Once a range of options has been identified, a structured process should be used to assess those options and, on the basis of their merit, move from a longer list of potential options to a shorter list of potential solutions.
The process of narrowing down options should be structured, objective, and evidence-based. Options should not be ruled out on the basis of prejudice, political and presentational difficulties, or in any way which precludes genuine consideration of certain options. Options should be ruled out only on the basis that they do not address the problem in an efficient way.
To give an indication of the type of structure required, the following three step outline process is offered:
1. Step one could be a quantitative Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) of the long list of options, showing, at a high level, each option's impact on the goals and objectives identified in Stage 1 of the overall Reform and Investment Framework. The best performing options move to step two:
2. Step two could be a rapid, or high level, cost-benefit analysis of a shorter list of options; alongside a more detailed MCA to pick up any impacts not captured in the rapid economic appraisal. The best performing options move to step three:
3. Step three would complement the more detailed MCA analysis with a thorough and detailed economic cost-benefit analysis of, for example, the two or three lead options.
Infrastructure Australia is mindful of the fact that scenario analysis is not yet widely applied. Therefore, as part of any submission made by proponents, we are not expecting detailed modelling of a initiative's costs and benefits under different scenarios. Rather, we are looking to proponents to provide a qualitative assessment of:
• the impact(s) of different scenarios on an initiative's strategic fit (ie whether a potential initiative's ability to contribute to the goals and objectives identified in Stage One is stronger or weaker under different scenarios); and
• the likely impact of the scenario on the initiative's costs and benefits.
Clearly, if explicit modelling of alternate scenarios is available, Infrastructure Australia would seek to view the outputs of that modelling.