## 5 Discussion of the Australian HSR Risks
### Summary of Recommendations  
The following recommendations are based on the findings from the previous sections. They are presented using a research-based recommendation structure as outlined by [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2018). These objectives are presented in an industry-ready manner, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt}} \hline \hline
**Risk Category** & **Risk Description** & **Likelihood** & **Impact** & **Risk Level** & **Mitigation Strategy** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Cost and Time Overruns} & Budget blowouts due to inaccurate forecasting, delays in land acquisition, procurement, and approvals. & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{Critical} & \multicolumn{2}{p{56.9 pt}}{Use Reference Class Forecasting (RCF) to compare similar projects; employ range-based budgeting instead of fixed estimates; ensure early land acquisition before central contracts.} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Construction Risks} & Unforeseen site conditions, tunnelling challenges, heritage site issues, and supply chain disruptions. & \multirow{6}{*}{Medium-High} & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{Major} & \multicolumn{2}{p{56.9 pt}}{Conduct detailed geotechnical investigations before work begins; implement Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) to detect risks early; establish supplier agreements for critical materials.} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Political Risks} & Change in government priorities leading to funding withdrawal or policy shifts. & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{Critical} & \multicolumn{2}{p{56.9 pt}}{Secure bipartisan support and frame HSR as a Regional Economic Development (RED) initiative instead of a transport project; ensure public engagement to create political pressure for continuity.} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Market Readiness} & Lack of private sector interest due to high capital costs and long project timelines. & \multirow{6}{*}{Medium} & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{Major} & \multicolumn{2}{p{56.9 pt}}{Break down projects into smaller work packages to reduce financial barriers; offer incentives like risk-sharing models; explore international expertise via global tenders.} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Risk Allocation} & Contractors refuse to take on excessive risk, leading to disputes and claims. & \multirow{6}{*}{Medium-High} & \multirow{6}{*}{Medium} & \multirow{6}{*}{Major} & \multicolumn{2}{p{56.9 pt}}{Use allancing contracts or Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) with risk-sharing mechanisms; ensure early risk workshops with contractors.} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Feasibility Perception} & Public and political scepticism is due to the perceived low benefit-cost ratio (BCR). & \multirow{6}{*}{High} & \multirow{6}{*}{Medium} & \multirow{6}{*}{Major} & \multicolumn{2}{p{56.9 pt}}{Reframe HSR as an economic development initiative rather than a transport project; highlight regional housing benefits and reduced congestion costs in feasibility studies.} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Workforce Capacity} & Limited domestic expertise in HSR design and construction. & \multirow{6}{*}{Medium} & \multirow{6}{*}{Medium} & \multirow{6}{*}{Mederate} & \multicolumn{2}{p{56.9 pt}}{Develop HSR-specific training programmes in collaboration with universities and TAFEs; implement a staged knowledge transfer from international experts; integrate HSR training into existing rail projects.} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Risk matrix. making them easy for professionals delivering nation-shaping projects of this nature to understand. **Recommendation 1: Position the Australian HSR Project as a Regional Economic Development (RED) Opportunity**  
* **Justification:** As presented in Section 5.1, previous HSR feasibility studies in Australia have struggled due to a failure to capture the benefits of regional economic development adequately.