评估澳大利亚小型基础设施项目可持续做法的简化评级工具——比较审查

IF 3.5 Q3 GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Smart and Sustainable Built Environment Pub Date : 2023-02-03 DOI:10.1108/sasbe-05-2022-0089
M. Sandanayake, Z. Vrcelj, Y. Bouras, H. Chau, Patrick Hastings
{"title":"评估澳大利亚小型基础设施项目可持续做法的简化评级工具——比较审查","authors":"M. Sandanayake, Z. Vrcelj, Y. Bouras, H. Chau, Patrick Hastings","doi":"10.1108/sasbe-05-2022-0089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe present study aims to inform the requirements for developing a sustainable rating tool for small-scale infrastructure projects (SSIPs) through research findings.Design/methodology/approachA review-based comparative study of existing infrastructure sustainability (IS) rating tools for assessment of SSIPs is presented. Key stakeholder participants of the existing IS rating tools, are interviewed to identify existing barriers and requirements for sustainability rating. The study further presents possible rating tool options to optimise the sustainable performance evaluation of SSIPs.FindingsFindings of this study indicated that prevalent IS rating tools are majorly applied to large-scale infrastructure projects and sustainability of SSIPs are seldom assessed. Based on a literature review and series of interviews, it was found that user friendliness, efficient structure, training and technical support, cost effectiveness and stakeholder recognition are the five key requirements of a sustainability rating tool for SSIPs. Additionally, six sustainability assessment options were proposed for SSIPs which range from pathways for existing tools through to new, customisable tools. Upon comparison, a new modified tool with verification process and revised tool with defined grouping of sustainable criteria was more effective for evaluation of SSIPs.Research limitations/implicationsUse of case specific information for validation and framework development may lack generalisation. However, methodology can be used for future decision-making by making necessary adjustments to suit different local regional requirements.Originality/valueDespite lack of generalisation, the findings can lead to future general studies on sustainability of SSIPs. Findings of the study provide foundation knowledge and awareness for sustainability evaluation of SSIPs.","PeriodicalId":45779,"journal":{"name":"Smart and Sustainable Built Environment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simplified rating tool to evaluate sustainable practices of small-scale infrastructure projects in Australia – a comparative review\",\"authors\":\"M. Sandanayake, Z. Vrcelj, Y. Bouras, H. Chau, Patrick Hastings\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/sasbe-05-2022-0089\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe present study aims to inform the requirements for developing a sustainable rating tool for small-scale infrastructure projects (SSIPs) through research findings.Design/methodology/approachA review-based comparative study of existing infrastructure sustainability (IS) rating tools for assessment of SSIPs is presented. Key stakeholder participants of the existing IS rating tools, are interviewed to identify existing barriers and requirements for sustainability rating. The study further presents possible rating tool options to optimise the sustainable performance evaluation of SSIPs.FindingsFindings of this study indicated that prevalent IS rating tools are majorly applied to large-scale infrastructure projects and sustainability of SSIPs are seldom assessed. Based on a literature review and series of interviews, it was found that user friendliness, efficient structure, training and technical support, cost effectiveness and stakeholder recognition are the five key requirements of a sustainability rating tool for SSIPs. Additionally, six sustainability assessment options were proposed for SSIPs which range from pathways for existing tools through to new, customisable tools. Upon comparison, a new modified tool with verification process and revised tool with defined grouping of sustainable criteria was more effective for evaluation of SSIPs.Research limitations/implicationsUse of case specific information for validation and framework development may lack generalisation. However, methodology can be used for future decision-making by making necessary adjustments to suit different local regional requirements.Originality/valueDespite lack of generalisation, the findings can lead to future general studies on sustainability of SSIPs. Findings of the study provide foundation knowledge and awareness for sustainability evaluation of SSIPs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Smart and Sustainable Built Environment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Smart and Sustainable Built Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/sasbe-05-2022-0089\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Smart and Sustainable Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sasbe-05-2022-0089","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的本研究旨在通过研究结果为小型基础设施项目(SSIP)开发可持续评级工具的要求提供信息。设计/方法/方法对用于评估SSIP的现有基础设施可持续性(IS)评级工具进行了基于审查的比较研究。对现有IS评级工具的主要利益相关者参与者进行访谈,以确定可持续性评级的现有障碍和要求。该研究进一步提出了优化SSIP可持续绩效评估的可能评级工具选项。本研究的结果表明,流行的IS评级工具主要应用于大型基础设施项目,很少评估SSIP的可持续性。根据文献综述和一系列访谈,发现用户友好性、高效结构、培训和技术支持、成本效益和利益相关者认可是SSIP可持续性评级工具的五个关键要求。此外,还为SSIP提出了六种可持续性评估选项,从现有工具到新的可定制工具。经过比较,具有验证过程的新的修改工具和具有定义的可持续标准分组的修订工具对SSIP的评估更有效。研究局限性/含义使用特定案例信息进行验证和框架开发可能缺乏通用性。然而,通过进行必要的调整以适应不同的地方区域要求,可以将方法用于未来的决策。原创性/价值尽管缺乏普遍性,但这些发现可以为未来SSIP的可持续性进行一般性研究。研究结果为SSIP的可持续性评估提供了基础知识和认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Simplified rating tool to evaluate sustainable practices of small-scale infrastructure projects in Australia – a comparative review
PurposeThe present study aims to inform the requirements for developing a sustainable rating tool for small-scale infrastructure projects (SSIPs) through research findings.Design/methodology/approachA review-based comparative study of existing infrastructure sustainability (IS) rating tools for assessment of SSIPs is presented. Key stakeholder participants of the existing IS rating tools, are interviewed to identify existing barriers and requirements for sustainability rating. The study further presents possible rating tool options to optimise the sustainable performance evaluation of SSIPs.FindingsFindings of this study indicated that prevalent IS rating tools are majorly applied to large-scale infrastructure projects and sustainability of SSIPs are seldom assessed. Based on a literature review and series of interviews, it was found that user friendliness, efficient structure, training and technical support, cost effectiveness and stakeholder recognition are the five key requirements of a sustainability rating tool for SSIPs. Additionally, six sustainability assessment options were proposed for SSIPs which range from pathways for existing tools through to new, customisable tools. Upon comparison, a new modified tool with verification process and revised tool with defined grouping of sustainable criteria was more effective for evaluation of SSIPs.Research limitations/implicationsUse of case specific information for validation and framework development may lack generalisation. However, methodology can be used for future decision-making by making necessary adjustments to suit different local regional requirements.Originality/valueDespite lack of generalisation, the findings can lead to future general studies on sustainability of SSIPs. Findings of the study provide foundation knowledge and awareness for sustainability evaluation of SSIPs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Smart and Sustainable Built Environment
Smart and Sustainable Built Environment GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY-
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
53
期刊最新文献
Smart personal protective equipment for intelligent construction safety monitoring The smart city conundrum: technology, privacy, and the quest for convenience An exploratory study on the benefits of transit orientated development (TOD) to rail infrastructure projects Augmenting the cities’ and metropolitan regional demands for mega rail infrastructure: the application of SWOT and factor analysis Development of an ontology-based asset information model for predictive maintenance in building facilities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1