An evaluation of district council policy and procedure related to the seal extension of roads

Abstract

District road seal extension projects and programmes are being progressively undertaken by district councils and are generally viewed by them as a positive step towards increasing the level of development in their district. However, there is indication from those outside district councils, that support for this viewpoint is limited. Difficulties exist around the inconsistent development and application of seal extension policies by district councils, and the inconsistent application of Transfund procedures for evaluating seal extension project viability.

The focus of this research is to undertake a comparative evaluation of policies used in assessing and prioritising seal extension projects of local roads in selected districts, and the policy/funding relationship between councils and Transfund. This is carried out on three levels: 1) description and evaluation of district seal extension policies with regards their priority setting, 2) description of Transfund funding allocation procedures and, 3) analysis of the policy relationship between Transfund and District Council policies.

Criteria for evaluation are developed via a synthesis and comparison of higher-level policy documents and literature. The criteria used are 1) economic efficiency, 2) equity, 3) accessibility, 4) safety, 5) policy consistency and 6) environmental consideration. Using a triple bottom line framework, this set of criteria is grouped into three sets - economic, social and environmental. The criterion of Policy Consistency forms a connection between the other five criteria as they are drawn together under the triple bottom line framework.

While there are a number of specific points made for each criterion in the analysis, regarding individual council policies, the findings are largely encompassed in the final criterion of Policy Consistency. As such, the findings can be summarised into three main points. 1. Significant inconsistencies exist among district council seal extension policies. 2. A number of councils are inconsistent in their valuation of seal extension projects. 3. The application of Transfund CBA procedures among councils, particularly intangible measurement, is not consistent.

The implication of these findings is that district councils and Transfund, their government funding organisation, need to source methods of instituting policy consistency in council operations regarding seal extension policy. The recommendation is for a collaborative forum to develop best practice guidelines to include measures for the criterion of policy consistency in process, in evaluation tools and in seal extension criteria. It is recommended that the remaining five criteria used in the analysis of this research form a basis from which to develop seal extension criteria in the best practice framework.