CHAPTER 7 - DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT MODEL
7.5 Indicators formulation process
7.5.2 Collecting indicators
There are total sixty-seven indicators included in the twenty-four standards systems and existing assessment frameworks (Table 7.4). The sixty-seven indicators were coded and classified with content analysis by EXCEL.
129
Project site suitability S4
Overall plan of urban development S5
A2. Energy and Resource use
Total lifecycle primary non-renewable energy use S6
Electrical peak demand S7
Materials use S8
Renewable energy use S9
Ecological resources use S10
Resources and materials recycle S11
A3. Environmental pollution
Greenhouse gas emissions S11
Other atmospheric emissions S12
Solid wastes S13
Other air pollution S14
Waste water pollution S15
Pollution of groundwater S16
Pollution of rivers S17
Pollution of potable water S18
Noise pollution S19
Electromagnetic pollution S20
Light pollution S21
B. Social aspects
B1. Coordinating with overall development plan
Project function S22
Project multiple uses S23
Improvement on road network efficiency S24
B2. Impacts on social life
Political stability S25
Reduced travel time S26
Providing job opportunities S27
Improvement of public health S28
Effects on development of local education S29
Protection of cultural and natural heritage related to the project S30
Resettlement work S31
Acceptable to different stakeholders S32
Coordination with various organisations S33
Serviceability S34
Impact on quality of life S35
Impacts on local culture S36
Impacts on landscape S37
Impacts on means of livelihood S38
C. Economic aspects
C1. Cost and economic benefits
Lifecycle cost S39
Return on Investment (ROI) S40
Net Present Value (NPV) S41
Cost/benefit ratio S42
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) S43
130
Related Indicators Code
Lifecycle profit S44
C2. Financial benefit
Project financing channel S45
Project investment planning S46
Financial risk S47
Payoff period S48
Project budget S49
C3. Impacts on local economy
Contribution to improvement of people's income and living standards S50
Contribution to local economy development S51
Attract investment S52
Increase tax income S53
D. Technological aspects
Controllability S54
Advantage of project technologies S55
Improvement of road network efficiency S56
Maintainability S57
Extendibility S58
Disaster prevention capability S59
Flexibility and adaptability S60
Project quality S61
New energy use S62
E. Governance aspects
Administrative rules S63
Rationality of project design and planning S64
Rationality of organisational structure design S65
Sound governance systems S66
Employees performance assessment S67
According to Cao et al. (2010), the number of indicators depends on the nature of the evaluated project and evaluation purposes, it should not only choose relevant indicators but also avoid using indicators which may result in duplication. Therefore, the duplicated indicators were combined, any individual indicators which appeared over seven times (occurrence rate 25%) were formulated into a preliminary indicator list. The Specifications for Environmental Impact Assessment of Highways JTG B03-2006 integrates pollution of groundwater, pollution of rivers and pollution of potable water into one indicator – impacts on water. In the same manner, impacts on farmland and impacts on forests were combined into one indicator- impacts on land. In total, thirty-nine duplicated indicators were selected as shown in Table 7.5 and grouped into five categories, there were thirteen indicators covering economic sustainability, eight indicators dealing with social sustainability, nine indicators involved with environmental sustainability, six indicators were within technological sustainability and three indicators are governance sustainability.
131
Table 7.5 Preliminary list of indicators
Aspects Code Indicators
S7 Return on Investment (ROI) S8 Net Present Value (NPV) S9 Payoff period
S10 Internal Rate of Return (IRR) S11 Cost/benefit ratio
S12 Contribution to local economy
S13 Contribution to improvement of people's income and living standards
Social aspect
S14 Providing job opportunities S15 Improvement of public health
S16 Effects on development of local education
S17 Protection of cultural and natural heritage related to the project
S18 Resettlement work
S19 Suitable to different stakeholders S20 Coordination on various organisations S21 Serviceability
Environmental aspect
S22 Effects on land (e.g. Land consumption and land pollution)
S23 Effects on ecological environment (changes on climate and local geology)
S24 Effects on air quality
S25 Effects on water quality (produced waste water, consumption of water resource, potential contamination) S26 Noise pollution
S27 Waste disposal
S28 Use of green energy sources S29 Energy saving
S30 Effects on natural landscape and historical sites
Technological aspect
S31 Advantage of project technologies
S32 Coordination with other transportation projects S33 Improvement of road network efficiency S34 Maintainability
S35 Extendibility
S36 Disaster prevention capability Governance aspect
S37 Rationality of project design and planning S38 Rationality of organisational structure design S39 Sound governance systems
Each aspect listed in Table 7.5 can be expanded upon as follows:
132
Economic sustainability assessment
Economic sustainability assessment tends to emphasise the impacts on two levels, that is, public and project. In other words, the evaluation is to ensure a sound financial basis for the project to maintain value in the development process, and determine if the highway infrastructure project development brings economic benefits to the local area (Peng, 2010).
The impacts on local economics were reflected by the indicators of support for the improvement of living standards and enhancing the benefits to all members of society.
The project financial data was used to evaluate the economic benefits of a project, including indicators lifecycle cost and profit, project budget, project financing channel, project investment planning, payoff period, financial risk, Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Net Present Value (NPV) and Cost-benefit ratio. The financial analysis of major infrastructure projects has traditionally emphasised the decision-making process, it can be used to estimate project outputs (Moutinho and Lopes, 2011). The goal of project financial analysis is to determine whether to take on the project, to calculate its profits and to ensure stable finances throughout. In other words, financial analysis evaluates project liquidity and profitability. The evaluation of the economic performance at the project level is unlikely to proceed if it is financially unviable based on the financial indicators (National Development and Reform Commission [NDRC], 2006).
Social sustainability assessment
Social sustainability assessment refers to the systematic appraisal of impacts on the quality of life of local people affected by highway infrastructure projects. It focuses on improving public health, employment opportunity and education, protection of cultural and natural heritage, meeting the demand of commodity circulation, immigration resettlement by highway infrastructure project land requisition, means of livelihood, transportation and communication of people along the highway, improvement of transportation system and other issues related to social development.
Environmental sustainability assessment
The environmental indicators focused on environmental protection, reducing impacts on wildlife and forest land, reducing noise impacts and natural resources utilisation, reducing
133
impacts on water, land and air and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, improving health and safety, encouraging eco-renovation and cost-effective techniques for new construction, improving the efficiency of land use and rationalising the land use structure, establishing a comprehensive ecological strategy.
Technological and governance sustainability assessment
Technological sustainability assessment includes the influences on the road network, services provided by highway and impacts on other aspect caused by the techniques and technologies. The governance sustainability assessment tended to evaluate the management efficiency of the highway infrastructure project from pre-development stage to post-operation stage including the project planning and design, organisational structure and governance systems.