While much of the government’s $787 billion stimulus package is allocated to infrastructure projects and transportation, more is needed for U.S. networks – and not only in terms of funding.

Many systems of the United States infrastructure network require rebuilding and reinvention. The influx of funding provided by the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), which sets aside more than $132 billion for a wide range of infrastructure projects, is a good start.

Yet the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) estimates the cost of improving the nation’s infrastructure to acceptable levels is $2.2 trillion over five years.

Clearly more is needed — and not only in terms of funding — to adequately address these problems.

A new report from Ernst & Young and the Urban Land Institute warns that short-term stimulus funding for various road, transit, rail and water projects is no substitute for a coordinated, long-range U.S effort to “maintain national prosperity in a rapidly evolving and more competitive global marketplace.”

“The infrastructure problems facing the country cannot be solved just by shoveling more money at one-off light-rail systems or constructing more ring roads and highway bypasses,” the report, Infrastructure 2009: Pivot Point, makes clear. “Concerted responses by federal, state and local governments must confront much tougher, more sensitive, and potentially disruptive issues and upend existing paradigms.”

The Ernst & Young/Urban Land Institute report details a four-pronged approach to changing infrastructure policy that addresses how the nation plans, funds and implements infrastructure programs:

• Establish a long-term national strategy. “A comprehensive strategy is needed that accounts for population growth, rapid urbanization and declining mobility throughout urban areas. New transport networks must interconnect more efficiently to move people and goods through increasingly congested global pathway cities.”
• Plan holistically, doing things in a more integrated way. “Goals to reduce congestion, cut carbon footprints, decrease foreign oil dependency and ensure adequate water supplies require integration of transportation, energy and environmental programs with land use planning and housing policy.”
• Revamp national, regional and local government vision and planning. “Consolidate government management. Federal, state and local governments must restructure agencies responsible for transportation, housing, water and energy to manage and execute a coordinated infrastructure policy.”
• Change funding approaches. “More of the funding burdens for new infrastructure networks and repairs must shift to users from taxpayers, since government coffers alone will never be sufficient to cover costs. Among the new funding sources: higher gas taxes, greater use of highway tolls, charges for vehicle miles traveled. The report also supports establishment of a national infrastructure bank [...] to help finance national networks and attract more private capital.”

With overlap of the Pivot Point recommendations, the ASCE’s comprehensive 2009 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure also focuses on ways the nation can begin addressing these critical deficiencies. The ASCE broadly offers five key solutions for raising the nation’s infrastructure grade point average:

• Increase federal leadership in infrastructure. “America’s infrastructure needs bold leadership and a compelling national vision. Without a strong national vision, infrastructure will continue to deteriorate.”
• Promote sustainability and resilience. “Sustainability and resiliency must be an integral part of improving the nation’s infrastructure. Sustainable development will not only preserve our high quality of life and environment we enjoy today, but improve conditions in the future.”
• Develop federal, state and regional infrastructure plans. “Infrastructure investment at all levels must be prioritized and executed according to well-conceived plans that both complement the national vision and focus on system-wide outputs.”
• Address life-cycle costs and ongoing maintenance. “As infrastructure is built or rehabilitated, life-cycle cost analysis should be performed for all infrastructure systems to account for initial construction, operation, maintenance, environmental, safety and other costs reasonably anticipated during the life of the project.”
• Increase and improve infrastructure investment from all stakeholders. “All levels of government, owners and users must renew their commitment to infrastructure investments in all categories.”

Decades of underfunding and inattention have led to crumbling bridges and roads, imperiling the ability of our nation’s infrastructure to support our economy and facilitate our way of life. If the U.S. is to be competitive in today’s and tomorrow’s world, it is imperative to invest in its infrastructure.

“The problems our nation’s infrastructure faces are significant, and their impact on our personal and economic health is incredibly serious,” D. Wayne Klotz, ASCE president, said in a statement earlier this year. “However, this crisis is solvable.”

Below is the full slideshow version of the Ernst & Young and Urban Land Institute report. To better view the slideshow, click the “full screen” icon on the bottom of the box or click the link that takes you to slideshare.net.

Infrastructure2009