SIEMENS INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSITION MONITOR 2023
The great divide on the path to net zero
How divisive issues and different pathways threaten the speed, scalability and efficiency of the infrastructure transition
Mission statement
The Siemens Infrastructure Transition Monitor explores the state of the infrastructure transition, the urgent priorities, and the path ahead for business and government leaders who must work together to responsibly evolve the world's infrastructure.
The Monitor was developed to inspire greater and faster real-world impact in the modernization, expansion, and decarbonization of energy, buildings, mobility, and industries.
The program also emphasizes innovation. Constructing and operating the next generation of infrastructure will be enabled by the world’s best technologies, data-driven strategies, and hundreds of big ideas.
Within this context, the Siemens Infrastructure Transition Monitor advocates three imperatives:
1. Infrastructure transition must make a positive impact beyond decarbonization
This research is deliberately broad, recognizing that the world needs to reshape infrastructure – not only to decarbonize energy systems and industrial operations, but also to improve resource efficiency and deliver positive socioeconomic impacts. Major infrastructure changes are an opportunity for progress in all these domains, so projects should target a broad set of goals.
2. Smarter infrastructure integration is mandatory
With so much of the world set to change so fast, we can‘t afford to think, or act, in silos. There‘s a great need for joined-up strategies, idea sharing, and close coordination between governments and industries. Collaboration and innovative technology solutions will deliver smarter integrations between the diverse elements of infrastructure that underpin our world.
3. Top speed is the only acceptable pace for infrastructure transition
Finally, the critical urgency of the infrastructure transition is what sets it apart from other megatrends that change the world. Never before have leaders – from communities, businesses, and government – shared such a great collective responsibility to rapidly reshape the world toward the same outcomes. This research reminds all of us that we have a profound need to act urgently to protect humanity and Earth’s biodiversity.
What is the great divide?
All the countries, businesses, and citizens of the world entered this era of transition from different starting points, with unequal resources, diverse philosophies, and specific challenges. As a result, we now see many different transition speeds and pathways toward the cleaner, smarter infrastructure of the future.
The infrastructure transition also spans many dilemmas, divisive issues, and difficult decisions. There are several live debates about major choices, such as the viability of carbon capture and storage, the role of green and blue hydrogen, the best types of energy storage, the use of carbon pricing mechanisms, whether to build new or retrofit – the list could go on and on.
Only 52% of senior executives say their country has a consistent decarbonization strategy, and just 47% say it‘s effective
This research finds the world divided on many of these big issues, while a gulf has opened between the accelerating transitions of leading organizations and nations and those that are far behind. Different contexts and opinions are normal, of course, but in today’s world we can‘t afford the inefficiencies and delays they can cause.
“The infrastructure transition is urgent, and the consequences of delay are severe,” says Matthias Rebellius, Managing Board Member of Siemens AG and CEO of Smart Infrastructure. "To reverse, or at least slow down global warming – and to make the world more resilient to climate change – we need to transform our infrastructure at unprecedented speed and scale. To do this, we need greater alignment, collaboration, and standardization.”
On many of the infrastructure transition goals investigated in this research, we find similar numbers of respondents at both ends of the progress scale. This is the case across each of the three Spheres of influence we explore: regions, cities, and industries.
Respondents are also divided on the likelihood of decarbonization outcomes for their organizations:
Accelerating decarbonization efforts in the year ahead
Likely: 46%
Unlikely: 31%
Meeting decarbonization targets for this year
Likely: 40%
Unlikely: 36%
Meeting decarbonization targets for 2030
Likely: 44%
Unlikely: 34%
We might hope to find common ground on the big issues. But that’s not what the research finds.
We asked respondents how well aligned and unified citizens, business, and government are on seven major transition issues – from the need to accelerate decarbonization to ensuring energy supplies are secure and affordable. On average, the results finds that there are three groups:
How aligned and unified are citizens, businesses, and government?
Fully or mostly aligned and unified
Semi-aligned and semi-unified
Fully or mostly misaligned and disunified
Similar fragmentation was evident across many more specific issues we investigated. In many areas – within industries, cities, countries, and regions – divided opinions and different contexts are a threat to the speed, scale, and efficiency of the infrastructure transition. Our research doesn’t have all the answers, but we want to raise important questions and stimulate debate. By doing so, we hope to build consensus on which gaps matter most and how to start closing them.
What are the three Spheres?
The three ‘Spheres’ of this research refer to three domains of significant power and influence. Each has a different relationship with the infrastructure transition, but the issues, challenges, and opportunities of each Sphere are overlapping and interdependent.
In each Sphere we examine current progress and future priorities for a set of core infrastructure transition goals. The infrastructure transition is a giant topic, so for this research we have selected a focus area for each Sphere:
