The Regional Australia Institute (RAI) social infrastructure forum offered an opportunity to share insights from a national survey and discuss the key success factors framing social infrastructure as a development path in local communities. Hosted by the RAI in partnership with the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, the forum is part of a larger body of work around Social Infrastructure in Australia.

2. SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT –
WHAT WE KNOW?
DR LEONIE PEARSON

3. BEST PRACTICE SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDES
Structures:
Physical infrastructure
that is social in nature
and supports the health
and wellbeing of the
community;
Services:
Community service
systems that are
provided through a
community’s physical
assets;

4. FIVE KEY FACTORS UNDERPIN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Regional
Economic
Development
Infrastructure
•Economic assets
•Social hard structures/ assets
•Social – soft assets; availability of business
supports, civic and professional organisations
Vision for community & business
•Quality of leadership
•Shared aspirations with collective goals and
strategies
•Not inhibited by fear of failure
Collaborative activity
•Cooperative investment and joint projects
•Vertically and horizontally integrated
ownership patterns across industry sector
•Welcoming of new ideas & start-ups
•Social – processes; culture of trust and
reciprocity – formal & informal
Availability of capital for growth
• Locally aware lenders understand
business potential and value of
knowledge
•Affordable funds available for
investment in R&D
Innovative capacity
•Skilled, knowledgeable workforce
•Learning culture with flexibility to adapt
•Able to discard outdated practices
•Close linkages with specialist R&D
resources

5. • Lowers transaction costs;
• Decreases social control costs;
• Increases productivity;
• Stimulates investment; and
• Facilitates innovation.
ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Drug court program
Victoria, Participants;
employment rate x2
(11 to 25%), reduced
unemploy. (85 to
54%), and 23% less
reoffending rate
In California, a
benefit- cost ratio of
$2.60 benefit for
every $ invested in
pre-kindergarten
education programs
In UK, a benefit cost
ratio of £10 benefit
for every £ invested in
community networks &
services

6. BUT NOT ALL PROGRAMS CAN
REACH THESE CONCLUSIVE
ECONOMIC RETURNS
– WHY?

7. Reduce risk
Maintain Community
function
Strengthen
community capacity
Target: existing community
stakeholders
Aim: to replace, upgrade or
maintain current assets &
services
Target: existing community
& government
Aim: to meet projected
community needs and to
stimulate demand
Target: community,
government & business
Aim: to meet needs across
the community by improving
business ecosystems
Target: local and external
businesses & government
Aim: build business
innovation to stimulate local
growth opportunities
THE RATIONALE FOR SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT
Improve Business
ecosystem
Stimulate Innovation &
economic growth
Capture Opportunity

8. Inputs
•Local Governance
•Need alignment
•Resources
Activity
• Structures
• Services
• Processes
Outputs
•Skills
•Health & wellbeing
•Connections made
Impacts
• Community
• Economic
• Environmental
BEST PRACTICE SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS

9. What do we know about SI and
Regional Development?
• SI key to regional development; increases
productivity, stimulates growth and markets
• Not all SI relates to Economic development –
could be risk minimisation
• Best practice SI shows 4 steps – all can be
achieved for every SI project

10. SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DOES
CATALYSE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

11. HOW SOCIAL
INFRASTRUCTURE HELPED
DENMARK GROW
GREGG HARWOOD
11

12. PROJECT 300 (RIVERSIDE STORY)

13. DEMARK IS HERE (6000 POPULATION)
Economic Drivers:
• Tourism Peak
• Tourism off peak (wedding etc.)
• Caravan Parks
• Nature Based Tourism
• Housing Construction
• Beef, Dairy & Organic Farming
• Retirees & tree changers
• Tree farming

14. THE WORST CLUB HOUSE IN THE BEST STREET

15. PROJECT 300 (THE WORST CLUB HOUSE IN THE BEST STREET)

16. PROJECT 300 (THE WORST CLUB HOUSE IN THE BEST STREET)

17. PROJECT 300 (THE WORST CLUB HOUSE IN THE BEST STREET)

18. PROJECT 300 (THE WORST CLUB HOUSE IN THE BEST STREET)

19. IN 2009 THEY HAD SOME PROBLEMS
• The club had just knocked back an opportunity to go into a $1.5 million joint Country Club (golf & tennis)
because they did not want to leave their prime riverfront location.
• Their active membership was around 120 members and composed of mainly seniors on limited incomes
which made planning to build a new club house at $2 – 3 million impossible.
• They had grass greens that required a green keeper that consumed most of their income.
• The grass greens could not be used in winter or for some time after rain in the remainder of the year. This
limited their income.
• While the Shire of Denmark has a generous one third of project funding model and they could possibly
get another third in grants they did not have the income stream to support a low interest loan via the Shire
for the remainder.
• Even if all the other ducks lined up it would be difficult to justify a new club house when they had declined
to participate in the joint Country Club facility that was 1.5km down the road.
• Their active membership was around 120 members and composed of mainly seniors on limited incomes
which made planning to build a new club house at $2 – 3 million impossible.
• The age of their membership meant that strategizing for a long term project was difficult.

20. BUT THEY HAD SOME OPPORTUNITIES
• They are the only club with a prime riverfront location and there were dragon boat and canoeing clubs that were looking for a
base and there was no space left along the river bank as it is mainly treed.
• They had an interesting mix of retired professionals, business and construction industry/ project management people who
worked out with the help of the regional Dept. of Sport and Rec Club Development Officer that they needed a membership of
300 people and a year round income to finance the project.
• They worked out that if they replace d their grass greens with synthetic turf that dried out quickly using the 1/3 Shire, 1/3 grant
and one third club/ loan model the money they saved by not having a green keeper would easily pay off the loan. As it turned
the increase in the number of playing days as of a result of the quick dry turf significantly increased their income enabling them
to pay off their loan very quickly.
• Having proven that they could budget and payoff their synthetic turf loan early they set about strategising to build a new
facility. They realised that if they could work with other emerging water based clubs it would build their membership numbers,
even out their membership hump, bring people with news skills and energy into the club and make any grant applications they
made more compelling.
• They reached out to the emerging water based clubs and the Dragon Boating and Kayak Clubs responded and started to use
their facility. This relationship worked well and after 3 years the clubs amalgamated to form the Riverside Club bring their
combined membership to 200. The invigorated club started to hold regular social events and their income and membership base
has continued to grow and is now at 250.
• Given their diverse membership they had the opportunity to build a better club house. Which lead onto to Riverside Stage 2
which is a foreshore usage and infrastructure plan.

21. THEY CAME UP WITH THIS

22. THEY CAME UP WITH THIS

23. THEY CAME UP WITH THIS

24. THEY CAME UP WITH THIS

25. BUILDING FEATURES
The ability to seat 200 plus people for a function.
The largest “warm” function centre in Denmark. People travel form Perth to Denmark for weddings.
Designed to have a caterer/ manager.
Iconic building in iconic location that provides an entry statement for Denmark.
Designed to be used by multiple groups in multiple configurations.
The source of funds is as follows:
Commonwealth Development Grant $500,000
LotteryWest Grant (for construction) $271,333
Great Southern Development Commission Grant $ 12,800
Great Southern Development Commission Grant $200,000
Shire of Denmark Grant $490,852
Denmark Riverside Club cash contribution $280,087
Denmark Riverside Club Self Supporting Loan $450,000
Denmark Riverside Club in kind $ 26,928
Total $2,232,000
The club achieved a 9:1 leveraging of their $280,087 cash contribution.
The Clubs funding model is sustainable and it will not require ongoing contributions from government or Council.
Designed to attract new which it is doing their membership is approaching 300
Complete in August 2016

26. THE CHALLENGES
Keeping the group and the project together.
They had a robust business and project plan and Project Team to drive the project forward and Management Team to work on how
the building would work when complete and to focus on the details of fitout ect and some people were on both teams.
Having a succession plan that rotated club presidents at various stages in the project so that the right person with the right skills was
at the helm when those skills were needed and people did not get burnt out.
Getting the project in the local development que. The Shire’s generous 1/3 funding model, federal RDA and state government had
stimulated around $ 5 million in community projects in Denmark over the past 6 years. The Riverside team were so efficient that they
leap frogged an indoor heated pool project that the community subsequently reject causing some friction and a reduced state
government funding outcome.
Addressing members various rates of accepting change.
Retaining members and keeping cash flow up during the construction.
Giving people roles to do so that they could embrace and own the change. i.e. taking people with them.
The temporary club house they got a team of retired farmers and tradesman to relocate it and set it up.
The nearby houses they communicated early and kept them on board.
Holding a Richtfest or topping out party with snapps for members when the roof went on to thank the builders.
Convincing funding agencies that the whole project was not a “front” for a new bowling club rooms. The Feds and Shire got the multi
use aspects the State Dept. of Sport and Rec struggled with it and funding scenarios reflect this.
Adjacent Aboriginal Corrobboree Site and Fore shore Heritage issue generally. Advice from local elders was early in the project the
concept reflected their input.

27. THE TEMPORARY CLUB HOUSE (FAMERS AT WORK)

28. THE TEMPORARY CLUB HOUSE (FAMERS AT WORK)

29. THE TEMPORARY CLUB HOUSE (COMPLETE)

30. SITE ERECTED & PAINTED BY CLUB MEMBERS

31. SOCIAL & ECONOMIC BENEFITS

32. SOCIAL & ECONOMIC BENEFITS
Social
• By transitioning from the “seniors” bowling club to the multi generational Riverside Club the seniors
involved in the club have engaging relationships with younger people that carry into other areas of
the community.
• The club members have a more engaging relationship with Council.
• The club budgets to make a $5000 plus donation annually to other groups.
• The new club rooms will provide a warm winter meeting place for seniors in winter.
• The new club rooms will be used on casual basis by other clubs and individuals.

33. SOCIAL & ECONOMIC BENEFITS
Economic
• The new club will employ a manager and caters. This means another 2 jobs in town.
• $2.3 million dollars spent in the local region during construction.
• More conventions and weddings will come to town. The building has already helped Denmark secure
the 2017 AVAN convention. This will bring 300 AVAN campers to Denmark during the April 2017
off peak tourist season.
• The new club rooms will be self sustaining and not require future contributions from Council.
• The new club rooms will bowlers from inland towns to day trip to Denmark.
• The exercise and well being benefits associated with the club will help to reduce direct and allied
health service costs in Denmark.

34. WHAT IS AUSTRALIA DOING IN
SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE?

35. SURVEY RESPONSE

36. WHAT IS SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO YOU?
Aged
Care
Child Care Centres
Playgrounds
Community
Centres
Libraries
Rec Parks
Cultural Groups
Disability Support
Family Services
Health Centres
Hospitals

37. “The sky is the limit - key roles that provide organisational and community leadership”
WHO IS A SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRACTITIONER?
Community
Community Development
or Services Officer
Volunteer groups
Welfare Officers
Recreation Staff
Health
Health Support Services
Medical Staff
Emergency Services
Education
Teachers
Librarians
Arts Organisations
Child Care
Youth Care Workers
Sport and Rec Services

38. Maintain
community
function
Strengthen
Community
Capacity
Improve
Business
Ecosystem
Stimulate
Growth and
output
SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT TYPES
New St John
Ambulance
sub centre
in Broome.
Blackall
Childcare
Centre

39. HOW ARE SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE
PROJECTS FUNDED AND WHY?
Identifying
Community Need
Projects not
feasible without
funding assistance
Basis for Economic
& Community
Growth
• Community – philanthropic, family businesses
• Local – government, large companies with local base, e.g.
banks, water, newspapers
• State – Royalties for regions, Libraries, schools, recreation,
tourism
• Federal – Innovation, PM&C (Community Dev.), Work for the
Dole, exceptional circumstances, DIRD – NSRF,

40. UNFUNDED PROJECTS
Lack of community drive
Challenge to coordinate across relevant parties
Short term planning
Irregular schemes & difficult funding criteria
Lack of self sufficiency

41. Inputs
• Local Governance
• Need alignment
• Resources
Activity
• Structures
• Services
• Processes
Outputs
• Skills
• Health & wellbeing
• Connections made
Impacts
• Community
• Economic
• Environmental
METRICS ALONG THE SI PROJECT PATH
leadership; clans,
networks, hierarchies or
markets, need
alignment or make do;
$ spent & time,
qualitative description
# suppliers trained, #
places offered, % increase
in incomes, % decrease in
costs, % of consumption
% women return to
work v.s. pre-training
or % reduction vs. pre-
child care
$ business generated
by cost $

42. What do we know about social infrastructure
projects in Australia?
• Lots of people and portfolios involved
• Processes and longevity key to success in SI projects
• Insights;
• Lack of really good metrics for assessing SI
impacts – more that just $cost to $benefit
• Need for aligning rationale with impacts and
funding schemes
• Clarity on how to structure a project for success –
share capacity across the regions

43. HOW SOCIAL
INFRASTRUCTURE IS
HELPING GOULBURN
STRENGTHEN ITS
COMMUNITY
DR URSULA STEPHENS
43

44. DISCUSSION
Q1: WHY IS SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE KEY
TO REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT?
Q2: GETTING THE BEST OUT OF YOUR SI
PROJECTS – WHAT’S NEEDED?