Like many of us, I took part in CIHT CLIMATES.  Climate Change is an existential issue for humanity with Appraisal being the beating heart for change to the Status Quo.

The CIHT CLIMATES report states:

“Appraisal is a key tool for shaping if not dictating political decisions on investment. Appraisal guidance informs how this process is carried out and in turn has a big influence on which projects and programmes get the green light. Appraisal guidance and practice are always at risk of failing to keep pace with a changing world (or a world that needs to be changed). Many CLIMATES participants expressed strong concern about this in relation to climate action.”

It goes on to make the following recommendation:

“Transport investment priorities should be reviewed – by governments, academia, and industry – to ensure clear and appropriate priority is given in the appraisal process to low‑carbon outcomes, resilience, and adaptation, all with future wellbeing in mind.”

As a CIHT Champion on Appraisal and also responsible for managing one of the three appraisal guidance approaches in use in the UK, I have been asked to consider this recommendation.

The first point to make is that Appraisal Guidance does not and cannot make policy. Whilst the outcome of an appraisal may lead to policy change, the appraisal process can only consider existing policy.  Thus priority to low-carbon outcomes, resilience, and adaptation, with future wellbeing in mind, can only be given if and when that is the policy of the government. 

The core principles of appraisal philosophy are exceptionally stable.  The ROAMEF principle set out in the HMT Green Book has been around since at least 2003 (oldest copy of the Green Book I can get my hands on).  What does change though is the policy context in which we work.  Whether you’re looking in STAG, TAG or WelTAG, all three stress the importance of interventions fitting with policy.

STAG:

“As part of your options appraisal, you will need to assess how options perform against current Scottish Government policy objectives.”

WelTAG:

“Select options that are a strategic fit with Welsh Government policy and deliver demonstrable well-being benefits.”

TAG:

“The Five Case approach shows whether schemes are supported by a robust case for change that fits with wider public policy objectives – the ‘strategic case’”

Fortunately, in relation to the CIHT CLIMATES recommendation, Scottish, Welsh and UK policy on Climate Change vary but they do all point toward low-carbon, resilience, adaptation and future wellbeing. Scotland, Wales, United Kingdom

Thus, I would argue that appraisal guidance inherently keeps up to date with government policy.  What about appraisal practice though?

When I meet with my counterparts in the UK and Welsh governments, appraisal practice often leaves a lot to be desired.  Why is this?  I can’t claim to know all the reasons, but these are some common issues that I have encountered in relation to why climate policy is not considered:

• Copy and Paste.  This isn’t a problem unique to our sector.  It’s also a problem that may also be exacerbated by the increasing use of Large Language Model AI which is inherently trained on historic studies.
  Using a previous study as a template for a new study obviously saves time and money and in the dog eat dog world of consultancy ... However, over-reliance means new policies are missed.
• Risk aversion to a different approach.  This is strongly linked to the Copy and Paste problem and applies in both the private and public sector.  Project X got approved, so if we do Project Y the same way … and building on new policy being missed it means that those aspects are not fully understood.
• Using the wrong policies.  The distinction between policy and process can be hard to untangle.  For example, an appraisal following STAG will use many of the processes set out in TAG – we don’t duplicate for the sake of duplication.  However, the DfT ‘Value for Money Framework’ is policy and does not apply in Scotland.  Similarly, I have been given appraisals in Scotland where Welsh government policy of BCRs presented with and without travel-time savings, has been applied.
• CPD.  We all know it’s important to keep up to date and understand the national, regional, local context of the appraisal being undertaken, but it takes time away from the day job and we’re all busy.  As a CPD reviewer for CTPP registrants, I see that keeping abreast of changes in policy is rarely high priority. Even as a Civil Servant, it is hard to keep on up to date on policy development, but if you work in appraisal it is essential.

Whilst I’ve got your attention talking about issues in appraisal practice specifically related to climate change, I’ll tack on some other poor appraisal practices that I see for you to think about.

• Hubris.  You’ve got the MSc, you’ve got the post-nominals, you’ve spent your career studying transport planning: “Why don’t these people understand that I already know the answer and make me waste all this time and effort justifying it?”  OK, that’s hyperbole, but is a natural frustration.
• Solution led. “Can you do an appraisal of a new railway station please?” No!  You appraise a problem or an opportunity, not a solution.
• Missing the big picture. Every penny you save with short-cuts at the appraisal stage will cost you a pound as the scheme progresses. Carpenters know this – measure twice, cut once.
• Forgetting that transport is a derived demand.  I know it’s a hackneyed phrase, but the outcomes of what we do are not about travel and traffic, but about reducing inequalities, helping deliver inclusive economic growth, improving our health and wellbeing and of course not forgetting, to take climate action!

Questions for you to ponder.

1.    Are you going to events held by your nation’s appraisal teams?  For example, in Scotland, we have an Appraisal and Modelling User Group.  The DfT have their annual TAGfest.

2.    Is your appraisal being led by a Chartered Professional (CTPP or CEng who specialising in planning) who really keeps their CPD up to date?

3.    Are you really keeping up to date with the relevant guidance on sifting your intervention options?

CIHT CLIMATES was published a year ago, this is part of a short series to update CIHT members and sector around the latest thinking on CIHT CLIMATES in 2026.

CIHT CLIMATES - extracts

Appraisal is a key tool for shaping if not dictating political decisions on investment. Appraisal guidance informs how this process is carried out and in turn has a big influence on which projects and programmes get the green light. Appraisal guidance and practice are always at risk of failing to keep pace with a changing world (or a world that needs to be changed). Many CLIMATES participants expressed strong concern about this in relation to climate action.

Recommendation
Transport investment priorities should be reviewed – by governments, academia, and industry – to ensure clear and appropriate priority is given in the appraisal process to low carbon outcomes, resilience, and adaptation, all with future wellbeing in mind.

Possible considerations
Appraisal priorities and processes are subject to periodic reviews. Examples include the HM Treasury Green Book Review (2020), The Wales Roads Review and the tests it developed (2023), and recent revision (for England) of the National Networks National Policy Statement (2024). Across the highways and transportation sector it remains unclear to what extent appraisal appropriately addresses the imperative of climate action. Recent work by the Road Investment Scrutiny Panel (2023) suggested significant scope for reflection and possible change. The devolution agenda for England further lends weight to addressing the importance of the role of appraisal in stifling or enabling climate action. This recommendation would be bolstered if review activity is sought and funded by government(s), thereby giving a mandate for and impetus to such work. With or without such direct support, it would be helpful to consider a comparative examination of appraisal guidance across the UK and its devolved nations to help reveal strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for appraisal and investment decisions.