On the ground, around the globe: Transit delivery uncovered

In conversation with Russell Jackson, AECOM’s global transit director

Australia and New Zealand are at a proverbial infrastructure crossroads. We’re partway through delivering on large-scale, city-defining projects, future-proofing the sector through digital advancements, and decarbonising our networks. We’re approaching all of this in the face of ageing infrastructure and federal and state funding constraints.

But challenge is the driver of innovation, which is why the timing of my conversation with AECOM global transit leader Russell Jackson couldn’t have been better. 

I sat down with Russell following his visit to the Australia and New Zealand region to draw insights from his highly impressive, vast knowledge bank, built from decades of global experience.  

Russell is our executive director for the U.K.’s High Speed Two (HS2) Interchange Station. His experience includes large-scale redevelopments like the Birmingham New Street Gateway Station (at its inception Europe’s largest building refurbishment). He’s led a 10-year, £2 billion railway systems renewal program across Southern England and Wales; major electrification projects; Gautrain railway in South Africa; and supported the NEOM Spine railway in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and VIA High Frequency Rail (HFR) in Canada.

Ray: As you know, funding constraints are a major challenge for us in Australia and New Zealand. Can you discuss the moving of projects quickly from concept to delivery, ‘speed to spade’?

Russell: There is a global industry debate around whether it’s best to avoid committing to fixed schedules and budgets for megaprojects; but political realities and the outcome needs of communities mean that in reality it’s often difficult to sustain broad targets as projects develop. With a clear project definition, a secure funding stream, and a fixed goal tied to a non-negotiable delivery date, project leaders create the right cultural mindset for speed and focus.  

A great example of this is the Northumberland Line project, the fastest consenting rail project of its kind and the largest third-party rail scheme in the U.K.. We applied what we call a ‘no regrets’ decision-making approach. This means making confident decisions early, without second-guessing or constantly revisiting alternatives. It’s a mindset you often see in time-critical projects like the Olympics, where there’s no room for delay. 

To make this happen, you need stakeholder alignment around that agreed, fixed end goal. Everyone, from the project team to government and suppliers, needs to buy into a shared sense of urgency. 

Another enabler of success is process simplification. If you have a high-performing, well-aligned team across leadership, supply chain and delivery, you can streamline or even remove some of the standard processes that aren’t necessary for that specific project. But that only works if the team is skilled enough to assess risks properly, and if leaders are willing to empower the team to challenge the status quo.

Ray: On the topic of funding, what can you share with us about land value capture? We’ve seen it used on a few big projects in Australia, and explored it as a concept in New Zealand, but its use is still limited.

Russell: Rail and transit projects are about connecting communities, but they’re also about unlocking housing, jobs and economic growth. If you link land value capture to that broader outcome, like new housing, you tie project success to a financial return. You’ve also tied your decision making and funding sources to bank commitments and agreements with landholders, which plays its part in accelerating project delivery.

Ray: AECOM is always looking for cross-sector learnings. Are there lessons in delivering major programs that are transferable between rail and road?

Russell: That’s an interesting question.  

Transferability depends heavily on the region and the maturity of the sector. Around the world, there are significant differences between sectors when it comes to things like digitisation, contract strategies and collaborative delivery models. Rather than saying one sector is better than another, we need to look at where best practice exists. 

For example, in the U.K., the rail industry hasn’t delivered many brand new railways in recent decades. That means it’s had less experience with things like land acquisition, engaging with adjacent landowners and managing complex early-stage consenting processes, whereas the roads sector has dealt with those issues more routinely. In hindsight, high-speed rail in the U.K. could have benefited from applying that knowledge earlier. 

One of the rail industry’s weaknesses is that it tends to look inward. It often doesn’t seek lessons or innovations from outside the sector. But it’s not just roads we can learn from. There’s also a lot of value in looking at vertical infrastructure, commercial buildings or even the tech industry. These sectors have made significant strides in things like design automation, attracting private investment and accelerating delivery.

Ray: What role has digital played in transit innovation? How is the transit sector adopting digital technology for efficiencies and value for money?

Russell: A few years ago, we saw widespread adoption of building information modeling (BIM) in many regions, often mandated by the public sector and embraced by the supply chain. But adoption is still uneven globally, especially when it comes to fully integrating BIM across design and construction. At AECOM, we’ve moved beyond that phase and are focused on what comes next. 

Digital should be used to tackle real challenges: affordability, capital cost increases, reducing carbon and speeding up delivery. Tools like design-to-cost and design-to-carbon, when supported by digital platforms, can be game changers. Projects like Auckland’s City Rail Link are starting to apply this thinking, but we need broader adoption. 

Embedding these digital tools shifts the culture of delivery. It makes cost and carbon more visible and manageable from the start, without compromising quality. 

Another big opportunity is in Design for Manufacture and Assembly (DfMA). There’s still a long way to go when linking digital design with standardised, efficient construction. Clients should expect and demand more of this from their contractors, and we need to lead that change. 

A good example is Spain’s high-speed rail success, which outpaces the U.K. and United States (U.S.). How did they achieve that? Well, at least one of the key pieces to their speed of delivery is standardisation. If we can connect standardisation, digital tools and DfMA, that’s a powerful combination to drive momentum … especially for complex, large-scale transit like high-speed rail.

Ray: That’s a great segue into my next question. There’s a lot of willpower to get high-speed rail, properly moving in Australia. What’s your impression of our readiness?

Russell: In terms of readiness, the first thing you need is consistent political support, and Australia has a real opportunity with political support in place. But success will depend on learning from global experience.  

A key challenge is policy and planning approvals. In Spain, high-speed rail is treated as national infrastructure, with a streamlined and standardised consent process. This balances national benefits with local impacts and helps keep delivery fast and affordable. In contrast, the U.K.’s multiple layers of consent, national and local, have slowed progress and increased costs. 

Right-of-way acquisition is another critical issue. In the U.S., particularly California, acquiring land, even between government bodies, has caused major delays. Australia may face fewer issues if much of the land is federally owned, but alignment across public agencies is essential. 

Ultimately, Australia needs a policy and planning framework that enables delivery at speed, with clarity, consistency, and alignment between stakeholders. Projects like Canada’s High-Frequency, High Speed Rail (Alto) are actively redefining these frameworks, and Australia should look closely at those lessons.

Ray: Are there other lessons from global projects we in ANZ should consider?

Russell: Definitely, and what I’ll say is that we are the largest engineering and program management consultant in this sector in the world. We’ve been involved in these projects across countries and continents, and we’re best positioned to share what’s worked and also the pain points.   

Contracting strategy is a big one. In both the U.K.’s HS2 and the U.S.’s California HSR, projects moved forward with large contract packages but limited early design or site investigation. That approach created major challenges down the line. 

This doesn’t mean Australia must do excessive pre-work, but contracts must include clear incentives for timely delivery. And critically, clients must also be part of that cultural shift—supporting rapid decisions, fast funding approvals, and “no regrets” decision-making. 

To deliver quickly, you need alignment between contractors, the client team, and the broader supply chain, all working within a culture that prioritises pace and outcome over rigid process. Contracts like New Engineering Contract 4 (NEC4), which are widely used in the U.K., focus on early risk identification and joint problem-solving to deliver outcomes.

Ray: Some great learnings for us to consider as we have these conversations. Rapid fire, if you had to pick three key trends shaping the future of transit, what are they?

Russell: First, that transit is increasingly seen not just as transport, but as a driver of housing, economic growth and social connection. Projects must stay focused on these broader community outcomes, not just building infrastructure for its own sake. 

Second, the growing pressure to reduce carbon and build climate-resilient networks. This doesn’t have to mean higher cost. It requires smarter design, challenging outdated standards and leveraging tools like ScopeX to deliver low-carbon solutions affordably. 

Finally, use of collaborative delivery models. Success is improving where clients bring together funders, operators, contractors and communities early — moving away from rigid hierarchies to more integrated leadership and delivery teams. 

I also spoke with Mark Southwell, AECOM’s executive vice president and chief executive of the transportation global business line, during his visit to the region, read our conversation here.