Researchers call for mandatory cost-benefit analysis and stronger oversight of major projects
A new report from engineering firm WSP and the Helen Clark Foundation is warning New Zealand is investing billions of dollars into infrastructure projects without a consistent system for proving value for money, transparency or long-term public benefit.
The report, Measuring What Matters – Getting the Best Value from Infrastructure Investment, argues Aotearoa lacks a mandatory, nationwide requirement for evidence-based assessment of major infrastructure spending decisions.
Researchers say the country is facing mounting pressure from climate change, population ageing, rising debt and a massive infrastructure funding shortfall estimated at around $193 billion, yet many major projects are still proceeding without consistent cost-benefit analysis.
Cost-benefit analysis, commonly referred to as CBA, is one of the primary tools used internationally to measure the economic, social and environmental impacts of infrastructure investments and compare competing priorities.
However, the report found the tool is being used inconsistently across central and local government agencies. Of six major infrastructure-focused government agencies contacted during the research, only NZTA and Kāinga Ora were found to consistently apply cost-benefit analysis to investment decisions.
WSP Fellow at the Helen Clark Foundation and report author Kali Mercier says infrastructure decisions shape the country for generations and influence everything from climate resilience and housing to transport and public services.
The report highlights that fewer than a quarter of infrastructure bids submitted through the Government Budget process over the past five years included a formal cost-benefit analysis.
Researchers warn this means many major funding decisions are being made without clear evidence about whether projects deliver the best long-term value for taxpayers or align with broader strategic priorities.
The report also raises concerns around accountability, noting New Zealand rarely conducts proper evaluations after infrastructure projects are completed to determine whether promised outcomes were actually achieved.
Researchers say this limits the country’s ability to learn from past mistakes, improve future planning and hold decision-makers accountable for how public money is spent.
WSP Technical Director Quanita Ali says consistent use of cost-benefit analysis could help governments and councils better understand trade-offs, compare vastly different projects fairly and focus limited funding on investments delivering the greatest long-term public value.
The report argues stronger use of evidence-based planning is becoming increasingly important as councils and governments face growing affordability pressures, infrastructure deficits and climate adaptation challenges.
Key recommendations include making cost-benefit analysis mandatory for all major central government infrastructure investments, introducing stronger independent oversight through the Infrastructure Commission, and requiring public release of business cases and economic assessments.
The report also recommends routine post-project evaluations and closer alignment between long-term infrastructure planning and the Budget process, including possible multi-year capital budgeting frameworks.
Researchers say New Zealand already has many of the technical tools needed to improve infrastructure decision-making, but stronger political commitment and system-wide consistency are required to ensure public money is invested transparently and effectively.
The findings are likely to intensify debate over major infrastructure priorities across transport, housing, health, climate adaptation and regional development as governments grapple with growing fiscal pressure and competing demands nationwide.
#Infrastructure #NZPolitics #ClimateResilience #Housing #Transport #HelenClarkFoundation #WSP #PublicSpending #Aotearoa #RadioWaatea
