Search results

A Delphi study was conducted to identify the critical variables of successful implementation of sustainable road infrastructure projects (SRIPs) in developing countries, determine the reasons for the various viewpoints held by infrastructure development professionals, determine what motivates and pushes the infrastructure sector to pursue sustainability, and determine the factors that could impact the implementation of a project for sustainable road infrastructure. Expert feedback was used to determine values for these metrics and indicators, and most of the panellists reached a consensus on the final decision. Statistical methods were used to determine whether there was a general agreement with respect to the statements and questions asked. The findings of the study were presented alongside its overarching principles. The most important criteria for SRIP implementation were socio-cultural sustainability, economic sustainability, environmental sustainability, and engineering performance, with little consensus on environmental sustainability and public participation. The primary purpose of this study was to identify the most crucial determinants of effective SRIP implementation in low-income nations. Interquartile deviation (IQD) values ranged from 7.0 to 8.1, but IQD values varied from 2.00 to 3.00. Thirty-one environmental sustainability indicators were assessed as important or very important, with 26 out of 30 having IQD values between 0.00 and 1.00. Six sub-attributes were deemed extremely significant and four important when experts examined institutional sustainability, with no consensus on the final four indications (IQD 1). Fourteen of twenty-one Public Participation Indicators were deemed ‘major’ by panellists for SRIP implementation, with consensus among experts. Ten factors contribute to diverse perceptions of sustainability, with only 2 deemed crucial and 18 deemed important. The four most essential indicators of successful SRIP implementation are VHI: 9–10). The other seven criteria were crucial because their median scores were between 7.00 and 10. The Delphi survey explained why various individuals in the infrastructure industry have divergent views on what it means to be sustainable. Twenty-one factors were identified as contributors to divergent perspectives on sustainability among infrastructure industry stakeholders. The Delphi survey also established the factors that affect the success of SRIP implementation in low-income countries, leading to the development of the conceptual SRIPI model.

The sustainable development goals (SDGs) are a collection of 17 goals to address the world’s most pressing sustainable development (SD) concerns by 2030. Third-world countries have a lesser global environmental impact than developed countries, and account for 66% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Infrastructure development has a key role to play in establishing a green society, with approaches such as green policy, sustainable monitoring, and sustainability reports. Indirect and induced sustainable infrastructure development (SID) dominates the SDGs, with the goal of providing secure, acceptable, readily available, and efficient transportation networks by 2030. Road infrastructure development (RID) should become more sustainable considering depleting natural resources, fragile ecological circumstances, and limited financial resources. Sustainable road infrastructure projects (SRIPs) provide several advantages, such as increased economic efficiency, lower resource utilization, greater social well-being, and enhanced protection of natural services. However, incorporating SD prerequisites into highway infrastructure projects in developing countries has been difficult due to a variety of factors. Efforts to develop sustainability certification standards for infrastructure systems are recommended, and it is important to define relevant ideas and principles for SRIP implementation. However, incorporating SD prerequisites into highway infrastructure projects in developing countries has been difficult due to a variety of factors. Different people have varied ideas about sustainability. This book aims to provide a unified guideline to aid developing nations in undertaking SRIPs and to develop a SRIP implementation model. This chapter provided a background for the book; it also provided insight into its organization, foundation, and significance. It also discusses the objectives of the book and emphasized on the purpose and motivation for writing the book.

The pursuit of sustainable development goals (SDGs) is the primary driver of road infrastructure development (RID), but multiple parties are involved in the process, causing confusion. To effectively manage stakeholder processes, Jeffry (2009) proposed a framework based on a preventative double-path relationship between stakeholders and institutions. Bal et al. (2013) proposed a five-stage framework for stakeholder management, which includes identifying key players and issues, conducting analysis and plans, tightening restraints on making promises, creating a plan and soliciting input from interested parties, and monitoring its effectiveness. Successful stakeholder management for sustainable road infrastructure project (SRIP) implementation has been shown to have several benefits, such as enhanced understanding of the fiscal position, improving status, building relationships, developing trust, and enduring collaborative relationships, distributing skills and practices, and recognizing and mitigating threats and vulnerabilities. Infrastructure projects involving roads include a range of complex activities, and it is essential for infrastructure projects to evaluate potential project partners prior to making a final decision. Dealing with many stakeholders and maintaining a reasonable degree of concordance between their interests is crucial for fruitful endeavours. It is important for project groups and partners to have a shared understanding of the project’s goals and solicit their input and for a precise approach to identify and manage project partners throughout the execution phase. However, RID is still in its infancy when it comes to managing stakeholders and relationships. Stakeholder management has been ad hoc due to a lack of standardized methodologies, approaches, strategies, and processes, and infrastructure development procedures should include a systematic approach to managing stakeholders. The bulk of SRIP implementation needs come from stakeholders, making project partners crucial. The sustainable development (SD) strategy emphasizes the importance of SRIP execution to stakeholders, such as architects, quantity surveyors, conservationists, environmentalists, regional managers, project managers, suppliers, subcontractors, and sustainability consultants. This section of the research addressed the omissions of previously analysed comprehensive factors in SID models and frameworks, including climate change response, public involvement, and stakeholder management. Strategies for filling these gaps were discussed. An analysis of relevant academic literature was conducted.

Public involvement, climate change reactions, stakeholder management, and stakeholder management have all been identified as weaknesses in sustainable road infrastructure development (SRID) inquiry. Most scholarly studies on sustainable infrastructure development (SID) are undertaken in advanced countries, while limited academic studies on the SID in third-world countries cite challenges impeding utilization. This chapter examines the conceptual holes in the SID model and aims to solve three identified gaps: public participation, climate change response, and stakeholder management. The inclusion of highlighted challenges is based on the belief that successful SRIP implementation would be impossible without public participation and climate change adaptation. Public participation is essential for the efficient implementation of SID. It allows stakeholders and everyone affected by infrastructure projects to participate in discussions, recognizing possible problems and creating solutions. International organizations, such as the World Bank, have embraced the concept of public participation as a need for effective project implementation. In underdeveloped countries, most infrastructure projects exclude the general populace, so public participation should be seen as a vital variable in the effective implementation of SRIP in poor countries. Arnstein (1969) proposed an eight-stage stepping ladder for citizen involvement from exploitation through consultation to citizens in control. Information is the cornerstone of all types of engagement, and the mildest kind of real involvement is a meeting when project participants voice their concerns and opinions. Co-creation and co-choice are rare in industrialized countries, and the issue of involvement has become a concern. Notification and attendance are prerequisites for meaningful participation, which can begin when the public is given the opportunity to express their opinions. Players are seen as social establishments or gatherings having the power to influence the fate of the organization, and an evaluation of the players is needed to determine whom to include. Participation in projects boosts decision-making efficacy and sufficiency by widening the information base, encouraging innovation, and fostering public acceptance of methodologies. Stakeholder engagement can increase the speed and quality of strategic decision-making. The key takeaways of the chapter are that public participation in road infrastructure projects should have a say in decisions concerning activities that affect their lives or occupations, should take into account the people’s history, cultural, natural, political, and sociological foundations and should be involved in the following ways: initiated early in the life cycle, organized and well-arranged, phased and improved, non-partisan professionals, learning about members’ traits and interests, and focussing on contentious subjects. Public engagement in SRIP implementation must be efficient and well-managed to be successful. Public participation is essential for SRID.

Climate change adaptation strategies are critical for long-term road infrastructure development (RID) because it is expected to put more land and transportation infrastructure at risk from stronger winds, more intense storms, and rising sea levels. Deformation and subsidence could occur if concrete pavements crumbled and asphalt roads softened due to higher temperatures, and changes in the frequency and intensity of precipitation could have far-reaching consequences for the smooth operation of transportation networks. The developed world is primarily responsible for the carbon emissions that contribute to global warming, while less developed countries are insignificant. The African Union sees climate change as a major threat to the continent’s economic development and is working with member states and key organizations to address it. It is critical for developing countries to establish frameworks for detecting climate change risks, developing adaptation strategies, and implementing plans. The sustainable development plan (SRIP) is critical for protecting transportation networks from the effects of climate change. Sustainable development principles are critical for clarifying the proposed project’s relationships with the local and larger society, economy, ecosystems, and various institutions. The ability of a system or structure to recover from disruption while continuing to function and adapt to new circumstances is referred to as resilient infrastructure. Low-carbon infrastructure coexists with resilient infrastructure, and the pursuit of resilient infrastructure necessitates a reduction in the likelihood of failure, a lessening of the negative consequences when failures do occur, and a reduction in the time required to recover due to an increase in the facilities’ capacity to endure, adapt, and change. As part of the implementation process, RID experts must consider how climate change will impact transportation infrastructure. Risk assessment is a systematic method of looking for things that could go wrong, determining how bad they could be, and determining how likely they are to happen. Adaptable designs must include multiple measures to prevent system breakdowns. Climate change’s effects on road infrastructure, as well as rising sea levels, continue to jeopardize low-lying transportation infrastructure. Implementing SRIP necessitates the development of a climate change response mechanism.

This chapter discusses the proposed integrated sustainable road infrastructure project implementation (ISRIPI) model and its constructs and sub-constructs, as well as public participation (PP), climate change response (CCR), and stakeholder management (SM). CEEQUAL was the most comprehensive rating system, with 11 criteria. Lim (2009) and Ugwu and Haupt (2007) were the most thorough studies examining sustainability models for infrastructure projects, focussing on social and cultural sustainability (SCS), economic sustainability (ES), environmental sustainability (EnS), institutional sustainability (IS), health and safety (HS), project management (PM), resource utilization and management (RUM), and engineering performance (EP). The Brundtland Report and Rio Summit defined social sustainability as the right to a decent standard of living, social justice between generations, within generations, and around the world. Thin (2002) showed social justice, unity, investment, and safety as aspects of society. Rosenström et al. (2006) defined social qualities as objects that make people happy. Cultural sustainability is access to cultural assets for current and future generations, and cultural legacy is the collection of physical signals passed on from the past to each civilization and, by extension, to all humans. EnS seeks to reduce the environmental impact of road infrastructure projects. Sustainable road infrastructure project implementation (SRIPI) must consider PM issues such as delivery system, risks, duration, performance assessment, sustainability clauses, and contract type. Quality control systems must be set up to ensure the optimum utilization and management of resources in SRIPI. EP criteria measure sustainable road infrastructure projects’ (SRIP) durability, quality, resilience, adaptability, functionality, carrying capacity, and robustness. This research developed an SRIPI model based on the models of CEEQUAL, Lim (2009), and Ugwu and Haupt (2007). The hypothesized framework consists of 37 SRIPI factors, including SCS, ES, IS, HS, PM, RUM, EP, CCR, PP, and SM. It projected the analytical authority of these constructs in the success of SRIPs to test whether the realization of SRIPI outcomes depends on the supposed indicators of the variables. SRIPI is a multidimensional structure composed of 11 latent variables, derived from literature review and Delphi study findings.

This section describes sustainable development (SD) in relation to infrastructure projects and explains how to evaluate SD. SD is assessed as context-dependent, considering the project’s economic, social, and ecological context. Sustainable road infrastructure projects (SRIP) should encapsulate the complete life cycle from idea to development, functionality, and maintenance. SD should be considered as part of the evaluation process prior to project execution, but it can also serve other functions. Sustainability evaluation must start with project appraisal or evaluation and the earliest stages of project decision-making. Sustainable infrastructure projects (SIPs) are evaluated using a variety of techniques and models, such as cost-benefit analysis (CBA), multi-criteria techniques, ecological and societal impact assessments, ranking techniques, models, and evaluation guidelines. Established SD structures and modelling techniques for infrastructure projects are presented from an SD perspective, with the primary objective of investigating how they operate and determining whether existing models provide an effective method for applying the SD idea into infrastructure development. CBA is a widely used strategy for evaluating alternatives to maximize sociocultural well-being. It is based on the likelihood of costing customer advantages and negative impacts and has been discussed in scholarly articles. The multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach is an acceptable methodology for addressing complex matters involving high risk, conflicting objectives, different types of information and data, different concerns and points of view, and the representation of complex and evolving biological, ecological, and financial frameworks. It combines many methodologies and offers various advantages over more conventional ways of decision-making and plan development. It should be used to increase community participation and empower partner organizations and should apply several criteria at the same time, including those that are difficult to adjust and quantify. The key difficulty with this strategy is the usage of weightings, which has been sharply criticized by several researchers. Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is an adaptive tool used to assess the ecological effects of a particular action, task, or procedure. It is applied globally to decision-making in numerous fields, including transportation, energy, and water, and has become a typical tool for determining the ecological performance of infrastructure projects. However, it has a few flaws and could benefit from improvements to assess SD with greater precision. It is a fragmented mechanism for assessing the three components of SD, but its incorporation into other evaluation approaches is desirable. The evaluation of societal implications has been conducted using a variety of methods and techniques, but there is currently no standard method for assessing the communal and appropriation consequences of infrastructure initiatives. Social life-cycle assessments (SLCAs) are advancing, but consensus remains a challenge. The Evaluation Partnership and the Centre for European Policy Studies identified several obstacles and challenges to implementing an outstanding societal assessment, such as the term ‘societal impacts’ being potentially overbroad and not adequately defined, and the lack of a suitable method for quantitatively evaluating sociological effects. Additionally, a large section of societal assessments is biased and frequently inconsequential. The chapter discussed the theoretical and methodological stances on sustainable road infrastructure, using current SID concepts and evaluation techniques thoroughly.

Slow release insecticidal paint formulations had been prepared by incorporating deltamethrin, an additive to impart insecticidal property to the paint formulation. The effects of the mode of incorporation of deltamethrin on the retention of the insecticide in the paint matrix, on drying, had been studied. Deltamethrin had been introduced (1 per cent by wt) in the grind and let‐down portions of the paint formulation. Extraction and high performance liquid chromatography studies of the insecticide had been carried out. It has been found that after drying, the paint samples contained a very high concentration of deltamethrin where the insecticide had been added in the grind portion instead of in the let‐down portion of the paint formulation.