Public value
available now
For public bodies, agencies and non-profit organisations. You need to show what the action is worth to society, and that the benefits justify the spend.
Resilience creates value, but most investment decisions get made without a clear account of how much.
The scale of benefits relative to costs is not clear.There is friction between stakeholders.The best option is not obvious.You need reliable evidence, and you need it now.Whether public benefits, business-relevant metrics or enterprise worth, cascadiaen produces an evidence base illuminating value.
Bring us your problem, we do the rest:
Rapid Resilience Investment Assessment
Decision-relevant evidence, at a fraction of the time, cost and effort of a normal consultancy engagement.
Power your decision-making with economic evidence on the value that taking action will create. Delivered in days, not months. If the problem changes, the assessment can be rerun, not recommissioned. Robust, transparent, auditable, clear, concise. Illuminating.
Use it when you need to
Show value for money
Set out what benefits funding the action returns, in financial and non-financial value. Both the scale and where the value comes from.
Engage stakeholders
Demonstrate value to audiences with different priorities: communities, businesses, boards, investors, governments, whoever you want to bring along.
Compare options
Assess the alternatives and land on which to take further for appraisal, implementation or capital allocation.
Who is this for?
Public and non-profit sector bodies, small and large businesses, and the finance sector. Public value is the current focus, business and finance value to follow.
Business value
in build
For operational leadership and anyone building the case internally. You need resilience spending in the terms your finance team accepts: cash flows, NPV, IRR and payback.
Finance value
in build
For investors, asset owners and allocators. You need resilience in the terms you price with: valuation multiples, risk premia and exposure pricing.
What can it do?
Run any resilience investment case, in any sector or geography. The evidence could point to a yes, it could point to a no, or it could be inconclusive. Whichever it is, you will know what's driving it.
Coastal resilience programme, Caribbean island
A local government sizing a mangrove, reef and sea-defence package, with a funding case to build.
The case for acting is strong.
$3.48 of public value for every $1 spent, rising to $4.25 under a high climate pathway. The evidence indicates benefits well in excess of costs.
So the case for acting is strong, holds under every climate pathway tested, and goes straight into the funding application.
Data centre siting, two candidate sites
An operator and its lender choosing between two sites for the same facility, screening both before they commit.
Cooling is the main factor to focus on.
Picking the more exposed site costs US$151.7 million in public value over the assessment period. Liquid cooling cuts that to a fifth.
So the assessment points to cooling as the main factor to focus on, because it addresses water stress, the largest part of that cost.
Beach erosion protection, UK
A coastal authority with an idea and a brief but no data of its own, wanting a quick check on whether the scheme is worth pursuing.
A defensible ‘no’.
£0.55 of public value for every £1 spent. The scheme does not pay as currently framed, which signals the need to rework it to deliver the intended value.
So the answer is a defensible ‘no’ before a feasibility study is even commissioned, but one that points to where the returns could be improved.
Wildfire resilience options, British Columbia
A municipality choosing between two levels of intervention, weighing which one earns its cost.
Spending more is the better buy.
The heavier package returns C$2.12 of public value for every C$1 and C$8.8 million net; the lighter returns C$1.95 and C$4.7 million. Both clear their cost, and both return greater value as the climate worsens.
So spending more is the better buy on both counts, and the comparison is on the record before it goes to council.
How can you verify it?
Traceable and auditable. The engagement follows a cost-benefit analysis framework and produces a set of documents to be read together, tracing inputs, analysis and quality assurance to results you can stand behind.
-
Results
What the value is, where it comes from, and how it holds across scenarios. It comes in three forms: a live page for exploring the assessment, a briefing note, and an account summary.
Open a sample → -
Inputs register
Every input with its value, unit, source, publisher and licence, plus the reason it was set where it was. Signed off before the run.
Open a sample → -
Cost-benefit account
Each value stream by type, line by line, year by year to present value, with the totals that carry into the headline.
Open a sample → -
QA report
Automated checks at every gate and an independent review of the analysis, logged with what passed, what was flagged, and where the evidence is thin. A person decides before each gate clears.
Open a sample →
About
Jake Kuyer
Environmental economist with fifteen years of international experience putting defensible numbers on climate, nature and social outcomes, for government, business and non-profit clients.
More about Jake →AI governance disclosure
Self-assessment against all 72 subcategories of NIST AI RMF 1.0, with ISO 42001 cross-referenced through NIST's published crosswalk. The document records how each is addressed and discloses how cascadiaen uses AI to support analysis across engagements. It is developed and published by cascadiaen for transparency and is not a claim to certification.
See the disclosure →If you are trying to assess value or build a case for action on resilience, we can help.
Get in touch