Key points include:
- Ultimately, whether services are in public or private ownership, a long-term approach to asset management and investment is needed, supported by sensible regulation, good governance and accountability in order to ensure best value for consumers.
- Public support for nationalisation as a binary concept is high, but more needs to be done to close the information deficit about the tangible benefits private investment delivers.
- Nationalisation of rail would have marginal short-term impacts, but in the longer-term an integrated network could improve decision-making and efficiency.
- At present, the water and energy sectors are funded almost wholly by private investment. There is a real risk that outright nationalisation would see investors move their capital elsewhere, with the public sector then needing to meet the investment requirements for much-needed infrastructure improvements.
ICE Discussion Paper: Potential implications of the nationalisation of infrastructure
Content type: Policy
Last updated: 2018
You may also be interested in@headerSize>

- Type
- Webinar
Climate change and urban flooding: why we fail to manage water in the built environment
Explore the growing challenges of water management, including urban flooding, declining public trust and climate pressures. Learn about the barriers to implementation and discover why we need more industry-wide reflection on effective, scalable solutions.
Guest blogger

- Type
- Infrastructure blog
Can AI help keep major infrastructure projects alive?
The UK’s infrastructure challenge is also a continuity challenge, writes ICE Policy Fellow Dr Samer Ali.

- Type
- Awards and competitions
‘Show others what can be achieved’: ICE’s Fellowship campaign shortlisted for national award
The ICE Connects: Women in Fellowship network is up for a prize at the 2026 Inspiring Women in Construction and Engineering Awards.