Ahmed Bello

PUBLISHED

Email Author

RE: Week 7 Discussion Question

COLL APSE
2333d072-dcae-477a-beae-362a070074a1
false

Parent Post
Asset management refers to the systems that observes and maintains the objects or
possessions that are of value to someone, whether it is tangible or not. It lays a lot of
emphasis on the operations, maintenance and upgrade of assets with a keen eye on cost. It
aims at using the least amount of resources for the maximum amount of returns
achievable (Wayne et al. 2009, p. 120-132). The most common approach used in the
management of public infrastructure assets in Africa is a comprehensive sustainable
approach (Ellis 2006, p. 26). This is the type of asset management approach that involves
itself with the deep understanding of the resources available and the assets being used or
developed with the sense of saving not on capital or cost means, but for the sake of the
future generation (Chen et al 2009, p. 200-210). In this approach, the infrastructure assets
are developed using the least amount of resources, are monitored after relatively long
periods, and are not comprehensively repaired when they are damaged (Bratland 2010, p.
35-51). The commissioning of such assets is not complete, and decommissioning as well
takes a lot of consideration before being done. Focusing on the root causes of failure in
order to maintain the components of public infrastructure once they are in existence is
one of the approaches to public infrastructure asset management in Africa. This approach
employs the learning of lessons through experience, whereby the concerned authorities
will have to put in place measures that were void so as to have led to the occurrence of a
failure in a given case. Once the mistakes have been identified, they are corrected in

subsequent infrastructures. Usually these failures are consequences of neglect of public

infrastructures as compared to the private ones (Bartland, 2010).

For instance, such an approach is observed in the Kenya Pipeline Corporation in

East Africa. This company was set up by the Eastern part of Africa with the aim of
transportation, storage and delivery of petroleum products to consumers through its rather
vast and ramified network of pipelines and oil depot. During the establishment of this
pipeline network, easily corroded materials were used for the pipelines since they had the
intention to save on cost (Ochieng 1992, p. 126). The pipeline has however served the
country as per the expectations despite going for class 2 materials during the
construction; hence, it can be said that the management of this asset was effective.

However, when it came to maintenance, the approach used by this company was
rather shortcoming since this was done after very long periods of time; again to save on
costs. This time however, they did not escape the fangs of fate. In a recent case in 2011, a
fuel tank sprung a leak. The people in the neighboring, rather crowded shanty village
started collecting the fuel in an endeavor to make their lives just a little better. The lives
most of them were fighting for came drastically to an end after a huge explosion took
place causing collateral damage (Chen et al 2009, p. 200-210) . Despite this turn of
events, the resources of the pipeline were not decommissioned even after reports
suggested that the assets were rather too old for what they were being subjected to.

Such cases are very rare in infrastructure asset management systems that use the
Rodger (2005) approach. This is because the Rodgers approach has defined
comprehensive steps, and focused on both the cost-saving aspect, and the quality of

service aspect. In the case of the Kenya Pipeline, the factory acceptance tests were
majorly compromised as the pipes were made with a class 2 material. Therefore, this
meant that the advertised specifications, and ratings were not achieved, and even though
they sustained the service for quite some time, the results of this miscalculation were very
tragic.

The site acceptance testing before the commissioning was also rather faulty since
the components of the pipes and equipment must have been overlooked for them to be
rendered satisfactorily (Krohe 2008, p. 8-13). On top of the poor and lowly recurrent
maintenance checks of the pipelines; it resulted in the service quality being compromised.

The failures in the public infrastructures are due two main critical gaps. The first is the
lack of ownership of the public infrastructure assets and, therefore, absence of
accountability and proper reliable maintenance. This is arguably attributed to the
misleading concept of capital which it is presumed that public infrastructure is taken to be
public capital.

So the dubbing of the public infrastructure as public capital is misleading the voters into
thinking that it will be effectively maintained.

Another critical gap is seen in the misuse of offices by the public officials who pursue
their political endeavors, which are a form of metaphorical in which self-centered acts of
capital maintenance may result in neglect of infrastructure. Politicians often find
themselves using and maintaining the resources metaphorical capital goods under them
to pursue their political goals at the expense of the infrastructure maintenance. They only

come to play in infrastructure maintenance if their longer selfish ends in career ambitions
are to be realized (Bratland, 2010, pp. 40-42).

Reference
Brtland, J. (2010) Capital concepts as insights
into the maintenance and neglect of
infrastructure, Independent Review, 15
(1), pp.35-51.
Chen, P. et al. (2009) Managing critical
infrastructure

interdependence

through

economic input/output methods, Journal

of Infrastructure Systems, 15 (3), pp.200210,

[Online].

Available

from:http://sfxhosted.exlibrisgroup.com.ez
proxy.liv.ac.uk/lpu?title=JOURNAL+OF+
INFRASTRUCTURE+SYSTEMS&volu
me=15&issue=3&spage=200&date=2009
(Accessed: 17 October 2013).

Cottrell, W.D. et al. (2009) Transportation

infrastructure maintenance management:
case study of a small urban city, Journal
of Infrastructure Systems, 15 (2), pp.120132,

[Online].

Available

from:http://sfxhosted.exlibrisgroup.com.ez
proxy.liv.ac.uk/lpu?title=JOURNAL+OF+
INFRASTRUCTURE+SYSTEMS&volu
me=15&issue=2&spage=120&date=2009
(Accessed: 18 October 2013).
Ellis, R. (2006) Decommissioning: taking part of
a system off-line doesnt have to get out of
hand, Engineered Systems, 23 (5), p.26,
[Online].

Available

from:

http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac
.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=
21057378&site=eds-live&scope=site
(Accessed: 18 October 2013).

Ochieng', W. R., & Maxon, R. M. (1992). An Economic History Of Kenya. Nairobi,

Kenya, East

African Educational Publishers.

Krohe, J., Jr. (2008) Our daunting to-do list:
when it comes to infrastructure, we know
the problems. What are we going to do
about them?, Planning Chicago, 74 (9),
pp.6-13,

[Online].

Available

from:

http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac
.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbl&A
N=RN237088588&site=edslive&scope=site (Accessed: 19 October
2013).
Rodgers, T.L. (2005) An owners perspective on
commissioning

of

critical

facilities,

ASHRAE Transactions, 111 (2), pp.618626,

[Online].

Available

from:

http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac
.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbl&A
N=CN057558204&site=edslive&scope=site (Accessed: 17 October
2013).

Wayne D., et al., 2009, Transportation Infrastructure Maintanence Management: Case

Study Of

Small

Urban

City,

Journal

of

Infrastructure System, 15:120-132, DOI:

10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342