Keyword search
Results
All (4)
All (4) ((4 results))
- Articles and reports: 11-624-M2008019Geography: CanadaDescription:
The overall growth of government-owned infrastructure has been very similar across most regions over the past 44 years. With the exception of the Atlantic Provinces, the range of average annual capital growth from one region to the next has been very narrow, falling between 1.8% and 2.2% since 1961, according to a new study released in September 2007 in the Canadian Economic Observer.
Since 2000, governments have increased their infrastructure capital more than at any time since the 1960s and 1970s. However, the growth has not been strong enough to prevent more and more signs of wear in our infrastructure (the data are net of depreciation and in constant 1997 dollars). This is due to cuts in the 1990s when governments were grappling with significant budgetary deficits, as well as many of the assets built in the post-war infrastructure boom reaching the end of their life span.
This study analyses, from 1961 to 2005, government investment in infrastructure by different levels of government and type of asset by region.
Release date: 2008-02-07 - Articles and reports: 11-010-X200700910332Geography: CanadaDescription:
This article finds that the volume of infrastructure capital has rebounded since 2000 after two decades of neglect. While infrastructure growth has been similar across regions, there are sharp differences in the type of asset targeted by the regions, especially when spending slowed after 1980.
Release date: 2007-09-13 - 3. The Age of Public Infrastructure in Canada ArchivedArticles and reports: 11-621-M2006035Geography: CanadaDescription:
This study looks at the average age of the four main components of public infrastructure in Canada: roads and highways, sewer systems, wastewater treatment facilities, and bridges. This study covers the 1963 to 2003 period for the three levels of government.
Release date: 2006-01-30 - Articles and reports: 11F0024M20040007449Description:
The state and local government sector owns nearly 90% of the nonmilitary capital structures and 70% of the nonmilitary equipment in the U.S. As such state and local governments are the key policymakers in determining levels of infrastructure investment. Yet as stewards of infrastructure, the states have had a rocky history. Current engineering studies examining the condition of U.S. capital stock suggest that much of it is disrepair and that investments of nearly $1.6 trillion would be needed over the next 5 years to restore full functionality to major types of infrastructure.
Recently states have shown renewed interest in using capital investment in infrastructure as an economic development tool. Popular economic development theories based on enhancing industry agglomeration often find the condition of key infrastructure as a factor in economic growth. While many states accept this conclusion, they are faced with a policy conundrum. Facing tight fiscal circumstances, states and localities are trying to determine which infrastructure investments matter in triggering economic growth. This paper will survey what is known about measuring the effect of infrastructure investment and discuss whether states are asking the right questions before spending infrastructure dollars.
Release date: 2004-11-25
Data (0)
Data (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
Analysis (4)
Analysis (4) ((4 results))
- Articles and reports: 11-624-M2008019Geography: CanadaDescription:
The overall growth of government-owned infrastructure has been very similar across most regions over the past 44 years. With the exception of the Atlantic Provinces, the range of average annual capital growth from one region to the next has been very narrow, falling between 1.8% and 2.2% since 1961, according to a new study released in September 2007 in the Canadian Economic Observer.
Since 2000, governments have increased their infrastructure capital more than at any time since the 1960s and 1970s. However, the growth has not been strong enough to prevent more and more signs of wear in our infrastructure (the data are net of depreciation and in constant 1997 dollars). This is due to cuts in the 1990s when governments were grappling with significant budgetary deficits, as well as many of the assets built in the post-war infrastructure boom reaching the end of their life span.
This study analyses, from 1961 to 2005, government investment in infrastructure by different levels of government and type of asset by region.
Release date: 2008-02-07 - Articles and reports: 11-010-X200700910332Geography: CanadaDescription:
This article finds that the volume of infrastructure capital has rebounded since 2000 after two decades of neglect. While infrastructure growth has been similar across regions, there are sharp differences in the type of asset targeted by the regions, especially when spending slowed after 1980.
Release date: 2007-09-13 - 3. The Age of Public Infrastructure in Canada ArchivedArticles and reports: 11-621-M2006035Geography: CanadaDescription:
This study looks at the average age of the four main components of public infrastructure in Canada: roads and highways, sewer systems, wastewater treatment facilities, and bridges. This study covers the 1963 to 2003 period for the three levels of government.
Release date: 2006-01-30 - Articles and reports: 11F0024M20040007449Description:
The state and local government sector owns nearly 90% of the nonmilitary capital structures and 70% of the nonmilitary equipment in the U.S. As such state and local governments are the key policymakers in determining levels of infrastructure investment. Yet as stewards of infrastructure, the states have had a rocky history. Current engineering studies examining the condition of U.S. capital stock suggest that much of it is disrepair and that investments of nearly $1.6 trillion would be needed over the next 5 years to restore full functionality to major types of infrastructure.
Recently states have shown renewed interest in using capital investment in infrastructure as an economic development tool. Popular economic development theories based on enhancing industry agglomeration often find the condition of key infrastructure as a factor in economic growth. While many states accept this conclusion, they are faced with a policy conundrum. Facing tight fiscal circumstances, states and localities are trying to determine which infrastructure investments matter in triggering economic growth. This paper will survey what is known about measuring the effect of infrastructure investment and discuss whether states are asking the right questions before spending infrastructure dollars.
Release date: 2004-11-25
Reference (0)
Reference (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
- Date modified: