By Michelle McCormick, Policy Director, Infrastructure New Zealand
Back in March this year, the New Zealand Government hosted the Infrastructure Investment Summit. This was an opportunity to showcase the government’s economic growth agenda and signal to the world that New Zealand was open for business. Ministers and the Prime Minister laid out a vision of an ambitious, reform-driven agenda designed to accelerate infrastructure development and growth across health, education, justice, corrections, transport, renewable energy, aquaculture, and more. The invitation was issued to the global investing community to help us achieve our infrastructure ambition.
A significant programme of reforms, designed to make Aotearoa New Zealand a more attractive location for global investors, was outlined and included regulatory setting changes such as a new fast-tracking approvals regime, interim amendments to the Resource Management Act, and a planned wholesale replacement of the outdated 34-year-old legislation.
There have been regulatory setting changes for our energy sector, as well as further changes that aim to enable investment, such as the new frameworks for public-private partnerships (PPPs) and market-led proposals. The invitation was directed at global investors, urging them to partner with New Zealand to deliver a transformative infrastructure pipeline. The signal was to domestic audiences – the government was serious about creating the right conditions for investment.
Fast-forward five months to August’s Building Nations Conference, and the question on everyone’s mind was whether New Zealand really measures up globally. Has our reform agenda shifted perceptions, or are we still falling behind in the competition for international capital?
The global benchmark: spending high, delivering low
Research from Te Waihanga (the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission), provides a sobering backdrop. Te Waihanga’s benchmarking shows that New Zealand sits in the top 10 per cent of OECD countries for infrastructure spending as a percentage of GDP. Yet, for infrastructure efficiency, we languish in the bottom 10 per cent of high-income nations. In other words, we spend more than most, but we get less back. For every dollar invested, the outcomes in service quality, durability and reliability trail our peers. This paradox – high input, low return – is well understood by investors. For global capital, efficiency is everything.
What investors are really looking for
Building Nations underscored that the world’s investment flows are now being shaped by two powerful, interconnected forces:
- The energy transition: trillions of dollars is being directed into renewables, grid resilience and low‑carbon industries.
- The rise of artificial intelligence (AI): from data centres to transport optimisation, AI is fuelling demand for new forms of infrastructure, while dramatically increasing energy needs.
International investors are seeking jurisdictions that can align these twin forces. They want certainty in the rules, stability in governance and credibility in pipelines. In this respect, New Zealand still enjoys some natural advantages: a reputation for transparency, low corruption and relative geopolitical stability in a turbulent world. But reputation only gets you so far.
Investors consistently emphasised three fundamentals:
- visible, bankable pipelines rather than ad hoc projects
- stable regulatory settings and bipartisan policy support
- skilled domestic partners, both in the workforce and in communities.
These elements reduce risk, build trust and give confidence that capital will generate long-term returns. Without them, our small scale and geographic distance become barriers rather than attractions.
The role of partnerships
Another theme at Building Nations was the importance of partnerships. International capital rarely lands in isolation. Deals depend on the depth of local capability and the willingness of communities to engage.
New Zealand’s iwi, with their intergenerational outlook and emphasis on stewardship, were highlighted as natural partners for long-term investment. Equally, our engineering, planning and legal expertise must be strengthened to give investors confidence that they are working with credible, capable teams.
Upskilling the workforce is particularly urgent. Global investors stressed that without local delivery capacity, even the best-financed projects falter. A shortage of skilled labour in construction and engineering is not just a workforce issue; it is a barrier to capital. Our current brain drain across the Tasman is a concern in this respect.
Getting the settings right
What separates investment-ready nations from aspirants is not simply the size of their cheque books, but the quality of their institutional frameworks.
Panellists pointed to international exemplars, such as London’s Elizabeth Line and Perth’s Capital Square developments. These were not just infrastructure projects; they were catalysts for urban transformation, tightly integrated with housing and economic growth strategies, with strong institutional alignment. They worked because they were embedded in long-term, bipartisan frameworks that gave investors certainty and confidence.
For New Zealand, the lesson is clear: reforms need to be embedded in a coherent narrative backed by political consensus. Bipartisan support is more than a nicety; it is the currency of confidence.
Other enablers matter, including:
- independent project analysis to ensure credible business cases and delivery capability
- social licence built through engagement and transparency; a strong vision that is owned and supported by the nation also helps
- collaborative leadership across government, industry and communities.
These are not luxuries, but rather are prerequisites for attracting serious, long-term investors.
Canada and Ireland: lessons in certainty
Infrastructure New Zealand’s international delegations also provide an opportunity to observe some best practice. In Canada, institutions such as Infrastructure Canada and the C$35-billion Canadian Infrastructure Bank provide independent, centralised vehicles that de-risk investment and attract private capital. Canada’s models emphasise early contractor involvement, structured risk allocation and sustained community engagement. The result is greater certainty, better delivery and deeper pools of capital.
In Ireland, the National Development Plan stretches over nine years, and is updated regularly, with projects rarely cancelled despite political change. This consistency has built confidence in motorway, light rail and urban regeneration projects. Political cycles are managed so that infrastructure momentum is not lost. A five-year electoral term is also helpful in this regard.
Singapore and Hong Kong: lessons in systems and scale
Singapore’s success has rested on five pillars – bipartisan vision, integrated planning, supportive legislation, government investment in strategic assets, and trusted PPPs. Its evolving master plans, updated each decade, have transformed the nation’s urban landscape while positioning it for future industries in digital connectivity, AI, and agrifood. A clear and shared understanding of what infrastructure will enable is a real strength.
New Zealand has a clear need to improve its productivity, and can look to examples such as Hong Kong for productivity and coordination lessons. Mandating technology use such as building information modelling (BIM), investing in detailed workforce planning, and moving to programmatic rather than project-by-project delivery means they are well on their way to achieving their target of gains of 30–45 per cent in construction.
Both cases show that to move the needle, isolated successes are not enough. System-wide coordination, digital transformation and strong delivery capability are required. For New Zealand, the National Infrastructure Plan is the vehicle, but only if we commit to it with discipline.
Towards market attraction: what must be done
If New Zealand is to lift its global market attraction, several actions are non-negotiable:
- Bipartisan commitment: Lock in a National Infrastructure Plan, including some key nation-building projects that survive electoral cycles. Core elements such as project pipelines, road pricing frameworks and environmental commitments must be agreed across parties.
- Credible pipelines: Move beyond one-off announcements to clearly sequenced programmes that logically and actively consider phasing, spatial, and resource constraints.
- Institutional capability: Consider establishing a New Zealand Infrastructure Bank or similar vehicle to bridge financing gaps, de-risk projects and attract international capital.
- Workforce strategy: Link immigration, vocational training and industry partnerships to create a sustainable workforce pipeline. Talent retention is as important as talent attraction.
- Productivity and digital transformation: Embrace technologies such as BIM, prefabrication, and robotics across the industry, and coordinate at a national scale.
Structure and certainty above all
New Zealand has taken important steps to signal openness to investment. Reforms to planning law, new PPP frameworks, and the articulation of an ambitious agenda are welcome. But compared to peers, we remain at risk of being seen as a small, uncertain market with big ambitions but insufficient follow-through.
The message from international investors is stark – capital is not the constraint, structure and certainty are everything.
If New Zealand wants to compete in the global marketplace for infrastructure capital, we must provide what investors prize above all: confidence that projects will be delivered, pipelines will endure, and politics will not derail progress.
Our challenge is not convincing investors to take our calls; it is convincing them to stay for the long term.