets.[citation needed] One such definition from 1998 defined infrastructure as the network of assets "where the system as a whole is intended to be maintained indefinitely at a specified standard of service by the continuing replacement and refurbishment of its components".[17]
Civil defense and economic development
[edit]Civil defense planners and developmental economists generally refer to both hard and soft infrastructure, including public services such as schools and hospitals, emergency services such as police and fire fighting, and basic services in the economic sector. The notion of infrastructure-based development combining long-term infrastructure investments by government agencies at central and regional levels with public private partnerships has proven popular among economists in Asia (notably Singapore and China), mainland Europe, and Latin America.
Military
[edit]Military infrastructure is the buildings and permanent installations necessary for the support of military forces, whether they are stationed in bases, being deployed or engaged in operations. Examples include barracks, headquarters, airfields, communications facilities, stores of military equipment, port installations, and maintenance stations.[18]
Communications
[edit]Communications infrastructure is the informal and formal channels of communication, political and social networks, or beliefs held by members of particular groups, as well as information technology, software development tools. Still underlying these more conceptual uses is the idea that infrastructure provides organizing structure and support for the system or organization it serves, whether it is a city, a nation, a corporation, or a collection of people with common interests. Examples include IT infrastructure, research infrastructure, terrorist infrastructure, employment infrastructure, and tourism infrastructure.[citation needed]
Related concepts
[edit]The term "infrastructure" may be confused with the following overlapping or related concepts.
Land improvement and land development are general terms that in some contexts may include infrastructure, but in the context of a discussion of infrastructure would refer only to smaller-scale systems or works that are not included in infrastructure, because they are typically limited to a single parcel of land, and are owned and operated by the landowner. For example, an irrigation canal that serves a region or district would be included with infrastructure, but the private irrigation systems on individual land parcels would be considered land improvements, not infrastructure. Service connections to municipal service and public utility networks would also be considered land improvements, not infrastructure.[19][20]
The term "public works" includes government-owned and operated infrastructure as well as public buildings, such as schools and courthouses. Public works generally refers to physical assets needed to deliver public services. Public services include both infrastructure and services generally provided by the government.
Ownership and financing
[edit]Infrastructure may be owned and managed by governments or by privately held companies, such as sole public utility or railway companies. Generally, most roads, major airports and other ports, water distribution systems, and sewage networks are publicly owned, whereas most energy and telecommunications networks are privately owned.[citation needed] Publicly owned infrastructure may be paid for from taxes, tolls, or metered user fees, whereas private infrastructure is generally paid for by metered user fees.[21][22] Major investment projects are generally financed by the issuance of long-term bonds.[citation needed]
Government-owned and operated infrastructure may be developed and operated in the private sector or in public-private partnerships, in addition to in the public sector. As of 2008[update] in the United States for example, public spending on infrastructure has varied between 2.3% and 3.6% of GDP since 1950.[23] Many financial institutions invest in infrastructure.
In the developing world
[edit]
According to researchers at the Overseas Development Institute, the lack of infrastructure in many developing countries represents one of the most significant limitations to economic growth and achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Infrastructure investments and maintenance can be very expensive, especially in such areas as landlocked, rural and sparsely populated countries in Africa. It has been argued that infrastructure investments contributed to more than half of Africa's improved growth performance between 1990 and 2005, and increased investment is necessary to maintain growth and tackle poverty. The returns to investment in infrastructure are very significant, with on average thirty to forty percent returns for telecommunications (ICT) investments, over forty percent for electricity generation, and eighty percent for roads.[24]
Regional differences
[edit]The demand for infrastructure both by consumers and by companies is much higher than the amount invested.[24] There are severe constraints on the supply side of the provision of infrastructure in Asia.[25] The infrastructure financing gap between what is invested in Asia-Pacific (around US$48 billion) and what is needed (US$228 billion) is around US$180 billion every year.[24]
In Latin America, three percent of GDP (around US$71 billion) would need to be invested in infrastructure in order to satisfy demand, yet in 2005, for example, only around two percent was invested leaving a financing gap of approximately US$24 billion.[24]
In Africa, in order to reach the seven percent annual growth calculated to be required to meet the MDGs by 2015 would require infrastructure investments of about fifteen percent of GDP, or around US$93 billion a year. In fragile states, over thirty-seven percent of GDP would be required.[24]
Sources of funding for infrastructure
[edit]The source of financing for infrastructure varies significantly across sectors. Some sectors are dominated by government spending, others by overseas development aid (ODA), and yet others by private investors.[24] In California, infrastructure financing districts are established by local governments to pay for physical facilities and services within a specified area by using property tax increases.[26] In order to facilitate investment of the private sector in developing countries' infrastructure markets, it is necessary to design risk-allocation mechanisms more carefully, given the higher risks of their markets.[27]
The spending money that comes from the government is less than it used to be. From the 1930s to 2019, the United States went from spending 4.2% of GDP to 2.5% of GDP on infrastructure.[28] These under investments have accrued, in fact, according to the 2017 ASCE Infrastructure Report Card, from 2016 to 2025, infrastructure will be underinvested by $2 trillion.[28] Compared to the global GDP percentages, The United States is tied for second-to-last place, with an average percentage of 2.4%. This means that the government spends less money on repairing old infrastructure and or on infrastructure as a whole.[29]
In Sub-Saharan Africa, governments spend around US$9.4 billion out of a total of US$24.9 billion. In irrigation, governments represent almost all spending. In transport and energy a majority of investment is government spending. In ICT and water supply and sanitation, the private sector represents the majority of capital expenditure. Overall, between them aid, the private sector, and non-OECD financiers exceed government spending. The private sector spending alone equals state capital expenditure, though the majority is focused on ICT infrastructure investments. External financing increased in the 2000s (decade) and in Africa alone external infrastructure investments increased from US$7 billion in 2002 to US$27 billion in 2009. China, in particular, has emerged as an important investor.[24]
Coronavirus implications
[edit]The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic has only exacerbated the underfunding of infrastructure globally that has been accumulating for decades. The pandemic has increased unemployment and has widely disrupted the economy. This has serious impacts on households, businesses, and federal, state and local governments. This is especially detrimental to infrastructure because it is so dependent on funding from government agencies – with state and local governments accounting for approximately 75% of spending on public infrastructure in the United States.[30]
Governments are facing enormous decreases in revenue, economic downturns, overworked health systems, and hesitant workforces, resulting in huge budget deficits across the board. However, they must also scale up public investment to ensure successful reopening, boost growth and employment, and green their economies.[31] The unusually large scale of the packages needed for COVID-19 was accompanied by widespread calls for "greening" them to meet the dual goals of economic recovery and environmental sustainability.[32] However, as of March 2021, only a small fraction of the G20 COVID-19 related fiscal measures was found to be climate friendly.[32]
Sustainable infrastructure
[edit]Although it is readily apparent that much effort is needed to repair the economic damage inflicted by the Coronavirus epidemic, an immediate return to business as usual could be environmentally harmful, as shown by the 2007-08 financial crisis in the United States. While the ensuing economic slowdown reduced global greenhouse gas emissions in 2009, emissions reached a record high in 2010, partially due to governments' implemented economic stimulus measures with minimal consideration of the environmental consequences.[33] The concern is whether this same pattern will repeat itself. The post-COVID-19 period could determine whether the world meets or misses the emissions goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement and limits global warming to 1.5 degrees C to 2 degrees C.[34]
As a result of the COVID-19 epidemic, a host of factors could jeopardize a low-carbon recovery plan: this includes reduced attention on the global political stage (2020 UN Climate Summit has been postponed to 2021), the relaxing of environmental regulations in pursuit of economic growth, decreased oil prices preventing low-carbon technologies from being competitive, and finally, stimulus programs that take away funds that could have been used to further the process of decarbonization.[33] Research suggests that a recovery plan based on lower-carbon emissions could not only make significant emissions reductions needed to battle climate change, but also create more economic growth and jobs than a high-carbon recovery plan would.[33] A study published in the Oxford Review of Economic Policy, more than 200 economists and economic officials reported that "green" economic-recovery initiatives performed at least as well as less "green" initiatives.[35] There have also been calls for an independent body could provide a comparable assessment of countries' fiscal policies, promoting transparency and accountability at the international level.[32]
In addition, in an econometric study published in the Economic Modelling journal, an analysis on government energy technology spending showed that spending on the renewable energy sector created five more jobs per million dollars invested than spending on fossil fuels.[36] Since sustainable infrastructure is more beneficial in both an economic and environmental context, it represents the future of infrastructure. Especially with increasing pressure from climate change and diminishing natural resources, infrastructure not only needs to maintain economic development and job development, and a high quality of life for residents, but also protect the environment and its natural resources.[31]
Sustainable energy
[edit]Sustainable energy infrastructure includes types of renewable energy power plants as well as the means of exchange from the plant to the homes and businesses that use that energy. Renewable energy includes well researched and widely implemented methods such as wind, solar, and hydraulic power, as well as newer and less commonly used types of power creation such as fusion energy. Sustainable energy infrastructure must maintain a strong supply relative to demand, and must also maintain sufficiently low prices for consumers so as not to decrease demand.[8] Any type of renewable energy infrastructure that fails to meet these consumption and price requirements will ultimately be forced out of the market by prevailing non renewable energy sources.
Sustainable water
[edit]Sustainable water infrastructure is focused on a community's sufficient access to clean, safe drinking water.[8] Water is a public good along with electricity, which means that sustainable water catchment and distribution systems must remain affordable to all members of a population.[8] "Sustainable Water" may refer to a nation or community's ability to be self-sustainable, with enough water to meet multiple needs including agriculture, industry, sanitation, and drinking water. It can also refer to the holistic and effective management of water resources.[37] Increasingly, policy makers and regulators are incorporating Nature-based solutions (NBS or NbS) into attempts to achieve sustainable water infrastructure.
Sustainable waste management
[edit]Sustainable waste management systems aim to minimize the amount of waste products produced by individuals and corporations.[38] Commercial waste management plans have transitioned from simple waste removal plans into comprehensive plans focused on reducing the total amount of waste produced before removal.[38] Sustainable waste management is beneficial environmentally, and can also cut costs for businesses that reduce their amount of disposed goods.[38]
Sustainable transportation
[edit]Sustainable transportation includes a shift away from private, greenhouse gas emitting cars in favor of adopting methods of transportation that are either carbon neutral or reduce carbon emissions such as bikes or electric bus systems.[39] Additionally, cities must invest in the appropriate built environments for these ecologically preferable modes of transportation.[39] Cities will need to invest in public transportation networks, as well as bike path networks among other sustainable solutions that incentivize citizens to use these alternate transit options. Reducing the urban dependency on cars is a fundamental goal of developing sustainable transportation, and this cannot be accomplished without a coordinated focus on both creating the methods of transportation themselves and providing them with networks that are equally or more efficient than existing car networks such as aging highway systems.[39]
Sustainable materials
[edit]Another solution to transition into a more sustainable infrastructure is using more sustainable materials. A material is sustainable if the needed amount can be produced without depleting non-renewable resources.[40] It also should have low environmental impacts by not disrupting the established steady-state equilibrium of it.[40] The materials should also be resilient, renewable, reusable, and recyclable.[41]
Today, concrete is one of the most common materials used in infrastructure. There is twice as much concrete used in construction than all other building materials combined.[42] It is the backbone of industrialization, as it is used in bridges, piers, pipelines, pavements, and buildings.[43] However, while they do serve as a connection between cities, transportation for people and goods, and protection for land against flooding and erosion, they only last for 50 to 100 years.[44] Many were built within the last 50 years, which means many infrastructures need substantial maintenance to continue functioning.
However, concrete is not sustainable. The production of concrete contributes up to 8% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions.[45] A tenth of the world's industrial water usage is from producing concrete.[45] Even transporting the raw materials to concrete production sites adds to airborne pollution.[45] Furthermore, the production sites and the infrastructures themselves all strip away agricultural land that could have been fertile soil or habitats vital to the ecosystem.
Green infrastructure
[edit]Green infrastructure is a type of sustainable infrastructure. Green infrastructure uses plant or soil systems to restore some of the natural processes needed to manage water, reduce the effects of disasters such as flooding,[46] and create healthier urban environments.[47] In a more practical sense, it refers to a decentralized network of stormwater management practices, which includes green roofs, trees, bioretention and infiltration, and permeable pavement.[48] Green infrastructure has become an increasingly popular strategy in recent years due to its effectiveness in providing ecological, economic, and social benefits – including positively impacting energy consumption, air quality, and carbon reduction and sequestration.[48]
Green roofs
[edit]A green roof is a rooftop that is partially or completely covered with growing vegetation planted over a membrane. It also includes additional layers, including a root barrier and drainage and irrigation systems.[49] There are several categories of green roofs, including extensive (have a growing media depth ranging from two to six inches) and intensive (have a growing media with a depth greater than six inches).[49] One benefit of green roofs is that they reduce stormwater runoff because of its ability to store water in its growing media, reducing the runoff entering the sewer system and waterways, which also decreases the risk of combined sewer overflows.[49] They reduce energy usage since the growing media provides additional insulation, reduces the amount of solar radiation on the roof's surface, and provides evaporative cooling from water in the plants, which reduce the roof surface temperatures and heat influx.[49] Green roofs also reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide since the vegetation sequesters carbon and, since they reduce energy usage and the urban heat island by reducing the roof temperature, they also lower carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation.[50]
Tree planting
[edit]Tree planting provides a host of ecological, social, and economic benefits. Trees can intercept rain, support infiltration and water storage in soil, diminish the impact of raindrops on barren surfaces, minimize soil moisture through transpiration, and they help reduce stormwater runoff.[47] Additionally, trees contribute to recharging local aquifers and improve the health of watershed systems. Trees also reduce energy usage by providing shade and releasing water into the atmosphere which cools the air and reduces the amount of heat absorbed by buildings.[48] Finally, trees improve air quality by absorbing harmful air pollutants reducing the amount of greenhouse gases.
Bioretention and infiltration practices
[edit]There are a variety of types of bioretention and infiltration practices, including rain gardens and bioswales.[48] A rain garden is planted in a small depression or natural slope and includes native shrubs and flowers. They temporarily hold and absorb rain water and are effective in removing up to 90% of nutrients and chemicals and up to 80% of sediments from the runoff.[51] As a result, they soak 30% more water than conventional gardens.[51] Bioswales are planted in paved areas like parking lots or sidewalks and are made to allow for overflow into the sewer system by trapping silt and other pollutants, which are normally left over from impermeable surfaces.[48] Both rain gardens and bioswales mitigate flood impacts and prevent stormwater from polluting local waterways; increase the usable water supply by reducing the amount of water needed for outdoor irrigation; improve air quality by minimizing the amount of water going into treatment facilities, which also reduces energy usage and, as a result, reduces air pollution since less greenhouse gases are emitted.[48]
Smart cities
[edit]Smart cities use innovative methods of design and implementation in various sectors of infrastructure and planning to create communities that operate at a higher level of relative sustainability than their traditional counterparts.[8] In a sustainable city, urban resilience as well as infrastructure reliability must both be present.[8] Urban resilience is defined by a city's capacity to quickly adapt or recover from infrastructure defects, and infrastructure reliability means that systems must work efficiently while continuing to maximize their output.[8] When urban resilience and infrastructure reliability interact, cities are able to produce the same level of output at similarly reasonable costs as compared to other non sustainable communities, while still maintaining ease of operation and usage.
Masdar City
[edit]Masdar City is a proposed zero emission smart city that will be contracted in the United Arab Emirates.[52] Some individuals have referred to this planned settlement as "utopia-like", due to the fact that it will feature multiple sustainable infrastructure elements, including energy, water, waste management, and transportation. Masdar City will have a power infrastructure containing renewable energy methods including solar energy.[52]
Masdar City is located in a desert region, meaning that sustainable collection and distribution of water is dependent on the city's ability to use water at innovative stages of the water cycle.[53] The city will use groundwater, greywater, seawater, blackwater, and other water resources to obtain both drinking and landscaping water.[53]
Initially, Masdar City will be waste-free.[52] Recycling and other waste management and waste reduction methods will be encouraged.[52] Additionally, the city will implement a system to convert waste into fertilizer, which will decrease the amount of space needed for waste accumulation as well as provide an environmentally friendly alternative to traditional fertilizer production methods.
No cars will be allowed in Masdar City, contributing to low carbon emissions within the city boundaries.[52] Instead, alternative transportation options will be prioritized during infrastructure development. This means that a bike lane network will be accessible and comprehensive, and other options will also be available.[52]
See also
[edit]- Agile infrastructure
- Airport infrastructure
- Asset Management Plan
- Green infrastructure
- Infrastructure as a service
- Infrastructure asset management
- Infrastructure building
- Infrastructure security
- Logistics
- Megaproject
- Project finance
- Pseudo-urbanization
- Public capital
- Sustainable architecture
- Sustainable engineering
References
[edit]- ^ Infrastructure | Define Infrastructure at Dictionary.com Archived 2016-03-05 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ O'Sullivan, Arthur; Sheffrin, Steven M. (2003). Economics: Principles in Action. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. p. 474. ISBN 978-0-13-063085-8.
- ^ Fulmer, Jeffrey (2009). "What in the world is infrastructure?". PEI Infrastructure Investor (July/August): 30–32.
- ^ Dyer, Mark; Dyer, Rachel; Weng, Min-Hsien; Wu, Shaoqun; Grey, Thomas; Gleeson, Richard; Ferrari, Tomás García (December 2019). "Framework for soft and hard city infrastructures". Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Urban Design and Planning. 172 (6): 219–227. doi:10.1980/jurdp.19.00021. hdl:10279/15706. S2CID 209059612.
- ^ a b Hamutak, Luta. "Civil Society Comments on Infrastructure Strategic Sector" (PDF).
- ^ Infrastructure for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. 1987. p. 21. doi:10.17226/798. ISBN 978-0-309-07814-6.
- ^ a b 2017 Infrastructure Report, 112pp, American Society of Civil Engineers, 2017
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j Cervero, Robert (December 2014). "Transport Infrastructure and the Environment in the Global South: Sustainable Mobility and Urbanism". Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah Dan Kota. 25 (3): 174–191. doi:10.5614/jpwk.2015.25.3.1.
- ^ a b "Public Infrastructure". Corporate Finance Institute. Retrieved 2024-01-26.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Torrisi, Gianpiero (January 2009). "Public infrastructure: definition, classification and measurement issues" (PDF).
- ^ "Human capital | economics". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2018-04-25.
- ^ "Infrastructure Materials Engineering – Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering". caee.utexas.edu. Retrieved 2020-11-05.
- ^ "What is economic infrastructure? definition and meaning". BusinessDictionary.com. Archived from the original on 2018-04-26. Retrieved 2018-04-25.
- ^ Cohen, Gershon (20 July 2017). "What is social infrastructure?". Aberdeen Standard Investments. Archived from the original on 26 April 2021. Retrieved 11 April 2020.
- ^ a b Pease, Bob (October 28, 2014). "Infrastructure Investment Opportunities for Public Safety Plans" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on April 20, 2021. Retrieved April 25, 2018.
- ^ "What does complementary assets mean?". definitions.net.
- ^ Association of Local Government Engineers New Zealand: "Infrastructure Asset Management Manual", June 1998. Edition 1.1
- ^ D.O.D. Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, 2001 (rev. 2005)
- ^ Land improvement, Online BusinessDictionary.com, http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/land-development.html Archived 2010-05-26 at the Wayback Machine (accessed January 31, 2009)
- ^ Land development, Online BusinessDictionary.com, http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/land-development.html Archived 2010-05-26 at the Wayback Machine (accessed January 31, 2009)
- ^ "Business models for transport infrastructure assets? Some experiences in Europe. In The decision-making process for infrastructural investment choices". FrancoAngeli. 2020.
- ^ Chivatá Cárdenas, Ibsen; Voordijk, Hans; Dewulf, Geert (2018). "Beyond project governance. Enhancing funding and enabling financing for infrastructure in transport. Findings from the importance analysis approach". European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research. 18 (4). doi:10.18757/ejtir.2018.18.4.3261.
- ^ Leonhardt, David (19 November 2008). "Piling Up Monuments Of Waste". The New York Times. p. B1. ProQuest 897784170.
- ^ a b c d e f g Christian K.M. Kingombe 2011. Mapping the new infrastructure financing landscape Archived 2019-04-11 at the Wayback Machine. London: Overseas Development Institute
- ^ Peter McCawley (2010), 'Infrastructure Policy in Developing countries' Archived 2015-10-17 at the Wayback Machine, Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, 24(1), May. See also Asian-Pacific Economic Literature Policy Brief No 19, May 2010, on 'Infrastructure policy in developing countries in Asia'.
- ^ Barclay, Cecily; Gray, Matthew (2016). California Land Use and Planning Law (35 ed.). California: Solano Press. p. 585. ISBN 978-1-938166-11-2.
- ^ Koh, Jae-myong (2018). Green Infrastructure Financing: Institutional Investors, PPPs and Bankable Projects. Cham, Switzerland. ISBN 978-3-319-71770-8. OCLC 1023427026.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ a b "COVID-19 Status Report". ASCE's 2017 Infrastructure Report Card. 23 June 2020. Retrieved 2020-11-05.
- ^ "Large economic gains can come from mundane improvements in policy". The Economist. Retrieved 2018-10-25.
- ^ "It's Time for States to Invest in Infrastructure". Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 2016-02-22. Retrieved 2020-11-05.
- ^ a b Allen, Mr Richard I.; Allen, Richard; Tandberg, Eivind (2021). How to Manage Public Investment During a Postcrisis Recovery. International Monetary Fund. ISBN 978-1-5135-8441-6.[page needed]
- ^ a b c Funke, Katja; Huang, Guohua; Eltokhy, Khaled; Kim, Yujin; Zinabou, Genet (2021). Monitoring the Climate Impact of Fiscal Policy - Lessons from Tracking the Covid-19 Response (Preprint). SSRN 4026488.
- ^ a b c "How a post-pandemic stimulus can both create jobs and help the climate". McKinsey. Retrieved 2020-11-05.
- ^ "The Paris Agreement – UNFCCC". unfccc.int. Retrieved 2022-05-23.
- ^ Hepburn, Cameron; O'Callaghan, Brian; Stern, Nicholas; Stiglitz, Joseph; Zenghelis, Dimitri (28 September 2020). "Will COVID-19 fiscal recovery packages accelerate or retard progress on climate change?". Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 36 (Supplement_1): S359 – S381. doi:10.1093/oxrep/graa015. PMC 7239121. S2CID 218942009.
- ^ Garrett-Peltier, Heidi (February 2017). "Green versus brown: Comparing the employment impacts of energy efficiency, renewable energy, and fossil fuels using an input-output model". Economic Modelling. 61: 439–447. doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2016.11.012.
- ^ "Sustainable water: our essential guide to sustainable water resource management solutions & strategies". aquatechtrade.com.
- ^ a b c Fisher, S.; Reiner, M. B.; Sperling, J. (2017). "Unreliable Sustainable Infrastructure: Three Transformations to Guide Cities towards Becoming Healthy 'Smart Cities'". International Conference on Sustainable Infrastructure 2017. pp. 388–397. doi:10.1061/9780784481202.037. ISBN 978-0-7844-8120-2.
- ^ a b c Hartman, Meghan; Knell, Mark Bone; Witherspoon, Jay (2010). "Masdar City's Integrated Approach to Sustainability". Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation. 2010 (2): 104–117. doi:10.2175/193864710798285516.
- ^ a b "What Are Sustainable Materials?". Center for Sustainable Materials. Rutgers. Archived from the original on 4 June 2012.
- ^ "11 Characteristics of Sustainable Materials". Simplicable. 17 October 2018. Retrieved 2020-11-06.
- ^ Gagg, Colin R. (May 2014). "Cement and concrete as an engineering material: An historic appraisal and case study analysis". Engineering Failure Analysis. 40: 114–140. doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.02.004.
- ^ Schulte, Justine; Jiang, Zhangfan; Sevim, Ozer; Ozbulut, Osman E. (2022). "Graphene-reinforced cement composites for smart infrastructure systems". The Rise of Smart Cities. pp. 79–114. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-817784-6.00008-4. ISBN 978-0-12-817784-6.
- ^ Schlangen, Erik (2018). "Foreword". Eco-Efficient Repair and Rehabilitation of Concrete Infrastructures. Elsevier. p. xvii. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-102181-1.00030-7. ISBN 978-0-08-102181-1.
- ^ a b c "Why Building With Concrete is not Sustainable". IWBC. 2019-04-28. Retrieved 2020-11-06.
- ^ Kurki-Fox, J. Jack; Doll, Barbara A.; Line, Daniel E.; Baldwin, Madalyn E.; Klondike, Travis M.; Fox, Andrew A. (2022-08-01). "The flood reduction and water quality impacts of watershed-scale natural infrastructure implementation in North Carolina, USA". Ecological Engineering. 181 106696. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2022.106696. ISSN 0925-8574.
- ^ a b Basdeki, Aikaterini; Katsifarakis, Lysandros; Katsifarakis, Konstantinos L. (2016). "Rain Gardens as Integral Parts of Urban Sewage Systems-a Case Study in Thessaloniki, Greece". Procedia Engineering. 162: 426–432. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.084.
- ^ a b c d e f "The Value of Green Infrastructure: A Guide to Recognizing Its Economic, Environmental and Social Benefits" (PDF). Center for Neighborhood Technology. 2011-01-21. Archived from the original on 2015-02-22. Retrieved 2020-11-05.
- ^ a b c d Li, W.C.; Yeung, K.K.A. (June 2014). "A comprehensive study of green roof performance from environmental perspective". International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment. 3 (1): 127–134. doi:10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.05.001.
- ^ "Using Green Roofs to Reduce Heat Islands". United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2014-06-17. Retrieved 2020-11-05.
- ^ a b "Soak Up the Rain: Permeable Pavement". EPA. 21 August 2015.
- ^ a b c d e f Nader, Sam (February 2009). "Paths to a low-carbon economy—The Masdar example". Energy Procedia. 1 (1): 3951–3958. Bibcode:2009EnPro...1.3951N. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2009.02.199.
- ^ a b "Wastewater Management Fact Sheet" (PDF). EPA: Office of Water. July 2006.
Bibliography
[edit]- Koh, Jae Myong (2018) Green Infrastructure Financing: Institutional Investors, PPPs and Bankable Projects, London: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-3-319-71769-2.
- Nurre, Sarah G.; Cavdaroglu, Burak; Mitchell, John E.; Sharkey, Thomas C.; Wallace, William A. (December 2012). "Restoring infrastructure systems: An integrated network design and scheduling (INDS) problem". European Journal of Operational Research. 223 (3): 794–806. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2012.07.010.
- Ascher, Kate (2007). The works: anatomy of a city. Researched by Wendy Marech (Reprint ed.). New York: Penguin Press. ISBN 978-0-14-311270-9.
- Larry W. Beeferman, "Pension Fund Investment in Infrastructure: A Resource Paper", Capital Matter (Occasional Paper Series), No. 3 December 2008
- A. Eberhard, "Infrastructure Regulation in Developing Countries", PPIAF Working Paper No. 4 (2007) World Bank
- M. Nicolas J. Firzli and Vincent Bazi, "Infrastructure Investments in an Age of Austerity: The Pension and Sovereign Funds Perspective", published jointly in Revue Analyse Financière, Q4 2011 issue, pp. 34–37 and USAK/JTW July 30, 2011 (online edition)
- Hayes, Brian (2005). Infrastructure: the book of everything for the industrial landscape (1st ed.). New York: Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-32959-9.
- Huler, Scott (2010). On the grid: a plot of land, an average neighborhood, and the systems that make our world work. Emmaus, PA: Rodale. ISBN 978-1-60529-647-0.
- Georg Inderst, "Pension Fund Investment in Infrastructure", OECD Working Papers on Insurance and Private Pensions, No. 32 (2009)
- Dalakoglou, Dimitris (2017). The Road: An Ethnography of (Im)mobility, space and cross-border infrastructures. Manchester: Manchester University Press/ Oxford university Press.
External links
[edit]- Body of Knowledge on Infrastructure Regulation
- Next Generation Infrastructures international research programme
- Report Card on America's Infrastructure
- sustainable sports infrastructure
- Dirk van Laak: Infrastructures, version: 1.0, in: Docupedia Zeitgeschichte, 20th may 2021
Infrastructure
View on GrokipediaInfrastructure consists of the fundamental physical structures, facilities, and systems required for the functioning of a society, including transportation networks such as roads, bridges, and railways; energy systems like power grids and dams; water supply and sanitation; and increasingly, digital telecommunications and information technology frameworks.[1][2] These elements enable the delivery of essential services and support economic operations by facilitating the movement of goods, people, and information.[3] Empirical analyses demonstrate that robust infrastructure investment yields substantial economic benefits, including boosted productivity of private capital and labor, with studies estimating social rates of return exceeding those of general capital for key assets like electricity generation and paved roads.[4][5] Transportation and energy infrastructure, in particular, exhibit long-run promotive effects on development, enhancing market access and specialization while mitigating short-term disruptions through efficient resource allocation.[6][7] Historically centered on "hard" physical assets vital for industrialization, infrastructure now encompasses "soft" organizational components and digital layers, such as broadband networks, data centers, and software systems that underpin modern connectivity and data flows.[8][9] This evolution reflects causal dependencies where physical foundations enable digital scalability, though integration poses challenges in cybersecurity and interoperability.[10] Despite these advantages, infrastructure faces persistent controversies over funding and maintenance, with many regions experiencing chronic underinvestment leading to deferred repairs, heightened vulnerability to natural disasters, and inefficient resource use that hampers growth.[11][12] Political debates often center on balancing public expenditures against private partnerships, amid evidence of agency problems and suboptimal allocation that undermine returns.[13][14]
Definitions and Classifications
Fundamental Definition and Scope
Infrastructure consists of the fundamental physical systems, facilities, and networks that underpin the economic and social functioning of a society, including transportation routes, energy generation and distribution grids, water supply and sanitation systems, and telecommunications infrastructure.[15] These assets enable the efficient movement of people, goods, and resources, while delivering essential services critical for daily operations and long-term development.[16] Economically, infrastructure exhibits characteristics of high fixed costs, extended useful lives typically spanning decades, and often natural monopoly structures due to economies of scale, which can justify public investment or regulatory oversight to mitigate underprovision by private markets.[17][18] The scope of infrastructure primarily encompasses "hard" or economic variants—such as roads, railways, ports, power plants, pipelines, and broadband networks—that directly support production, trade, and connectivity, as opposed to "soft" elements like schools or hospitals, which prioritize human capital formation and are sometimes categorized separately.[19] This distinction arises because hard infrastructure tends to generate widespread externalities, including productivity multipliers; for example, a 10% increase in public capital stock has been associated with up to 0.8% higher GDP growth in empirical studies across OECD countries.[20] While definitions have broadened over time to include digital and resilient features amid technological shifts, core scope remains tied to durable, capital-intensive assets providing non-excludable benefits akin to public goods.[19] In practice, infrastructure's boundaries are influenced by policy contexts, with international bodies like the World Bank emphasizing its role in poverty reduction and sustainable growth through investments totaling an estimated $94 trillion globally from 2016 to 2040 to meet development needs.[21] However, expansive definitions risk diluting focus on high-return projects, as narrower economic framings—prioritizing assets with verifiable returns on investment—better align with causal drivers of growth, such as reduced transaction costs and enhanced factor mobility.[22] Empirical evidence underscores this: countries with robust infrastructure governance, scoring high on IMF Public Investment Management Assessments, achieve up to 50% greater efficiency in project outcomes compared to laggards.[23]Economic and Functional Classifications
Infrastructure is economically classified into two primary categories: economic infrastructure, which directly facilitates production, distribution, and exchange of goods and services, and social infrastructure, which supports human capital development and quality of life. Economic infrastructure encompasses assets such as transportation networks (roads, railways, ports), energy systems (power plants, grids), and utilities (water supply for industrial use, telecommunications), enabling business activity and contributing to gross domestic product growth through enhanced productivity and reduced transaction costs.[24] [25] In contrast, social infrastructure includes education facilities, healthcare systems, housing, and sanitation services, which indirectly bolster economic output by improving workforce skills, health, and social stability, though empirical studies indicate lower direct multipliers compared to economic investments.[26] [27] This distinction arises from causal linkages: economic assets lower barriers to commerce, while social ones address human factors, with overlaps in areas like basic water systems serving both roles.[20] Functionally, infrastructure is often categorized as hard or soft based on tangibility and operational nature. Hard infrastructure consists of physical, capital-intensive structures like bridges, dams, pipelines, and airports, which provide durable services with high upfront costs and long depreciation periods, typically requiring public or large-scale private investment due to natural monopoly characteristics and positive externalities.[15] [25] Soft infrastructure, conversely, involves non-physical systems such as regulatory frameworks, educational institutions, legal systems, and administrative processes that govern and support the use of hard assets, fostering economic and social functions through intangible mechanisms like policy enforcement and knowledge dissemination.[15] [28] These functional types interact synergistically—hard assets depend on soft governance for efficiency, as evidenced by data showing that inadequate soft infrastructure, such as corruption-prone permitting, can undermine returns on physical investments by up to 20-30% in developing economies.[3] Classifications are not rigid and evolve with economic theory and data; for instance, the OECD proposes refining economic infrastructure to focus on asset types like transport and energy while excluding purely social elements, emphasizing measurability via national accounts for investment tracking.[3] Empirical evidence from global datasets, including World Bank analyses, supports prioritizing economic over social in growth models, with a 1% increase in economic infrastructure stock correlating to 0.1-0.2% higher GDP growth, though biases in academic sourcing—often favoring social equity narratives—may understate these causal effects.[25] Ownership variants, such as public, private, or public-private partnerships, further modulate these categories, with private involvement rising in economic infrastructure post-1980s due to efficiency gains from market incentives, as documented in infrastructure investment benchmarks.[29]Sectoral and Material Classifications
Infrastructure is classified sectorally according to its primary functional or economic contributions, enabling targeted analysis for investment, policy, and risk management. Economic infrastructure sectors, which facilitate production, trade, and resource distribution, encompass transportation (e.g., roads, railways, ports), energy (e.g., power generation and grids), and communications (e.g., telecommunications networks). Social infrastructure sectors, supporting human capital and public services, include education facilities, healthcare systems, and public housing. These divisions reflect causal dependencies, where economic sectors drive growth through efficiency gains—such as reduced logistics costs from improved transport—while social sectors enhance productivity via workforce health and skills, as evidenced by correlations between infrastructure investment in these areas and GDP per capita increases in OECD nations from 2000 to 2020.[18] In security and resilience contexts, sectoral classifications emphasize criticality. The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) delineates 16 critical infrastructure sectors as of 2024, prioritizing assets vital to national function: Chemical Sector (handling hazardous materials), Commercial Facilities Sector (public venues), Communications Sector (telecom and information sharing), Critical Manufacturing Sector (industrial production), Dams Sector (water control), Defense Industrial Base Sector (military support), Emergency Services Sector (response capabilities), Energy Sector (power and oil), Financial Services Sector (monetary systems), Food and Agriculture Sector (supply chains), Government Facilities Sector (public administration), Healthcare and Public Health Sector (medical services), Information Technology Sector (cyber systems), Nuclear Reactors, Materials, and Waste Sector (nuclear operations), Transportation Systems Sector (mobility networks), and Water and Wastewater Systems Sector (utilities). This taxonomy, derived from interagency assessments post-9/11, underscores intersectoral dependencies, such as energy's role in enabling 90% of other sectors' operations per empirical modeling.[30][31] Material classifications distinguish infrastructure by physical composition and tangibility, informing engineering, durability, and sustainability analyses. Hard infrastructure relies on durable, material-based assets: concrete and reinforced concrete for dams and foundations (e.g., comprising over 70% of global civil works volume per 2022 industry data), steel for bridges and structural frames (with annual production exceeding 1.8 billion tons worldwide), asphalt and aggregates for roadways (aggregates alone accounting for 85% of concrete by volume), and polymers or composites in modern pipelines. These materials' properties—compressive strength of concrete at 20-40 MPa, tensile yield of steel at 250-500 MPa—directly cause load-bearing capacity and longevity, though corrosion and fatigue necessitate maintenance costing trillions annually in developed economies. Soft infrastructure, conversely, involves immaterial systems like governance protocols and software overlays, lacking physical substrates but enabling hard assets' operation, as in traffic management algorithms reducing congestion by 15-20% in deployed smart systems. This binary aids causal realism in assessments, revealing how material degradation (e.g., 40% of U.S. bridges rated structurally deficient in 2021 ASCE data) precipitates systemic failures absent soft redundancies.[32][33] Such classifications evolve with technology; for instance, emerging sectors integrate advanced materials like carbon fiber composites in aviation infrastructure, reducing weight by 20-30% versus steel while enhancing fuel efficiency, per FAA engineering standards updated in 2023. Empirical data from material science underscores selection criteria: lifecycle costs favor concrete's low upfront expense (under 500-1000/ton), though regional availability—e.g., U.S. steel production at 86 million tons in 2023—dictates practical use. Source credibility in these domains favors peer-reviewed engineering journals and government reports over media narratives, mitigating biases in sustainability claims that often overstate green material efficacy without randomized trial data.Historical Development
Pre-Industrial and Ancient Infrastructure
Ancient infrastructure emerged in early civilizations where water management, transportation, and urban planning were essential for sustaining large populations and agriculture. In Mesopotamia, around 5400 BCE, communities near Eridu developed extensive irrigation canal networks to harness Tigris and Euphrates rivers, enabling surplus crop production that supported urban growth; archaeological surveys have mapped over 100 kilometers of these prehistoric canals, constructed from compacted earth to distribute water across arid floodplains.[34] Similarly, in ancient Egypt by 3000 BCE, basin irrigation systems utilized the Nile's annual floods, with farmers digging canals and dikes to retain water in rectangular fields, allowing multiple harvests per year and yielding up to 10-15 times the seed input in grains like emmer wheat. These hydraulic works, often organized under pharaonic oversight, spanned thousands of kilometers along the Nile Valley, preventing famine and facilitating trade.[35] The Indus Valley Civilization (circa 2600-1900 BCE) demonstrated advanced urban sanitation infrastructure in cities like Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa, where standardized baked-brick drains connected private homes to street-level covered sewers, sloping gently to carry wastewater to outfalls; these systems, integrated with public wells and reservoirs, served populations of up to 40,000 per city without evidence of centralized palaces, suggesting decentralized governance.[36] Grid-planned streets, averaging 9-12 meters wide, aligned with cardinal directions, minimized flooding through elevated house platforms and soak pits for sullage.[37] In ancient Rome, from the Republic era (509 BCE onward), the empire constructed over 80,500 kilometers of stone-paved roads by the 2nd century CE, layered with foundation stones, gravel, and fitted polygonal slabs for durability under military and commercial traffic; these vias, like the Appian Way built in 312 BCE, averaged 4-6 meters wide and included milestones and drainage ditches, reducing travel times and enabling legion rapid deployment.[38] Complementing this, Roman aqueducts delivered up to 1 million cubic meters of water daily to Rome by the 1st century CE, via gravity-fed channels of stone and concrete arches spanning valleys, with inverted siphons crossing depressions; the 11 major aqueducts, such as Aqua Appia (312 BCE), minimized evaporation through covered conduits and settled impurities in basins.[39] Pre-industrial developments extended these principles into medieval Europe, where watermills proliferated after 1086 CE, with England's Domesday Book recording 5,624 sites harnessing rivers for grinding grain and fulling cloth, boosting productivity by factors of 10-20 over manual labor; vertical waterwheels, often integrated into manorial infrastructure, featured wooden gears and stone foundations for longevity.[40] Defensive structures like motte-and-bailey castles, emerging around 950 CE in Normandy, incorporated earthworks and timber palisades for rapid fortification, evolving into stone keeps by the 12th century to control trade routes and agriculture in feudal territories. In China, the Qin Dynasty (221-206 BCE) linked earlier walls into a 5,000-kilometer barrier using rammed earth and stone, incorporating watchtowers and beacon systems for signaling invasions, while supporting ancillary roads and canals for logistics.[41] These systems, reliant on manual labor and basic materials, laid foundations for societal complexity without mechanized power.Industrial Revolution and Early Modern Advances
The early modern period in Europe, spanning roughly 1500 to 1800, featured incremental enhancements to transportation infrastructure, particularly in Britain, where economic pressures from growing trade and population spurred investments in roads and bridges. Turnpike trusts, authorized by parliamentary acts beginning in 1663 but proliferating after 1700, imposed tolls to fund road repairs and widening, resulting in over 1,100 trusts managing approximately 22,000 miles of roads by 1800.[42] These improvements addressed the limitations of pre-existing rutted tracks, which were often impassable in wet conditions and limited wagon speeds to 2-3 miles per hour, thereby facilitating more reliable overland movement of goods like coal and wool. Bridge construction also advanced, with stone-arch designs becoming standardized for durability; for instance, by the mid-18th century, engineers like John Smeaton pioneered empirical methods for assessing load-bearing capacities, influencing structures that supported heavier traffic volumes.[43] The Industrial Revolution, commencing in Britain around 1760, catalyzed a transport revolution driven by mechanization and capital investment, fundamentally reshaping infrastructure to accommodate surging industrial output. Canals emerged as a pivotal innovation, with the Bridgewater Canal—completed in 1761 to link coal mines to Manchester—exemplifying private enterprise in reducing freight costs from 6 shillings per ton-mile by road to under 1 shilling by water, spurring a canal-building boom that added over 2,000 miles of navigable waterways by 1830.[42] Steam power, refined from Thomas Newcomen's 1712 atmospheric engine to James Watt's efficient version patented in 1769, powered pumps for mine drainage and later propulsion, enabling deeper coal extraction and factory operations that demanded robust supply chains.[44] These developments lowered transport barriers, with canal ton-miles increasing dramatically to support textile and iron industries, though they initially favored bulk goods over perishable items due to slow transit times averaging 2-3 miles per hour. Railways marked the era's transformative leap, integrating steam locomotion with iron tracks for unprecedented speed and capacity. The Stockton and Darlington Railway, opened on September 27, 1825, became the world's first public steam-powered railway, hauling coal over 26 miles at speeds up to 15 miles per hour and carrying 450 tons daily within months of operation.[45] The Liverpool and Manchester Railway, operational from 1830 after competitive trials, demonstrated passenger viability by transporting 445 passengers in one day at fares undercutting stagecoaches, while freight volumes exploded to 1.5 million tons annually by 1840.[46] By 1850, Britain's rail network spanned over 6,000 miles, financed largely by private joint-stock companies and reducing average freight costs by 50-70% compared to canals, thus integrating regional markets and accelerating urbanization around industrial hubs like Manchester and Birmingham.[47] These advances, rooted in empirical engineering and market incentives, laid the groundwork for modern infrastructure by prioritizing efficiency and scalability over prior artisanal methods.20th Century Expansion and State-Led Projects
The 20th century marked a pivotal era of infrastructure expansion, characterized by large-scale state-led initiatives responding to economic depressions, world wars, and rapid industrialization needs. Governments worldwide assumed direct roles in funding and executing projects to stimulate employment, enhance connectivity, and support military and economic objectives, often through centralized planning and public works agencies. In the United States, the Great Depression prompted unprecedented federal intervention, while in Europe and the Soviet Union, authoritarian regimes pursued ambitious networks of highways, dams, and power grids to consolidate power and drive modernization. These efforts prioritized scale over immediate profitability, leveraging state resources to overcome private capital shortages.[48] In the United States, President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal programs from 1933 onward exemplified state-led infrastructure development. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), established on May 18, 1933, coordinated dam construction, flood control, navigation improvements, and rural electrification across seven states, generating hydroelectric power that boosted regional industry and agriculture. By integrating resource management, the TVA constructed multiple dams and transmitted electricity to previously underserved areas, contributing to economic recovery through job creation and infrastructure modernization. Similarly, the Hoover Dam, initiated in 1931 and completed in 1936 ahead of schedule and under budget, harnessed the Colorado River for irrigation, flood control, and hydropower, supplying water to over 2 million acres and powering cities like Los Angeles while employing thousands during the Depression. Agencies like the Public Works Administration (PWA) and Works Progress Administration (WPA), authorized under the National Industrial Recovery Act of June 16, 1933, funded thousands of projects including bridges, airports, and roads, with the PWA allocating billions for nationwide works that employed millions.[49][50][51][52] Europe witnessed analogous state-driven expansions, particularly in Germany and the Soviet Union. Germany's Autobahn network originated in the late 1920s, with the first segment between Cologne and Bonn opening in 1932; under the Nazi regime from 1933, construction accelerated as a public works program, building over 3,000 kilometers by 1942 to facilitate military logistics and civilian mobility, though post-war repairs and expansions in West Germany extended it to more than 8,000 kilometers by unification. In the Soviet Union, the GOELRO electrification plan, launched in 1920 and expanded through the 1930s, increased power generation nearly sevenfold by 1932, enabling industrialization via massive hydroelectric projects like the Dnieper Hydroelectric Station, completed in 1932 as the world's largest at the time, which supported heavy industry and urban growth despite inefficiencies from centralized planning. These initiatives, while achieving rapid buildouts, often incurred high human and fiscal costs, with Soviet projects relying on forced labor and German efforts tied to rearmament. Post-World War II reconstruction in Western Europe, funded by the Marshall Plan from 1948, further amplified state involvement in rebuilding transport and energy networks, though initial 20th-century momentum stemmed from pre-war state imperatives.[53][54][55]Post-1980s Deregulation and Privatization Trends
Beginning in the 1980s, governments in developed economies shifted toward deregulating and privatizing infrastructure sectors, driven by critiques of state-owned enterprises' inefficiencies, high fiscal burdens, and poor service quality. This trend, often associated with neoliberal policies under leaders like Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan in the United States, aimed to introduce market competition, attract private investment, and improve operational performance through profit incentives.[56][57] Globally, the approach gained traction via the Washington Consensus, with the International Monetary Fund and World Bank advocating privatization in developing countries as a condition for loans, resulting in over $3 trillion in assets transferred from public to private hands by the early 2000s, including railroads, airports, and energy firms.[58][56] In the United Kingdom, Thatcher's government initiated privatization with British Telecom in 1984, followed by British Gas in 1986 and water utilities in 1989, while railways were fragmented and sold under John Major's Railways Act 1993.[59] These reforms introduced independent regulators like Ofwat and Ofgem to oversee pricing and standards, ostensibly fostering competition. In the United States, deregulation extended from airlines and trucking in the late 1970s into the 1980s, with telecommunications liberalized via the 1996 Telecommunications Act breaking up AT&T's monopoly, and partial energy market openings in states like California and Texas starting in the 1990s.[57][60] Transport deregulation lowered fares and spurred innovation, as seen in aviation where average ticket prices fell by about 50% in real terms post-1978 reforms.[57] Empirical outcomes have been mixed, with evidence of efficiency gains in some sectors but persistent challenges in others. World Bank analyses of private sector participation in infrastructure across Latin America and elsewhere found improvements in productivity, service coverage, and investment levels, particularly when paired with effective regulation.[61] For instance, airport privatizations under private equity ownership have shown substantial enhancements in passenger volume, operational efficiency, and service quality compared to public or other private models.[62] However, UK rail privatization led to fragmented infrastructure investment, escalating subsidies—reaching £11 billion annually by 2019—and higher commuter fares relative to European peers, undermining claims of sustained cost efficiencies.[63][64] In U.S. energy markets, deregulation correlated with price spikes from market power exercises, as evidenced by California's 2000-2001 crisis and studies showing up to 20% higher wholesale prices due to reduced oversight.[65] Overall, while privatization often boosted short-term investment in competitive segments like telecom, it frequently required ongoing public subsidies and regulatory tweaks to address underinvestment in natural monopolies like rails and grids, highlighting causal links between ownership structure and performance absent robust competition.[66][67]Core Applications and Sectors
Transportation and Logistics
Transportation infrastructure comprises the durable physical assets enabling the conveyance of passengers and freight, such as roadways, bridges, rail lines, airports, seaports, inland waterways, and pipelines for energy and bulk materials. Logistics infrastructure supports these by incorporating storage, handling, and transfer facilities, including warehouses, freight terminals, and intermodal hubs that allow seamless shifts between transport modes. These systems underpin supply chain efficiency, minimizing frictions in resource distribution and fostering economic interconnectivity.[68][69] Quantitative assessments affirm the causal linkage between transportation infrastructure expansion and output growth, primarily through reduced transaction costs and enhanced factor mobility. A World Bank panel analysis of 87 countries from 1992 to 2017, employing a pooled mean group estimator, calculated a long-run GDP elasticity of 0.091 for road infrastructure across the full sample, rising to 0.095 in developing economies, implying that proportional increases in road capacity yield commensurate gains in per capita output after controlling for endogeneity.[70] Rail infrastructure, by contrast, exhibited near-zero or slightly negative elasticities (-0.003 overall), suggesting diminishing marginal returns in saturated networks.[70] Short-term disruptions from construction often offset initial benefits, with positive effects materializing over extended horizons. Dynamic externalities extend these gains beyond immediate savings in travel time and fuel. Improved connectivity promotes agglomeration, concentrating firms and labor in productive clusters via lower coordination costs, as evidenced by 19th-century U.S. rail developments that integrated Midwestern markets and spurred localized productivity surges.[71] Such investments also catalyze sectoral reallocation, enabling labor shifts to higher-value activities and amplifying trade responsiveness to global demand fluctuations.[71] In logistics, performance metrics reveal direct trade amplification. The World Bank's Logistics Performance Index (LPI), benchmarking customs efficiency, infrastructure quality, and timeliness across modes, correlates positively with bilateral exports and imports; econometric models confirm that a one-standard-deviation LPI improvement boosts trade flows by facilitating reliable just-in-time delivery and reducing border delays.[72][73] High-LPI nations, often those with integrated multimodal systems, achieve logistics costs as low as 8-10% of GDP, versus 20% or more in deficient environments, underscoring infrastructure's role in competitive advantage.[74] Inefficiencies persist as countervailing forces, with congestion and capacity shortfalls generating externalities like elevated inventory costs and delayed shipments. Urban traffic bottlenecks alone can claim 1-2% of GDP in lost productivity annually in advanced economies, while deferred maintenance exacerbates modal imbalances, favoring roads over underutilized rails.[75] Targeted logistics upgrades, including digital tracking and port automation, mitigate these by optimizing load factors and routing, though empirical returns hinge on institutional factors like regulatory streamlining over mere capital infusion.[69]Energy Production and Distribution
Energy production infrastructure encompasses facilities that convert primary energy sources into usable forms, primarily electricity, through power plants utilizing fossil fuels, nuclear fission, hydropower, wind, solar, and biomass. In 2023, fossil fuels accounted for 61% of global electricity generation, with coal alone contributing 35% or 10,434 terawatt-hours (TWh).[76] Renewables generated one-third of electricity, led by hydropower at 14%, wind at 8%, and solar photovoltaic at 7%, while nuclear provided approximately 9%.[77] These systems rely on centralized generation sites connected to transmission networks, with baseload capacity from nuclear and fossil plants ensuring continuous supply, unlike intermittent renewables that require complementary storage or backup.[78] Distribution infrastructure includes high-voltage transmission lines for long-distance power transfer and lower-voltage local grids for end-user delivery, forming interconnected networks to balance supply and demand. Global electricity transmission and distribution losses average around 8%, though figures vary by region, with the United States experiencing about 5% annual losses equivalent to powering multiple states.[79] Aging grids, particularly in developed nations, face capacity constraints, with the American Society of Civil Engineers assigning U.S. energy infrastructure a D+ grade in 2025 due to vulnerabilities from extreme weather and insufficient modernization.[80] Empirical data indicate nuclear power's superior safety record, with 0.03 deaths per TWh from accidents and pollution—far below coal's 24.6—contrasting public perceptions influenced by rare high-profile incidents like Chernobyl.[81] Integrating higher shares of variable renewables poses grid stability challenges due to intermittency, where output fluctuates with weather, necessitating expanded transmission, energy storage, and demand-response systems to prevent blackouts.[82] For instance, wind and solar's rapid growth—adding more new energy than any source in 2023—demands overbuilds and backups, as current infrastructure struggles with mismatches between generation peaks and demand.[83] Fossil and nuclear plants provide dispatchable power critical for reliability, with global primary energy consumption reaching 620 exajoules in 2024, still dominated by hydrocarbons amid rising demand.[84] Investments in high-voltage direct current lines and smart grids are essential to minimize losses and accommodate electrification trends, though regulatory hurdles and material costs impede deployment.[85]Communications and Digital Networks
Communications infrastructure consists of physical and cyber components that facilitate the transmission of voice, video, and data services worldwide, including fiber optic cables, cellular towers, submarine cables, satellites, and data centers. These elements underpin global connectivity, with submarine cables alone handling over 95% of intercontinental data traffic, enabling everything from internet browsing to financial transactions.[86][87] The sector's expansion has been driven by demand for high-speed broadband and mobile data, with network infrastructure markets valued at over $60.5 billion globally in 2023.[88] Wired networks, particularly fiber optics, form the high-capacity backbone for terrestrial and long-haul communications, transmitting data via light pulses through thin glass or plastic fibers capable of terabits-per-second speeds. Deployment has accelerated to meet bandwidth-intensive applications; in the United States, fiber networks passed 52% of homes and businesses by 2024, up from prior years due to investments in last-mile connections.[89] Globally, the fiber optics market stood at $8.96 billion in 2025 projections, expected to reach $17.84 billion by 2032 at a 10.3% compound annual growth rate, reflecting upgrades from legacy copper systems.[90] These networks require extensive trenching and splicing, with costs estimated at $130–150 billion needed in the U.S. alone for comprehensive fiber-to-the-premises rollout over the next five to seven years.[91] Wireless infrastructure complements wired systems through cellular base stations and spectrum allocation, evolving from 4G to 5G for ultra-reliable low-latency communications supporting IoT, streaming, and edge computing. By 2024, 5G networks covered 51% of the global population, with commercial deployments in 92 countries spanning 2,497 cities since initial rollouts in 2019.[92][93] Standalone 5G architectures, which separate control and user planes for efficiency, have gained traction in leaders like China, India, and the U.S., though non-standalone variants predominate elsewhere for quicker integration with existing 4G cores.[94] Spectrum auctions and tower densification—requiring millions of small cells—drive infrastructure costs, yet enable peak download speeds exceeding 1 Gbps in advanced markets.[95] Submarine cables, laid on ocean floors between landing stations, interconnect continents and carry the majority of international internet traffic, with over 1.4 million kilometers deployed globally as of recent mappings.[96] These fiber-based systems, often bundled with repeaters for signal amplification every 50–100 kilometers, span routes like the transatlantic MAREA cable (operational since 2018, with 200 Tbps capacity).[86] Satellites, including low-Earth orbit constellations like Starlink, provide redundancy and coverage for remote or underserved areas, though ground stations and inter-satellite links remain critical infrastructure ties.[97] Vulnerabilities include cable cuts from anchors or seismic events, which disrupt up to 200 Tbps of capacity per incident, underscoring reliance on diversified routing.[98] Data centers, housing servers, storage, and networking gear, process and store digital content, forming the computational core of cloud services and AI workloads. Global electricity use by data centers reached approximately 415 terawatt-hours in recent estimates, equating to 1.5% of total consumption, with U.S. facilities alone accounting for 4.4% of national power in 2023 (176 TWh).[99][100] Demand surges from AI training—projected to drive 165% growth in data center power needs by 2030—necessitate hyperscale facilities (up to 100 MW+), often co-located near fiber hubs and power grids, with cooling systems consuming 40% of site energy.[101][102] Edge data centers, deployed closer to users for latency reduction, expand infrastructure footprints in urban and rural zones alike.[103]Water, Sanitation, and Waste Management
Water supply infrastructure includes surface and groundwater sources, purification facilities, pumping stations, and extensive piping networks for distribution to urban and rural populations. As of 2024, approximately 74% of the global population—about 5.9 billion people—has access to safely managed drinking water services, defined by the World Health Organization as water free from contamination, available when needed, and located on premises.[104] This represents progress from 68% coverage in 2015, during which 961 million people gained access, though 2.1 billion still rely on unimproved or distant sources prone to fecal contamination and health risks.[104] In developed nations, centralized treatment plants employ filtration, chlorination, and advanced processes like reverse osmosis, but aging distribution systems contribute to significant losses; Europe experiences average non-revenue water losses of 25% due to leaks in pipes often over 50 years old, while Italy loses 42% of its supply annually—equivalent to the needs of 43 million people.[105] [106] Sanitation infrastructure comprises sewerage collection systems, wastewater treatment plants, and onsite solutions like septic tanks, aimed at preventing human waste from contaminating water bodies and spreading diseases. Globally, only 58% of people had safely managed sanitation services in 2024, up from 48% in 2015, with 1.2 billion gaining access in that period; 3.4 billion lack such facilities, leading to open defecation or untreated discharge affecting 4.3 billion.[107] Developed countries achieve near-universal connection to treatment plants, where secondary and tertiary processes remove 90-99% of biological oxygen demand and pathogens before effluent release, but in developing nations, over 80% of wastewater receives no treatment and is discharged directly into rivers or oceans, exacerbating pollution and antimicrobial resistance.[108] Infrastructure gaps persist due to underinvestment; for instance, decentralized systems in low-income areas often fail without regular maintenance, contrasting with robust piped networks in high-income regions that handle billions of cubic meters daily.[109] Waste management infrastructure involves collection fleets, transfer stations, landfills, incinerators, and recycling facilities to handle municipal solid waste, which totaled 2.1 billion tonnes globally in 2023 and is projected to reach 3.8 billion by 2050 amid urbanization and consumption growth.[110] In high-income countries, integrated systems achieve 50-70% recycling and controlled disposal rates, with modern landfills capturing methane for energy and incinerators reducing volume by 90% while generating power; the European Union, for example, diverts 48% of waste from landfills via these methods.[111] Developing regions lag, with only 20-30% formal collection coverage in many cities, resulting in uncontrolled dumpsites that leach toxins and emit greenhouse gases equivalent to 5% of global anthropogenic methane.[111] Per capita generation averages 0.79 kg daily worldwide, but inefficiencies—such as open burning in 40% of low-income areas—underscore the need for scalable infrastructure like waste-to-energy plants, which have expanded in Asia but face financing barriers in sub-Saharan Africa.[111] These systems' effectiveness hinges on density and governance; sparse rural networks rely on composting, while urban hubs require automated sorting to recover materials amid rising e-waste and plastics comprising 12% of total discards.[110]Economic Impacts and Empirical Evidence
Contributions to Productivity and Growth
Empirical analyses consistently find that physical infrastructure investments elevate productivity by augmenting the productivity of private capital and labor through reduced transaction costs, improved connectivity, and enhanced resource mobility. Cross-country panel data from 87 nations spanning 1992 to 2017 reveal positive long-run GDP elasticities for core infrastructure categories, with electricity at 0.110, fixed telephone lines at 0.096, and roads at 0.091; these effects are statistically significant and more pronounced in developing economies than in industrialized ones, reflecting greater marginal returns from addressing bottlenecks.[70] Such elasticities imply that a 10% increase in infrastructure stock could raise GDP by 0.7% to 1.1% over the long term, depending on the sector and context.[7]| Infrastructure Type | Long-run GDP Elasticity (PMG Estimator) |
|---|---|
| Electricity | 0.110 |
| Fixed Telephones | 0.096 |
| Roads | 0.091 |
| Mobile Phones | 0.009 |
| Railways | -0.003 |