Calls for consolidated infrastructure planning grow as global race to prepare for AI economy intensifies

From Washington to Berlin to Seoul, governments are locked in an infrastructure race as urgent as any arms buildup, betting that the aging power grids, roads and water systems of the last century won't be able to carry the weight of an AI-driven economy.

The United States has effectively launched a nationwide infrastructure overhaul. The Inflation Reduction Act, introduced under the previous Joe Biden administration, championed a "return of manufacturing" and focused on reviving the competitiveness of clean energy industries such as solar power and batteries, which had fallen behind China. At the same time, the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 set in motion repairs to roads, bridges, railways, public transit and the power grid.

In effect, the United States pursued the growth of advanced industries alongside the expansion of the power and logistics infrastructure needed to support them. U.S. President Donald Trump, while skeptical of clean energy, has also been active in improving infrastructure in energy and shipbuilding, drawing on investment from other countries.

Germany, once Europe's economic locomotive but now mired in a recent downturn, has also taken a resolute approach. Judging that aging infrastructure was behind the decline in its manufacturing competitiveness, Berlin has moved toward large-scale spending even at the cost of shaking its longstanding commitment to a balanced budget.

Since last year, the German federal government has been rolling out a special infrastructure and climate-neutrality fund worth 500 billion euros ($577 billion). The fund sits outside the general budget, allowing the government to borrow on a large scale without running afoul of the so-called debt brake — a constitutional cap on new borrowing that has long constrained German spending. Money from the fund has begun flowing into social infrastructure such as transportation and digital networks, along with climate-neutral projects.

Countries are also busy overhauling governance structures. Infrastructure projects are often carried out separately by different ministries and facilities, with different agencies responsible for stages ranging from planning to construction to maintenance and repair. This has led to frequent cases of delayed project selection or poor management, prompting efforts to fix fragmented decision-making systems.

Britain merged the National Infrastructure Commission and the Infrastructure and Projects Authority in 2025 to create the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (Nista). Nista establishes a 10-year strategy spanning transportation, electricity and water, and manages major projects within a single portfolio, aiming to improve consistency between planning and execution. Based on this, London plans to invest at least 725 billion pounds ($980 billion) in infrastructure over 10 years starting in 2025.

Australia operates an independent advisory body on national infrastructure, which evaluates the priority of nationally significant projects across transportation, water, energy, telecommunications and social infrastructure together. Major projects receiving 250 million Australian dollars ($176 million) or more in federal government support are subject to evaluation. The commission also recommends to the government which major national projects should be given priority consideration over the next 10 years.

Calls are growing in Korea, too, for a system to integrate and coordinate infrastructure plans currently scattered across different ministries. In April, 36 lawmakers jointly proposed an act on national infrastructure with the core provision being the establishment of a national infrastructure commission under the president to deliberate and decide on cross-ministry infrastructure strategy, investment priorities and the designation and evaluation of strategic projects. The prime minister and a private-sector member appointed by the president would serve as co-chairs.

"In the past, industrial complexes were designated first, and only then did we think about supplying water, electricity and roads. Going forward, industrial siting and infrastructure need to be considered together from the start," said Han Seung-heon, a professor in the department of civil and environmental engineering at Yonsei University and president of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers. "Korea, too, needs to strengthen its ability to link different infrastructure plans — for power, water and roads — and adjust priorities, as Australia has done."

BY JANG WON-SEOK [lee.jian@joongang.co.kr]