However, imagine the same bridge in a rural town struggling to make ends meet, with barely enough staff to keep up with the basic needs. How can it take advantage of all this and not be left behind? What about in a developing country? The context in which this bridge sits becomes vitally important. The bridge in the urban setting is quickly integrated into the system of systems. Except in the rural setting, if the data being generated lacks a person or system to interpret or leverage it, there is no meaning to derive, no predictions to be made—would this just be a colossal waste of money? Such a perceived waste can be avoided if the context is evaluated early in the conceptual design stage.
Assuming in each instance somebody is looking to achieve similar levels of resiliency leveraging the latest technology, the context requires different methods of implementation. In the case of the rural location, it means contracting remote monitoring and support; in the case of the developing country, it means perhaps simply the ability to apply the learning derived from similar sensor-laden bridges in other parts of the world. In both instances, when context is considered, operators can still obtain valuable intelligence to ensure future designs are more sustainable.
In the end, the data is generally only as good as the team or system that can interpret the data and leverage it for continuous improvement. It is important people do not become lulled into complacency with respect to technology and allow smart infrastructure make them inferior. These improvements can be readily shared so all stakeholders, regardless of context, improve their infrastructure investment and design decisions. The key is treat the whole patient—step back and understand the context, before trying to devise and implement a more sustainable solution.
Next-generation contracting
In the previous bridge example, considerations are referenced for new methods of contracting in ways that will help cities less-equipped take advantage of technological advancements. This is the tip of the iceberg as it relates to how interdependencies and new technologies could influence planning and contracting in the industry.
As new technology helps improve resiliency decision-making and funding constraints lead to new ways to extend life or lower life cycle costs of assets, we are rapidly seeing changes in our delivery methods. Owners are taking a step back and starting to look at the bigger picture. There is a rise in public-private partnerships (P3) an increasing prominence of Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), and many new terms and conditions in infrastructure design and construction contracts addressing shared risk.
In the midst of the merging of physical and virtual worlds, evidence of new relationships are forming in the supply chain as well. Traditional engineering firms are finding new partners—more collaboration with large IT and system integration companies, more partnerships with financial firms and banks, and learning how to drive more progressive relationships with contractors on much larger scales.
All these new relationships and contracting methods invoke a new line of questioning or self-reflection for many traditional design and engineering firms with respect to their position or ‘fit’ in this evolving supply chain. It is truly imperative for traditional design firms to complement this supply chain disruption with an equal level of disruption considering new ways of working, sparking ‘whole-systems thinking’ and embracing deep technological shifts in the industry.
When delving deeper into the fusing of the physical and virtual worlds, it is important to embrace these changes through a push to accelerate ‘digital engineering.’ Whether an individual leverages related terms such as building information modeling (BIM), this is about the automation of all or parts of the lifecycle of a built asset.
In the private sector, the infrastructure owner is more intensely driven by commercial returns and when he or she sees the clear return on investment (ROI) evidenced through the use of digital engineering and digital asset management, the owner understands and is able to quickly develop new requirements without complex government bureaucracy. The financial world sees it the same way. Lengthy concessionaire agreements on P3 contracts are about ensuring the commercial returns. The benefits of de-risking the ROI by proactive data management means second-guessing enforcement of contractual requirements on the lead designer not an option.
When examining the area of infrastructure resiliency, engineers can be leveraging BIM in more progressive ways, not just for obligatory contract requirements, but by becoming invested partners in driving that ROI—share in the reward, as much as the risk. Addressing level of detail and information in early phase models, BIM can be leveraged for management of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) compliance. Modeling and optimizing carbon and energy efficiency during concept stage will lead to material long-term operating cost reductions. Additionally, designers can leverage frameworks for sustainable return on investment, putting a value on green infrastructure and showcasing long-term benefits for maintenance cost and resiliency.
