How to improve Economic, Environment, Social and Cultural outcomes

I have previously outlined the compelling case to build a community and disaster resilient Wellington and save $100m per annum (here,) and explained how to improve economic outcomes (here) environmental outcomes (here), social outcomes (here) and cultural outcomes (here).

 This thought piece summarises how to improve economic, environmental, social and cultural outcomes.

The objective is to lift all outcome scores to 80% by 2030. The current trends [1] indicate that capabilities and vulnerabilities are static or declining. The vulnerabilities are a lack of:

·         confidence in finding a job. Economic

·         helping in the community and feeling safe walking alone. Social

·         engaging in cultural activities. Cultural

·         confidence land is being used for optimal purpose. Environment

·         confidence in Council and Parliament. Governance 

·         connection with neighbours and preparation for a disaster. Disaster .

If the objective to lift all outcome scores to 80% by 2030 is achieved the benefits[2]  will be that people will have more confidence in finding a job, feel safer, be more engaged in their community, have greater confidence land is being used for optimal purpose, have greater trust in Council and Parliament and be more connected with neighbours and prepared for a disaster.

[1]suburb have been gathered each October since 2019 through a community survey which asks questions of residents based on the wellbeing indicators in the Governments Living Standards Framework here, which have been aligned to the Governments resilience areas here. A score trending less than 60% is a vulnerability and a score trending greater than 60% is a capability. Here is the Wellington suburb survey data showing the trend lines https://newlandrg.weebly.com/result-2019-2024.html

[2] Using the wellbeing indicators in the Governments Living Standards Framework and attaching monetary values to, from The Treasurys; CBAx data set.

A summary of the economic, environmental, social and cultural solutions by option are set out in the table below:

Each of the options would transparently show the costs and benefits from an economic, environment, social and cultural perspective including the required economic, environment, social and cultural infrastructure. Decision makers then identify the preferred option and way forward. It is likely the preferred “public value” option is Thrive. To be affordable and achievable this may need to be phased starting with Survive for the first three years, then Revive for 3 years and then Thrive.

This requires the Government to reprioritise its existing investment programme to initiatives that deliver, in the words of the Minister of Finance, “better bang for buck” and better public value.

Next steps

My next thought piece will suggest how to enable each of the above options with the required infrastructure comprising transport, water, housing, energy, communications and community facilities.