Supporting standards

In order to set the optimum criteria for construction projects to function and operate in an environmentally acceptable manner, a series of standards was developed for the construction industry and infrastructure projects to produce more sustainable building practices within the legal limits. According to the MHUD (2014), there are 15 mandatory standards for new and existing construction projects. These standards require saving energy, construction safety, construction techniques and structures and so on. Sustainability issues are covered by the current standards, but none are specific to sustainable development.

In 2006, MHUD and the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (APSIQ) developed a voluntary rating system and updated it in 2014, the Assessment Standard of Green Building. The standard is regarded as the first national standards for sustainable building in China which covers not only residential buildings but also public construction (MHUD and APSIQ, 2014). This standard was based on LEED (Leadership in Energy and Design) from the USA, but emphasises the unique conditions in China. For instance, it encourages the use of rainwater or sea water for construction because China lacks freshwater resources (Dong, 2013).

The Standard includes six elements: Land savings and outdoor environment; Energy savings; Water savings; Materials savings; Indoor environmental quality; Operations and management. Each element has control items, and preference items. Control items are prerequisites of the building projects, and a project receives points when it meets the requirements of general or preference items. All elements need to be satisfied for a residential and public project. The system uses a checklist scoring scheme, which allows the project decision-makers to choose the most appropriate credits for the projects.

Unlike other countries, where green building rating systems e.g. BREEAM and LEED have been developed by organisations independent from government, the Standard in China is formalised as a national standard by the government (Chang et al., 2016), it shows that Chinese government is pushing towards green building in the construction sector (Pan et al., 2016).

84

With the growing attention upon environmental and energy consumption issues, many provinces use the Assessment Standard of Green Building as a model to establish the green building environmental assessment standard. Yunnan Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau formulated the Evaluation Standard for Green Building of Yunnan (DBJ53/T-49-2013) in 2013. It is more in line with the local conditions, and it emphasises that the green building assessment process should include the climate characteristics, poor economic foundation, and various minority cultures in Yunnan (Yunnan Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau, 2011). It acts as the guidance for designing, constructing and operating green buildings, and promotes the development of green building in Yunnan. But some problems appear in the practical application of the standard.

Firstly, the standard is not mandatory for construction projects, most executive, middle management and practitioners in the construction industry are not aware of the need for green building (Song et al., 2014). Second, a lack of qualified professionals and experience of green building is prevalent in the construction sector (Wang, 2016). Thirdly, there is no supportive policy framework for green buildings and green infrastructures (Song et al., 2014). Finally, the cost of rating green building is high, the Green Building Certification in China is $ 8,000 which influences the implementation of Green Building in China (Pan et al., 2016).

To facilitate highway infrastructure projects, the MOT issued the Specification for Environmental Impact Assessment of Highways (JTG B03-2006) to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of environmental impact assessment in highway construction (MOT, 2013). This Specification is dedicated to evaluating the environmental impacts of re-construction and new-construction of highway infrastructure projects. It provides a definitive standard and criteria for this activity with full concern for the social and ecological environment. Table 5.6 lists all the factors for the highway environmental assessment.

85

Table 5.4 Factors of Specification for Environmental Impacts Assessments

Aspects Factors

Impacts on quality of life and livelihood, including: resident's life style,

livelihood, incomes and structure, hygiene and health, safety, education Impacts of relocation, including: impacts on living and production conditions for the affected population, impacts on the natural and social-economic conditions

location and species of the affected trees Wildlife types and distribution, area of activity and migration routes

Nature reserve science, forest landscape and scenery location and distribution

Noise environmental impacts

Noise sources types, level and relations with highway location

86

The Specification identifies measures related to social disruption, noise control, environmental impacts, and appropriate technical specifications for the highway. It is derived from the Assessment Standard of Green Building which aims to strengthen highway infrastructure project development activities. It provides engineering design and technical specification for highway projects, incorporating measures for environmental protection, but it also demonstrates that the economic benefits of the highway projects are not contained, only one factor reflects the impacts on local economic development.

To conclude, based on the regulations and laws, the relevant industry standards provide guidance for the approach of highway infrastructure projects to social impact evaluation and natural surroundings evaluation (MHUD and APSIQ, 2014). Government and authorities are continually improving the standards for the sustainability assessment of highway infrastructure projects, many evaluation frameworks and systems have been established under these standards. It is still faced with a series of problems, for example, CPG issues strict regulations on environmental and social impacts, but the actual monitoring and enforcement is mainly undertaken by local government, with more attention paid to economic growth. Chang et al. (2016) found that only a few local authorities investigated the implementation of laws, regulations and policies to promote sustainable construction. Another challenge of current policy frameworks is most them include environmental considerations, economic assessment and technical aspects, but give less consideration to social issues, and they tend to be targeted at new-construction projects. For re-construction projects, comprehensive sustainable development guidance has still not been produced, even though the MHUD developed the Standard for Green Performance Assessment of Existing Building Retrofitting (GB/T51141-2015) in 2015 (Song and Gong, 2016; Chang et al., 2016)