Call for Evidence to support National Infrastructure Assessment Report 2

Ideally, these initiatives check most or all of the boxes below:

• Could be initiated, replicated, or expanded within roughly 6-18 months;
• Deliver clear, measurable improvements in housing-enabling infrastructure (e.g., improving performance, strengthening resilience, better managing demand);
• Use practical tools or approaches to make those improvements happen (e.g., operational improvements, stronger asset management, innovative partnership models, improved delivery methods); and,
• Offer lessons that other infrastructure actors in Canada could reasonably adopt or adapt.

Question 1

Please describe a practical initiative, pilot, or approach that could be advanced in the near term. As part of your response, please consider:

• What specific action is proposed?
• What challenge does it address, or opportunity does it capitalize on?
• Who would lead or implement it?
• What result(s) could reasonably be achieved within 6-18 months?
• What enabling conditions would be required (e.g., policy or regulatory changes, technical expertise, financing, partnerships, data)?

Submissions should emphasize feasibility, replicability, and measurable progress.

Part II - Informing the Development of NIA Report 2

In addition to identifying Quick Starts, the Council is seeking focused, practical input to inform the analysis and recommendations in NIA Report 2.

We are particularly interested in real-world experience, applied lessons, and approaches that have demonstrated results.

Question 2

NIA Report 1 recommended that governments and industry must make forward looking, evidence based infrastructure decisions, supported by standardized data and tools.

What practical approaches could improve asset management planning and create more consistent, usable data to inform infrastructure decision-making / decision-makers?

• What tools, standards, or practices have helped improve asset management planning or reporting on infrastructure assets in practice?
• How can infrastructure data be collected, shared, and/or standardized in ways that support better decision-making, while also remaining practical for communities of different sizes and capacities?
• What tools, standards, or practices exist to ensure natural infrastructure assets are accounted for in asset management planning?

Question 3

NIA Report 1 highlighted the need to promote innovative made-in-Canada practices across design, procurement and delivery and mobilize private capital through predictability, shared risk and blended finance.

What financing, procurement and delivery models exist to incentivize improved infrastructure performance, reliability, and capacity utilization over the lifecycle of assets?

• What actions can be taken to ensure risk is allocated in a manner that attracts private sector investment while ensuring that outcomes in the public interest (e.g., climate resilience, community well-being, value for money) are met?
• How can outcomes over the lifecycle of infrastructure assets, including but not limited to enhanced climate resilience, be best built into procurement contracts to maximize the private sector's ability to innovate to achieve long-term value?
• What best practices can support smaller communities in accessing capital to fund infrastructure projects?

Question 4

NIA Report 1 recommended that communities maximize the value of existing built and natural infrastructure, optimize asset performance, manage demand, and advance innovative solutions before investing in new systems.

What practical approaches could help better manage demand for infrastructure services?