Archive - this information is for reference only and no longer maintained.

This page relates to the 2021-24 National Land Transport Programme.

Introduction

This page provides the criteria to use to derive the Investment Prioritisation Method rating for the scheduling and efficiency factors.

Scheduling

The scheduling factor has two criteria: interdependency and criticality. The highest rating between these two criteria determines the scheduling rating. As an overview:

  • interdependency – focuses on the impact that non-delivery of an activity will have on realising the benefits of that package or programme
  • criticality focuses on either:
    • the need for activities to be undertaken to allow an activity, programme or package to proceed to implementation during a specific National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) period, or
    • the impact non-delivery of an activity will have on unplanned loss of service of part of the network.

The default rating for both interdependency and criticality is low.

Interdependency

The interdependency criteria are concerned with proposed activities that are part of a wider programme or package, which may involve investments outside of the transport system, such as major housing or industrial developments. The rating is determined by the extent to which non-delivery of the activity will impact on the delivery and realisation of benefits of the overall package or programme, or by the extent to which the activity relies on the delivery of other phases or elements of the package. The interdependency rating applies to all phases of an activity.

Criticality

The criticality criteria have two factors, the first being activity programming, ie the need for activities or phases to be undertaken to allow a programme or package to proceed to implementation during a specific NLTP period. The rating is determined by considering when the remainder of the package should be implemented. This rating can be different for separate phases of an activity. For example, if there were detailed business case and pre-implementation phases submitted for inclusion and implementation was to occur in the 2024–27 NLTP, the business case phase could be assigned a high rating, while the pre-implementation phase could be assigned a medium rating, as the business case needs to be completed ahead of pre-implementation.

The second factor for criticality is network resilience and is based on the additional travel time imposed through detours required if there is a risk of unplanned loss of service of part of the network. This is independent of the Government Policy Statement on land transport (GPS) alignment rating for resilience improvements associated with improving freight connections or climate change adaptation.

Government Policy Statement on land transport 2021(external link)

For the definitions of programme and package see

Investment Prioritisation Method definitions and description of criteria

Interdependency

The table below provides the criteria for the ratings.

Rating Criteria
Low
  • Activity/combination of activities is part of a programme or package, but non-delivery in the 2021–24 NLTP period will not hold up the overall delivery of other parts of programme, package or another investment (eg housing development).
  • The proposed activity is a standalone activity (not part of another programme or package)
  • Non-delivery of the proposed activity in the 2021–24 NLTP has a negligible impact on realising the estimated benefits of the programme/package.
Medium
  • Activity/combination of activities is part of a programme, package or another investment, but relies on the delivery of another phase or activity in the 2021–24 NLTP period before being actioned.
  • Non-delivery of the proposed activity in the 2021–24 NLTP has a moderate impact on realising the estimated benefits of the programme/package, ie one or more benefits may not be achieved or may be reduced, or may be delayed for up to three years.
High
  • Activity/combination of activities is part of a programme, package or another investment (eg housing development), and its delivery in the 2021–24 NLTP period is required to enable further implementation of that programme, package, or investment.
  • Non-delivery of the proposed activity in the 2021–24 NLTP has a significant impact on realising the estimated benefits of the programme/package, ie one or more benefits will not be achieved or will be delayed for more than three years.

Criticality

The table below provides the criteria for the ratings.

Rating Criteria
Low
  • Need to undertake this activity in order to deliver/ prepare for the remainder of programme/package where its implementation is to begin in the 2027–31 NLTP or beyond
  • Significance of the activity as part of the network, with risk of unplanned loss of service (≥2 hours) requires use of alternative routes or modes taking up to one hour extra travel time for most users
Medium
  • Need to undertake this activity in order to deliver/ prepare for the remainder of programme/package where its implementation is to begin in the 2024–27 NLTP
  • Significance of the activity as part of the network, where risk of unplanned loss of service (≥2 hours) requires use of alternative routes or modes taking one to two hours extra travel time for most users
High
  • Need to undertake this activity in order to deliver/ prepare for the remainder of programme/package where its implementation is to begin in the 2021–24 or early 2024–27 NLTP
  • Significance of the activity as part of the network, where risk of unplanned loss of service (≥2 hours) requires use of alternative routes or modes taking >2 hours extra travel time for most users

Efficiency

The efficiency factor looks at monetised impacts, generally using the benefit–cost ratio (BCR). For some activities, eg to replace a facility or technology at the end of its life, the present value (PV) of costs may be used where an asset is at end of life and is being replaced on a like-for-like basis.

Monetised benefits and costs manual

In the early stages of developing a proposed activity, there may not have been detailed consideration of the cost of ownership and quantification of benefits. To assist in these cases, we have developed a new tool to calculate an Indicative Efficiency Rating (IER) for the purpose of investment prioritisation.

Indicative efficiency rating tool

The table below shows how the BCR or PV of costs determines the efficiency rating. 

 Rating BCR
 Very low  <1.0
 Low  1.0 – 2.9
 Medium  3.0 – 5.9
High  6.0 – 9.9 PV of costs (where an asset is at the end of life and is being replaced on a like-for-like basis
Very high  >10

Proposals with a very low efficiency rating (BCR<1) may be included in the 2021–24 NLTP if they are above the investment threshold for an activity class. However, funding for these activities will only be approved by exception at the appropriate level of delegation, usually the Waka Kotahi Board.