The history of fast-tracked projects, and implications for evidence-based decision making

Oct 8, 2024

2 min read

1

40

0

Last week, the government announced a list of 149 projects to be added to its Fast-Track Approvals Bill. Alongside this, two tables were released, categorising the projects by sector and region:

However, what would be even more interesting is a third table that provides the history of these projects. Are they new concepts? Are they partway through the consenting process? Which have previously had their applications declined?

While much has already been written about the previously declined projects (see Newsroom article below), something else that caught my attention was how many of these projects have been in the pipeline for years. Flicking through the list, I even recognised a couple of old clients from my pre-2018 consulting days — so these go back quite a way!

It made me think about the role of evidence in decision-making. Some of these projects have been gestating for so long that there should be plenty of evidence gathered to assess their environmental or societal impacts. But, of course, no two projects are the same.

Large infrastructure projects often take years to come to fruition. Priorities shift, particularly with transport projects. Initial scoping might be done, only for a decision to divert investment elsewhere, leaving the project on hold. In other cases, projects may be well down the consenting track, but haven't reached a conclusion.

Varying levels of evidence in resource consent applications is nothing new. What makes things more intriguing this time is the Bill’s emphasis on delivering these projects. It raises questions: how are different evidence levels being weighed in the decision-making process? And how transparent is that process?

Personally, I’d love to see the level of evidence and the uncertainty around it clearly outlined in the decision documents. Imagine if they were presented in a way similar to IPCC reports, with explicit confidence levels attached to each key decision. What are the odds we’ll see that level of clarity, do you reckon?

Disclaimer: not advice, just my thoughts and opinions.