ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC AND METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE ASSESSMENT OF THE URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE SUSTAINABILITY
Abstract
Urban infrastructure sustainability assessment currently is being viewed as an important step towards the reduction of urbanization consequences, at the same time improving sustainability of communities within economic, social and ecological changes. To make such informed decisions, scientists have already developed several tools for comprehensive assessment of cities’ sustainability, which unfortunately do not fully reflect the sustainability of their infrastructures. Most modern assessment methods have been developed based on the needs of developed countries, which differ from the needs of developing countries. Increasingly, cities in developed countries obtain the top positions in various international rankings for urban sustainability. At the same time, cities in developing countries are rarely included in the rankings. Despite the presence of a significant number of scientific papers on the topic of urban sustainability assessment, the methodology for assessing the sustainability of its infrastructure remains unestablished. Most scholars consider urban infrastructure to be an integral part of sustainability assessment. According to the author, this approach is ineffective in terms of the results obtained, as it does not provide an opportunity to objectively analyze the state of municipal infrastructure due to the small number of criteria used for direct evaluation. This approach also limits the possibility of comparison between the infrastructures of different cities. Therefore, there is a need for further research and development of a specialized methodology for urban infrastructure sustainability assessment. Within the scope of this work, author analyzed various methods used for urban infrastructure sustainability assessment, presenting their advantages and disadvantages as well as analyzed the wholeness of the main urban sustainability indicators used for urban infrastructure assessment. It was revealed that out of 9 indicators analyzed only 3 proved to be adequate based on the number of infrastructure components included into assessment methodologies and availability of assessment results for several consequent years.
References
United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division 2019. New York: United Nations. URL: https://population.un.org/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2018-Report.pdf.
Komeily, L.I., & Srinivasan,, R.S. A need for balanced approach to neighborhood sustainability assessments: A critical review and analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society 2015, Volume 18, Pages 32-43, 8. ISSN 2210-6707. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.05.004.
C40. Why Cities? URL: https://www.c40.org/why_cities
Sahely H.R., Kennedy C.A., Adams B.J. Developing sustainability criteria for urban infrastructure systems. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 2005. Vol. 32, P. 72–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/L04-072.
Rahman S, Vanier D. Life cycle cost analysis as a decision support tool for managing municipal infrastructure. CIB 2004 Triennial Congress. Toronto, Ontario 2004. Р. 1–12. URL: https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/accepted/?id=ade94ea0-397c-4f48-8382-0f82b6a080b3.
Loucks, D.P. Quantifying trends in system sustainability. Hydrological Sciences Journal. 1997. Vol. 42. Iss. 4. Р. 513–530. URL: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02626669709492051.
Ugwu O., Kumaraswamy M., Wong A., Ng S. Sustainability appraisal in infrastructure projects (SUSAIP): Part 1. Development of indicators and computational methods. Automation in construction. 2006. Vol. 15. Р. 239–251. URL:
Baloloy, C. Benefit cost analysis as a tool for sustainability and resiliency of transport infrastructure system to future climate uncertainty. NTNU. 2018. URL: https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/2570003.
Haimes, Y.Y. Sustainable development: a holistic approach to natural resource-management. Systems, Man and Cybernetics. 1992. IEEE Transactions № 22(3). Р. 413–417. URL: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/155942.
Lockwood C. Building the green way. Harvard business review. 2006. Vol. 84. Р. 129–137. URL: https://hbr.org/2006/06/building-the-green-way.
ISI. About ENVISION. Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. URL: https://sustainableinfrastructure.org/envision/overview-of-envision/.
ISOA. The IS Rating Scheme. URL: https://www.isca.org.au/Get-Involved/IS-Ratings.
BRE Group. CEEQUAL Version 6. URL: https://www.ceequal.com/.
UN Habitat. City Prosperity Initiative. URL: https://unhabitat.org/programme/city-prosperity-initiative.
Arcadis. Singapore and Hong Kong among Top Ten cities in Arcadis' Sustainable Cities Index. URL: https://www.arcadis.com/en/news/asia/2018/10/singapore-and-hong-kong-among-top-ten-cities-in-arcadis-sustainable-cities-index.
IESE Business School. IESE Cities in Motion Index. URL: https://media.iese.edu/research/pdfs/ST-0509-E.pdf.
The Mori Memorial Foundation. What is the GPCI? URL: http://mori-m-foundation.or.jp/english/ius2/gpci2/index.shtml.
Mercer. Quality of living city ranking. URL: https://mobilityexchange.mercer.com/Insights/quality-of-living-rankings#Americas.
The Economist Intelligence Unit. The Global Liveability Index 2021. URL: https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/global-liveability-index-2021/.
Kenneth A. Grant & Steven Chuang. An aggregating approach to ranking cities for knowledge-based development. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development. 2018. Vol. 3(1). Р. 17–34. URL: https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijkbde/v3y2012i1p17-34.html.
Горяна І.В. Формування методики оцінювання сталості розвитку регіонів. Економічний аналіз. 2013. Вип. 14. № 1. С. 59–63. ISSN 1993-0259.
Тульчинська С.О., Кириченко С.О. Дослідження методичних підходів до оцінювання розвитку соціальної інфраструктури в регіонах. Економічний вісник НТУУ «КПІ». 2017. Вип. 14. С. 67–75. URL: http://ev.fmm.kpi.ua/article/view/108739.
Гречко А.В. Методичні підходи оцінювання сталості розвитку продуктивних сил регіонів України. Ефективна економіка. 2018. № 8. URL: http://www.economy.nayka.com.ua/pdf/8_2018/56.pdf.
Леонова С.В., Барвінська Х.Б Ідентифікація та оцінювання перспектив сталого розвитку автотранспортної системи України. Інфраструктура ринку. 2020. Вип. 40. С. 103–109. URL: http://www.market-infr.od.ua/journals/2020/40_2020_ukr/19.pdf.
Філіпішина Л.М. Інтегральна оцінка стійкості розвитку промислових підприємств. Глобальні та національні проблеми економіки. 2017. Вип. 19. URL: http://global-national.in.ua/archive/19-2017/56.pdf.
Тимошенко М.М. Методичні засади оцінки сталого розвитку сільських територій: алгоритм, структурна схема та інструментарій дослідження. Миколаївський національний університет імені В.О. Сухомлинського. 2018. Вип. 2. С. 214–220. URL: http://global-national.in.ua/archive/21-2018/44.pdf.
Tietenberg, T.H., & Lewis, L. Environmental and natural resource economics (9th ed.). Routledge. URL: https://fcom.stafpu.bu.edu.eg/Economy/3898/crs-15010/Files/environmental_and_natural_resource_economics_by_tom_tietenberg_9th_edition.pdf.
Reston, Va. Sustainability criteria for water resource systems. Task Committee on Sustainability Criteria, Water Resources Planning and Management Division, American Society of Civil Engineers and the working group of UNESCO/IHP IV Project 7 1988. URL: https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/652309.
UrbanFootprint. Urban Footprint Tool. The Urban Intelligence Platform. URL: https://urbanfootprint.com/.
UN Environment programme. Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). URL: https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/starting-life-cycle-thinking/life-cycle-approaches/social-lca/.
Sachs, J., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., Woelm, F. The Decade of Action for the Sustainable Development Goals: Sustainable Development Report 2021. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. URL: https://www.sdgindex.org/.
Dynamic Cities. City Ranking. URL: https://www.dynamiccities.savillsim.com/city-rankings.
IMD. Smart City Index 2020. Institute for Management Development. URL: https://www.imd.org/smart-city-observatory/smart-city-index/.
United Nations (2019). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. New York: United Nations. Available at: https://population.un.org/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2018-Report.pdf
Komeily, L. I., & Srinivasan,, R. S. (2015). A need for balanced approach to neighborhood sustainability assessments: A critical review and analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society, Volume 18, Pages 32-43, 8. ISSN 2210-6707. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.05.004
C40. (2021). Why Cities? Available at: https://www.c40.org/why_cities (accessed 27 June 2021)
Sahely HR, Kennedy CA, Adams BJ. (2005). Developing sustainability criteria for urban infrastructure systems. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering. 2005;32:72-85 .DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/L04-072
Rahman S, Vanier D. (2004). Life cycle cost analysis as a decision support tool for managing municipal infrastructure. CIB 2004 Triennial Congress. Toronto, Ontario 2004. p. 1-12. Available at: https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/accepted/?id=ade94ea0-397c-4f48-8382-0f82b6a080b3
Loucks, D.P. (1997). Quantifying trends in system sustainability. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 42(4): 513–530. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02626669709492051
Ugwu O, Kumaraswamy M, Wong A, Ng S. (2006) Sustainability appraisal in infrastructure projects (SUSAIP): Part 1. Development of indicators and computational methods. Automation in construction. 2006;15:239-51. Available at:
Baloloy, C. (2018). Benefit cost analysis as a tool for sustainability and resiliency of transport infrastructure system to future climate uncertainty. NTNU. Available at: https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/2570003
Haimes, Y.Y. (1992). Sustainable development: a holistic approach to natural resourcemanagement. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, 22(3), 413-417. Available at: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/155942
Lockwood C. (2006) Building the green way. Harvard business review. 2006;84:129-37. Available at: https://hbr.org/2006/06/building-the-green-way
ISI (2021). About ENVISION. Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. Available at: https://sustainableinfrastructure.org/envision/overview-of-envision/ (accessed 27 June 2021)
ISOA. (2021). The IS Rating Scheme. Available at: https://www.isca.org.au/Get-Involved/IS-Ratings (accessed 27 June 2021)
BRE Group (2021). CEEQUAL Version 6. Available at: https://www.ceequal.com/ (accessed 27 June 2021)
UN Habitat (2021). City Prosperity Initiative. Available at: https://unhabitat.org/programme/city-prosperity-initiative (accessed 27 June 2021)
Arcadis (2018). Singapore and Hong Kong among Top Ten cities in Arcadis' Sustainable Cities Index. Available at: https://www.arcadis.com/en/news/asia/2018/10/singapore-and-hong-kong-among-top-ten-cities-in-arcadis-sustainable-cities-index (accessed 27 June 2021)
IESE Business School (2021). IESE Cities in Motion Index. Available at: https://media.iese.edu/research/pdfs/ST-0509-E.pdf
The Mori Memorial Foundation (2021). What is the GPCI? Available at: http://mori-m-foundation.or.jp/english/ius2/gpci2/index.shtml (accessed 27 June 2021)
Mercer (2021). Quality of living city ranking. Available at: https://mobilityexchange.mercer.com/Insights/quality-of-living-rankings#Americas (accessed 27 June 2021)
The Economist Intelligence Unit (2021). The Global Liveability Index 2021. Available at: https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/global-liveability-index-2021/ (accessed 27 June 2021)
Kenneth A. Grant & Steven Chuang, (2012). An aggregating approach to ranking cities for knowledge-based development, International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(1), pages 17-34. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijkbde/v3y2012i1p17-34.html
Horiana, I. V. (2013 Formuvannia metodyky otsiniuvannia stalosti rozvytku rehioniv. [Formation of methods for assessing the sustainability of regional development]. Ekonomichnyi analiz. Vol. 14. Iss. 1, p. 59-63. – ISSN 1993-0259. (In Ukrainian)
Tulchynska S. O., Kyrychenko S. O. (2017). Doslidzhennia metodychnykh pidkhodiv do otsiniuvannia rozvytku sotsialnoi infrastruktury v rehionakh. [Research of methodological approaches to assessing the development of social infrastructure in the regions]. Ekonomichnyi visnyk NTUU «KPI». Vol. 14. P. 67–75. Available at: http://ev.fmm.kpi.ua/article/view/108739 (In Ukrainian)
Hrechko A. V. (2018). Metodychni pidkhody otsiniuvannia stalosti rozvytku produktyvnykh syl rehioniv Ukrainy. Efektyvna ekonomika. Vol. 8. – Available at: http://www.economy.nayka.com.ua/pdf/8_2018/56.pdf (In Ukrainian)
Leonova S.V., Barvinska Kh. V. (2020). Identyfikatsiia ta otsiniuvannia perspektyv staloho rozvytku avtotransportnoi systemy Ukrainy. [Methodical approaches to assessing the sustainability of the development of productive forces of the regions of Ukraine]. Infrastruktura rynku. Vol. 40. P. 103-109. – Available at: http://www.market-infr.od.ua/journals/2020/40_2020_ukr/19.pdf (In Ukrainian)
Filipishyna L.M. (2017). Intehralna otsinka stiikosti rozvytku promyslovykh pidpryiemstv. [Integral assessment of the sustainability of industrial enterprises] Hlobalni ta natsionalni problemy ekonomiky. Vol. 19. Available at: http://global-national.in.ua/archive/19-2017/56.pdf (In Ukrainian)
Tymoshenko M.M. (2018). Metodychni zasady otsinky staloho rozvytku silskykh terytorii: alhorytm, strukturna skhema ta instrumentarii doslidzhennia.[Methodical bases of estimation of sustainable development of rural territories: algorithm, structural scheme and research tools]. Mykolaivskyi natsionalnyi universytet imeni V.O. Sukhomlynskoho, Vol. 2. P.214-220. Available at: http://global-national.in.ua/archive/21-2018/44.pdf (In Ukrainian)
Tietenberg, T. H., & Lewis, L. (2018). Environmental and natural resource economics (9th ed.). Routledge. Available at: https://fcom.stafpu.bu.edu.eg/Economy/3898/crs-15010/Files/environmental_and_natural_resource_economics_by_tom_tietenberg_9th_edition.pdf
Reston, Va (1998). Sustainability criteria for water resource systems. Task Committee on Sustainability Criteria, Water Resources Planning and Management Division, American Society of Civil Engineers and the working group of UNESCO/IHP IV Project M-4.3. Available at: https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/652309
UrbanFootprint (2021). Urban Footprint Tool. The Urban Intelligence Platform. Available at: https://urbanfootprint.com/ (accessed 27 June 2021)
UN Environment programme (2021). Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). Available at: https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/starting-life-cycle-thinking/life-cycle-approaches/social-lca/ (accessed 27 June 2021)
Sachs, J., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., Woelm, F. (2021). The Decade of Action for the Sustainable Development Goals: Sustainable Development Report 2021. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://www.sdgindex.org/
Dynamic Cities (2021). City Ranking. Available at: https://www.dynamiccities.savillsim.com/city-rankings (accessed 27 June 2021)
IMD (2021). Smart City Index 2020. Institute for Management Development. Available at: https://www.imd.org/smart-city-observatory/smart-city-index/ (accessed 27 June 2021)
