2. Content
• A brief introduction to research interests in
governance, engineering and
transformational change in infrastructure
• Framing of governance, for the purposes of
the presentation, and its distinctive role in
the relationship between ecosystems,
infrastructure and cities.
• Discussion on four selected themes arising
from the above
• Putting the themes into context by looking
at a live project seeking to make
transformational change – the Pipebots
project.
• Some references, further reading and
resources included in the final slide.
3. Research Interests
• Urban Infrastructure and
Governance - hard and soft
engineering and hard and
‘soft’ law
• Particular interest area is the
role of justice and its
prevalence (or lack of)
How do we balance the need for
safe and secure infrastructure
(carrying life essential resources)
with the change, innovation and
adaptation needed?
Does the idea of ‘justice’ need to
be restated and re-emphasised –
If something is resilient and
sustainable, is it automatically
considered just?
4. • The quality of urban (human) life is interrelated
with the safety and security of its infrastructure.
• Infrastructure is a form of distribution of assets
and detriments and can provide what we need
to survive, if not thrive. Choices are made which
require ‘just’ governance.
• In urban environments we are arguably more
remote and detached from the natural world,
how do we govern to appreciate and adapt to
the environment’s needs as well as our own?
• Governance systems and infrastructure is
‘human-made’. How can such a system best
account for and receive feedback from the
natural world?
Framing
Infrastructure and
Governance
5. Four Themes
1. Distribution
2. Participation
3. Governance Tool
4. Adaptation
• Distribution Choices. Is our governance system open
about distribution decision making, who we
prioritise, who bears the brunt of unwelcome
development (who or what will survive or thrive?)
(Note also: Capabilities approach).
• Respect and Participation choices. Whose views are
taken into account when we make distribution
choices? How do we give non-human life a seat at
the (human) governance table?
• Choice of governance tool. Are we making the best
decisions over the choice of governance tool? The
force of ‘hard’ law can be justified (e.g. potable
water safety,) but it can be inflexible and difficult to
adapt. There are alternative tools from less formal
regulation, financial incentives to education.
• Adaptation and resilience. How does the drafting
and choice of a governance tool sit with the need for
flexibility in some instances e.g. to allow for
innovation, advances in our thinking, changing and
unpredictable ecosystems and resources?
6. Distribution Choices
“The natural distribution is neither just nor
unjust; nor is it unjust that persons are born
into society at some particular position.
These are simply natural facts. What is just
and unjust is the way that institutions deal
with these facts”
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
• Distributive Justice and levelling-up versus ‘lock-
in’. Infrastructure can embed prejudices. Also,
as more systems come under stress, prejudices
that are currently hidden, may come to light.
• Do we ask open questions about who we are
benefitting by a new infrastructure proposal
and make plain the answer?
• Do we ask open questions about who bears the
brunt of any detriments e.g. siting of
undesirable development?
• Do we look to far future scenarios (and what we
want our world to look like) when addressing
these issues?
• My own research, concentrating on the water
and wastewater sector, suggested these
questions are not explicitly raised.
7. Participation
and Respect
Participatory Justice. How do we
ensure a distribution is fair and
equitable and seen to be fair and
equitable. Who has a voice and is
that voice heard in a meaningful
way?
• Large research area, but question for today is
– are we just talking about human
participation? What about non-human life?
How can the environment ‘participate’?
• How can we measure success or
communicate with nature in an urban
environment where the resource is invisible?
• How thorough is our baseline knowledge of
the health of the environment (not just
selected highlights)? My research suggests
this knowledge is lacking. Another
consequence of this is the opportunity for
selective reporting and ‘greenwashing’.
8. Choice of Governance instrument
Choice of instrument could be viewed alongside the extreme far future
scenarios discussed in the first presentation by Professor Rogers.
• Fortress World
• Market forces
• Policy reform
• New Sustainability Paradigm
There are choices as to whether we leave matters to market forces, use
financial instruments, choose lighter, less formal regulation for flexibility
or strict enforceable command and control for safety, for example. The
reality is there is a choice across a continuum of options all of which have
behavioural outcomes.
9. Context: Pipebots
• Funded by UK’s EPSRC (Engineering and Physical
Sciences Research Council).
• Consortium of a number of UK Universities,
strong academic focus but drawing heavily on
sector partners
• Aim to create intelligent, autonomous, micro-
robots to live in underground pipe networks and
other dangerous infrastructure sites
• Current focus on water and wastewater. Initially
to detect leaks and eventually fix them.
• Uses sensors to gather data on the condition
and content of the pipes, flows, heat etc.
• Aims? Improve resilience, reduced excavations,
reduce carbon
• Potential to gather real-time data on the water
and wastewater systems.
10. Pipebots:
Reflecting on the
Four Themes
• Distributional justice – Little sector dialogue on justice
principles, very heavy dialogue on resilience and
sustainability
• Participatory justice – sensors are capable of feeding into
our knowledge of the ecosystems and environment,
providing a voice, but absent drivers mean there is little
motivation to develop this potential
• Choice of tool :
• Limited appetite to use tools to change behaviour
(water availability example)
• Strong regulation leading to – ‘work-to-rule/ work-
to-comply’ mentality in some areas
• Industry experts express frustration at narrowly
focussed laws that cause more harm by not
balancing impacts on the wider ecosystem
• Adaptation and resilience
• Current regulation not designed for the
complexities of robots in water supplies (regulations
not reviewed)
• Very little data on current baselines (free rein for
‘greenwashing’?)
11. Governance and Justice: Take Home Points
Governance
Questions to
be explicitly
addressed
Who benefits
and who
does not?
How can the
environment’s
voice be
heard?
Can data be
used as a
voice?
Which
governance
tool should
we use?
Can the tool
be drafted to
adapt with
need?
12. Thank you
References and Further
Reading
Great Transition Initiative (2021) Global Scenarios | Explore (greattransition.org)
Holland (2014) Capabilities, Well-being and social justice. DOI:10.1093
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199692071.003.0003
Pelling, M. (2003) The vulnerability of cities: natural disasters and social resilience. Earthscan
Pipebots (2021) https://Pipebots.ac.uk (this work is supported by the UK's Engineering and
Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Programme Grant EP/S016813/1)
Rawls, J. (1999) A theory of justice Revised edition. edn.: Oxford : Oxford University Press,
1999.
Rogers, C.D.F. (2018) 'Engineering future liveable, resilient, sustainable cities using
foresight', Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Civil Engineering, 171(6), 3-9.
Schlosberg, D. (2007) Defining environmental justice : theories, movements, and nature /
David Schlosberg. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sikor, T., Martin, A., Fisher, J. and He, J. (2014) 'Toward an Empirical Analysis of Justice in
Ecosystem Governance', Conservation Letters, 7(6), pp. 524-532.
Shrimpton, E.A., Hunt, D.V.L. and Rogers, C.D.F. (2021a) Justice in (English) Water
Infrastructure: A systematic review, Sustainability 13(6):3363
Shrimpton, E.A., Hunt, D.V.L. and Rogers, C.D.F. (2021b) A governance framework for
implementation of scientific and engineering innovation in buried infrastructure systems
(publication pending)
Walker, G. (2012) Environmental justice : concepts, evidence and politics / Gordon Walker.
London : Routledge, 2012.
Walker, G. (2014) 'Water Scarcity in England and Wales as a failure of (meta) Governance ',
Water Alternatives-an Interdisciplinary Journal on Water Politics and Development, 7(2), pp.
388-413
eas983@bham.ac.uk
