Public infrastructure is the foundation of modern civilization, and may be the most significant factor in the quality of life for developed and developing nations everywhere. The debate about how to prepare professionals to meet the challenge of adequately managing the public infrastructure has existed at least since the earliest infrastructure was built by the Romans. Over the past 50 years, the public works profession has unsuccessfully attempted to create a system of formal educational programs in colleges and universities across the United States. In recent Public Works Management & Policy issues, Little and others have made compelling arguments for renewing efforts to create an educational curriculum that can provide public administrators and engineers with the skills to protect the public's investment in public infrastructure. The messages from Gordon, Little, and Grigg should be a wake-up call to both the profession and to educational institutions concerning this unmet need. Engaging in Renewed DebateThe latest round of debate on how to prepare public works managers-and, more specifically, civil infrastructure managers-was launched by Cameron Gordon's (1999) Dialogue on the development and deployment of a curriculum designed to meet this need. Gordon advocates creating a new curriculum through which potential public works managers might obtain their formal education in schools of civil engineering, public administration, public policy, and business. In support of his assertion, Gordon provides an excellent and compelling argument about the societal and political forces that have led to the lack of adequate preparation for the traditional civil engineering practitioner engaged in public works and infrastructure management. Today, public works administrators and infrastructure managers face complex demands that have little to do with the technical aspects of engineering.Richard G. Little's (1999) refreshing Commentary discussed the need to develop a new education program for infrastructure managers, one that would address the complex management issues surrounding the planning, finance, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of public infrastructure and services. Little is painfully correct in contending that basic preparation at the university level for an infrastructure manager is generally lacking. Only a handful of
The use of development impact fees (DIFs) to finance public facilities necessary to accommodate new growth is a concept that has gained acceptance in recent years. California and Florida are considered by many to be the leading areas for the development of theory, practical models, and legislation for determining growth-related costs and calculating impact-fees for new construction. Two methods of calculation of impact fees are discussed: inductive and deductive. A total of 22 potential impact fees for public facilities have been identified, including the conventional water, sewer, and street impact fees. Other potential impact fees include public safety facilities (police and fire), library, public art, and day-care facilities. The consequences of not using impact fees to offset the cost of providing adequate public facilities for new growth are far-reaching. Often the full effects of growth are not felt, or recognized, by the community for many years. The community may simply wake up one day to discover that they need to improve a street or intersection to alleviate congestion.
Public works agencies are under increasing pressure to be more accountable for effective operation and management of public infrastructure and the services related thereto. In the United States and Canada, the American Public Works Association (APWA) has developed over 400 recommended management practice principles that address virtually every aspect of public works. APWA has now published the third edition of the Public Works Management Practices Manual and has developed a self-assessment methodology by which public works agencies can document their existing practices against the nationally recognized policies, practices and procedures. Across the United States and Canada, hundreds of public works agencies are engaged in evaluation of their operations and management against the recommended practices in the Management Practices Manual. Many of these agencies have also committed to becoming accredited by APWA. The self-assessment process provides a systematic approach to evaluating both management and technical aspects of providing infrastructure services necessary to support urban and rural communities. Most agencies conducting these self-assessments find that the process of systematically reviewing every policy, practice and procedure is very beneficial. Often, areas of duplication or gaps are identified and immediately corrected. Agencies frequently find that there are conflicting interpretations about an agency's official policy. Differences between printed policies and actual practice are frequently identified and can be easily rectified. Operational personnel are frequently invited to participate in redefining what an agency handles and how it handles the day-to-day issues. Some managers have likened the process to the ISO 9000 process of certifying quality assurance. The self-assessment process does provide a mechanism for continuous improvement through the accreditation process, which requires re-evaluation every three years.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.