Stakeholder management studies in mega construction projects: A review and future directions

Recognizing the urgent need for sustainability, we argue that to move beyond the rhetoric and to actually realize sustainable development, it must be considered as a decision-making strategy. We demonstrate that sustainability assessment and sustainability indicators can be powerful decision-supporting tools that foster sustainable development by addressing three sustainability decision-making challenges: interpretation, information-structuring, and influence. Particularly, since the 1990s many substantial and often promising sustainability assessment and sustainability indicators efforts are made. However, better practices and a broader shared understanding are still required. We aim to contribute to that objective by adopting a theoretical perspective that frames SA and SI in the context of sustainable development as a decision-making strategy and that introduces both fields along several essential aspects in a structured and comparable manner.

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/5828901/file/5828952.pdf

Sustainability assessment and indicators: Tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development

This paper argues that the need for a core “fourth pillar” of sustainability/sustainable development, as demanded in multiple arenas, can no longer be ignored on the grounds of intangibility. Different approaches to this vital but missing pillar (cultural-aesthetic, religious-spiritual, and political-institutional) find common ground in the area of ethical values. While values and aspects based on them are widely assumed to be intangible and immeasurable, we illustrate that it is possible to operationalize them in terms of measurable indicators when they are intersubjectively conceptualized within clearly defined practical contexts. The processes require contextual localization of items, which can nonetheless fit into a generalizable framework. This allows useful measurements to be made, and removes barriers to studying, tracking, comparing, evaluating and correlating values-related dimensions of sustainability. It is advocated that those involved in operationalizing sustainability (especially in the context of creating post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals), should explore the potential for developing indicators to capture some of its less tangible aspects, especially those concerned with ethical values.

/pdf/bringing-the-missing-pillar-into-sustainable-development-19zkix2uuq.pdf

Bringing the "missing pillar" into sustainable development goals: towards intersubjective values-based indicators

Competition from low wage countries and the adoption of free market strategies have forced manufacturing firms to recognise and implement productivity enhancement strategies. This research defines a holistic sustainability index embedding several performance indices. The aim of this study was to establish a relevant framework that would assess the current situation of an industry through aggregation of environmental, social, economical as well as manufacturing variables. The proposition has its roots in trends and gaps in the sustainability literature of manufacturing industries and is based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. A list of indicators measuring the industry performance based on an AHP scoring methodology is proposed. The next stages include grouping industries according to common deficiencies across the four dimensions and establishing a cooperation framework. The food manufacturing industry is the main target in this study and will benefit from adopting sustainable long-term policies. By recognising the importance of social–environmental sustainability and taking the initiative to pursue it, profits will grow as a positive effect of such policies. The added value is twofold: (1) coupling all sustainability dimensions, often addressed in silos and (2) integrating manufacturing indicators which enable the analysis of interrelationships with sustainability.

Towards a holistic sustainability index for measuring sustainability of manufacturing companies

Existing approaches to sustainability assessment are typically characterized as being either “top–down” or “bottom–up.” While top–down approaches are commonly adopted by businesses, bottom–up approaches are more often adopted by civil society organizations and communities. Top–down approaches clearly favor standardization and commensurability between other sustainability assessment efforts, to the potential exclusion of issues that really matter on the ground. Conversely, bottom–up approaches enable sustainability initiatives to speak directly to the concerns and issues of communities, but lack a basis for comparability. While there are clearly contexts in which one approach can be favored over another, it is equally desirable to develop mechanisms that mediate between both. In this paper, we outline a methodology for framing sustainability assessment and developing indicator sets that aim to bridge these two approaches. The methodology incorporates common components of bottom–up assessment: constituency-based engagement processes and opportunity to identify critical issues and indicators. At the same time, it uses the idea of a “knowledge base,” to help with the selection of standardized, top–down indicators. We briefly describe two projects where the aspects of the methodology have been trialed with urban governments and communities, and then present the methodology in full, with an accompanying description of a supporting software system.

Reframing social sustainability reporting: towards an engaged approach

The contribution of stakeholders to the development and implementation of a sustainable built environment has emerged as crucial to the delivery of meaningful change. The inclusion of all affected parties can facilitate the development of patterns, structures and buildings that are sustainable in the social, ecological and economic dimensions. The slow development of a more sustainable building sector often results from the absence of knowledge about possible benefits because of financial constraints or the presence of conflicting interests. Furthermore, in most cases, measures to foster a sustainable building sector do not include all of the relevant stakeholders or are only one-sided. Based on a literature review of stakeholders in the building sector, this paper describes the stakeholders involved in the development of sustainable buildings and the challenges in stakeholder motivation. The practical case of the Network for Sustainable Construction Switzerland demonstrates how to foster sustainable construction by including a wide range of stakeholders and the need to address stakeholders with diverse initiatives. This case study supports the hypothesis that stakeholder motivation cannot be created by a single initiative; rather, a variety of actions are required to deliver change successfully.

Harnessing stakeholder motivation: towards a Swiss sustainable building sector

Since the beginning of the sustainability debate approximately 20 years ago, all parties involved in the urban planning process have been expected to devise sustainable solutions to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Potential to include sustainability criteria is present in the strategic planning stage and during the initial studies of a project. However, instruments available at these early stages are rare and show numerous weaknesses. The present study intends to close this gap by developing an instrument for the prioritization of sustainability criteria in urban planning processes. It is based on the Sustainable Building Tool 07 (SBTool 07), a comprehensive and well-established tool for the assessment of sustainability of construction projects, key issues pertaining to the initial planning stages are identified via a materiality matrix—a method established for corporate sustainability reporting. The resulting method has been tested in a competition in the Icelandic city of Reykjavik. Results include a materiality matrix on stakeholder priorities and the relevance of criteria to sustainability across the life cycle as well as a core set of 19 criteria to be addressed in Reykjavik.

Prioritizing Sustainability Criteria in Urban Planning Processes: Methodology Application

The contribution of indicators and indicator systems to sustainable development is discussed controversially – from positive and limited to negative impacts. Yet, the perception of the potential and risks of sustainability indicator systems influences the success of their implementation. In view of this correlation and the existing research gaps, we investigate the perceived contribution of indicator systems to sustainable development in five Asian cities of developing countries. Thirty interviews with local key actors have been held and a Qualitative Content Analysis has been conducted, drawing on the interview material. Results include a typology of positive and negative contributions based on the type of indicator systems' use, as well as a quantitative description of the level of awareness of different actors. Perceived positive and negative contributions are discussed considering the actors' functions, experiences and cities. The research shows that developers of sustainability indicator systems and scholars have the most awareness concerning risks whereas users and potential users are lacking this, and it portrays future implementation requirements.

Perceived contribution of indicator systems to sustainable development in developing countries

Contemporary studies on sustainability indicator systems (SISs) typically focus on the technical advancement of indicator construction, on qualitative impacts of indicator programmes and on impacts on governance, decision-making and sustainability as a social construct. Yet, their implementation so far has rarely been addressed, even though monitoring and the use of indicator results fall far behind the number of SISs developed. This study aims at the identification of requirements for the development of and constraints to the implementation of SISs in five Asian cities of developing countries. Interviews with local key actors are held, and a qualitative content analysis is carried out. Findings include evidence on the degree of indicator implementation in the case study cities, a hexagonal model for the classification of requirements and constraints, as well as general conclusions for barriers to the use of SISs.

Sabrina Krank

Papers

Harnessing stakeholder motivation: towards a Swiss sustainable building sector

Prioritizing Sustainability Criteria in Urban Planning Processes: Methodology Application

Perceived contribution of indicator systems to sustainable development in developing countries

Constraints to implementation of sustainability indicator systems in five Asian cities

Lessons from seven sustainability indicator programs in developing countries of Asia