Infrastructure investment plan 2021-22 to 2025-26: lessons learned
We will publish a draft infrastructure strategy for consultation in January 2026. We've published this lessons learned evaluation of the current strategy to guide future decision making.
2. Methods
This process review has been carried out by social researchers in the Exchequer analysis team. The design was informed by the Magenta Book guidance, which suggest that process evaluations are appropriate when asking:
“What can be learned from how the intervention was delivered?”
And more specifically:
- what worked well and less well, and why?
- what could be improved?
- how has the context influenced delivery?
Given limited resources, this review is proportionate. It does not include a Theory of Change, though this may be useful for the Infrastructure team to consider in developing the new Infrastructure Strategy (for example, what outcomes can the new strategy expect to achieve, and can the process for how those outcomes be achieved be mapped out?).
2.1 Focus Groups
Evidence was gathered primarily through focus groups. (Individual interviews were offered but not taken up). Four focus groups were run as set out in Table 1 below:
| Focus Group | Number of participants |
|---|---|
| Focus Group 1: Members of Infrastructure Investment Board (IIB) and other portfolio investment and finance decision makers (these were senior SG staff from various portfolios) – these are referred to as “SG officials” in this report | 5 |
| Focus Group 2: Members of Infrastructure Investment Board (IIB) and other portfolio investment and finance decision makers (as above, senior SG staff from various portfolios) – these are referred to as “SG officials” in this report | 4 |
| Focus Group 3: Staff from scrutiny bodies - the Scottish Parliament Information Centre, and Audit Scotland - these are referred to as “staff from scrutiny bodies” | 2 |
| Focus Group 4: External industry experts (represented at PIPAG) – these are referred to as “external experts” | 3 |
A total of 14 people participated in the focus groups. The focus groups were not intended to be representative, but the small size of the groups, and the expertise of the participants, enabled some in depth discussions.
Notes were collected during interviews, and the discussions transcribed on Microsoft Teams. These notes and transcriptions have been held temporarily by the social researchers and will be destroyed once the write up of the focus groups has been finalised. All comments made in the focus groups have been anonymised in this report.
2.2 Review of documents
In addition to the focus groups, a collection of relevant documents was reviewed. These were mainly documents and information referred to by focus groups members. This was intended to follow up the specific references made and did not represent a full literature review.
2.3 Discussion with Planning Infrastructure and Place Advisory Group
The (draft) results of the evaluation were discussed with the Planning Infrastructure and Place Advisory Group (PIPAG) in August. This includes internal and external members. This represented the final stage of gathering views for the evaluation, and the feedback from PIPAG are summarised in this report.