panies insist that borrowers meet certain conditions before financing is provided for infrastructure. Negotiation among stakeholders often is the decisive final basis for decision. Such methods are discussed further in Chapter 5.

In all these cases, performance assessment is a useful tool. As an orderly process yielding a debatable, defensible, outcome-based set of measures, performance assessment supports decision making and subsequent action. The committee recommends that responsible agencies adopt infrastructure performance measurement and assessment as an ongoing process essential to effective decision making. Adequate budgets should be maintained to support the continuing performance assessment process.

NOTES

1  

''Community" here refers to the broad view of this study, effectively encompassing anyone having an interest in the system at any jurisdictional level.

2  

Such conditions raise construction costs so substantially that designers tend to avoid such areas if they can.

3  

Reaching consensus often requires compromises that may have as much to do with educating people about the issues or shifting their opinions as with any substantive change in the infrastructure system's behavior. Providing compensation for adverse impacts of infrastructure, for example, is a way of assuring that performance is adequate. Such a strategy is sometimes used successfully to overcome the "Not In My Backyard" response.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement