Framework and processes for enhancing sustainability deliverables in Australian road infrastructure projects

Road and highway infrastructure provides the backbone for a nation’s economic growth. The versatile dispersion of population in Australia and its resource boom, coupled with improved living standards and growing societal expectations, calls for continuing development and improvement of road infrastructure under the current local, state and federal governments’ policies and strategic plans. As road infrastructure projects involve huge resources and mechanisms, achieving sustainability not only on economic scales but also through environmental and social responsibility becomes a crucial issue. While sustainability is a logical link to infrastructure development, literature study and consultation with the industry found that there is a lack of common understanding on what constitutes sustainability in the infrastructure context. Its priorities are often interpreted differently among multiple stakeholders. For road infrastructure projects which typically span over long periods of time, achieving tangible sustainability outcomes during the lifecycle of development remains a formidable task. Sustainable development initiatives often remain ideological as in macro-level policies and broad-based concepts. There were little elaboration and exemplar cases on how these policies and concepts can be translated into practical decision-making during project implementation. In contrast, there seemed to be over commitment on research and development of sustainability assessment methods and tools. Between the two positions, there is a perception-reality gap and mismatch, specifically on how to enhance sustainability deliverables during infrastructure project delivery. Review on past research in this industry sector also found that little has been done to promote sustainable road infrastructure development; this has wide and varied potential impacts. This research identified the common perceptions and expectations by different stakeholders towards achieving sustainability in road and highway infrastructure projects. Face to face interviews on selected representatives of these stakeholders were carried out in order to select and categorize, confirm and prioritize a list of sustainability performance targets identified through literature and past research. A Delphi study was conducted with the assistance of a panel of senior industry professionals and academic experts, which further considered the interrelationship and influence of the sustainability indicators, and identified critical sustainability indicators under ten critical sustainability criteria (e.g. Environmental, Health & Safety, Resource Utilization & Management, Social & Cultural, Economic, Public Governance & Community Engagement, Relations Management, Engineering, Institutional and Project Management). This presented critical sustainability issues that needed to be addressed at the project level. Accordingly, exemplar highway development projects were used as case studies to elicit solutions for the critical issues. Through the identification and integration of different perceptions and priority needs of the stakeholders, as well as key sustainability indicators and solutions for critical issues, a set of decision-making guidelines was developed to promote and drive consistent sustainability deliverables in road infrastructure projects.

Venture creation and resource processes : using Bricolage sustainability ventures

Principal Topic: Resource decisions are critical to the venture creation process, which has important subsequent impacts on venture creation and performance (Boeker, 1989). Most entrepreneurs however, suffer substantial resource constraints in venture creation and during venture growth (Shepherd et al., 2000). Little is known about how high potential, sustainability ventures (the ventures of interest in this research), despite resource constraints, achieve continued venture persistence and venture success. One promising theory that explicitly links to resource constraints is a concept developed by Levi Strauss (1967) termed bricolage. Bricolage aligns with notions of resourcefulness: using what's on hand, through making do, and recombining resources for new or novel purposes (Baker & Nelson 2005). To the best of our knowledge, previous studies have not systematically investigated internal and external constraints, their combinations, and subsequent bricolage patterns. The majority of bricolage literature focuses on external environmental constraints (e.g. Wieck 1989; Baker & Nelson 2005), thereby paying less attention to in evaluating internal constraints (e.g. skills and capabilities) or constraint combinations. In this paper we focus on ventures that typically face resource-poor environments. High potential, nascent and young sustainability ventures are often created and developed with resource constraints and in some cases, have greater resource requirements owing to higher levels of technical sophistication of their products (Rothaermel & Deeds 2006). These ventures usually have high aspirations and potential for growth who ''seeks to meet the needs and aspirations without compromising the ability to meet those of the future'' (Brundtland Commission 1983). High potential ventures are increasingly attributed with a central role in the development of innovation, and employment in developed economies (Acs 2008). Further, increasing awareness of environmental and sustainability issues has fostered demand for business processes that reduce detrimental environmental impacts of global development (Dean & McMullen 2007) and more environmentally sensitive products and services: representing an opportunity for the development of ventures that seek to satisfy this demand through entrepreneurial action. These ventures may choose to ''make do'' with existing resources in developing resource combinations that produce the least impact on the environment. The continuous conflict between the greater requirements for resources and limited resource availability in high potential sustainable ventures, with the added complexity of balancing this with an uncompromising focus on using ''what's on hand'' to lessen environment impacts may make bricolage behaviours critical for these ventures. Research into bricolage behaviour is however, the exception rather than the rule (Cunha 2005). More research is therefore needed to further develop and extend this emerging concept, especially in the context of sustainability ventures who are committed to personal and social goals of resourcefulness. To date, however, bricolage has not been studied specifically among high potential sustainable ventures. This research seeks to develop an in depth understanding of the impact of internal and external constraints and their combinations on the mechanisms employed in bricolage behaviours in differing dynamic environments. The following research question was developed to investigate this: How do internal, external resource constraints (or their combinations) impact bricolage resource decisions in high potential sustainability ventures? ---------- Methodology/Key Propositions: 6 case studies will be developed utilizing survey data from the Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE) large-scale longitudinal study of new venture start-ups in Australia. Prior to commencing case studies, 6 scoping interviews were conducted with key stakeholders including industry members, established businesses and government to ensure practical relevance in case development. The venture is considered the unit of analysis with the key informant being the entrepreneur and other management team members where appropriate. Triangulation techniques are used in this research including semi-structured interviews, survey data, onsite visits and secondary documentation website analysis, resumes, and business plans. These 6 sustainability ventures have been selected based on different environmental dynamism conditions including a traditionally mature market (building industry) and a more dynamic, evolving industry (renewable energy/solar ventures). In evaluating multidisciplinary literature, we expect the following external constraints are critical including: technology constraints (seen through lock-in of incumbents existing technology), institutional regulation and standards, access to markets, knowledge and training to nascent and young venture bricolage processes. The case studies will investigate internal constraints including resource fungability, resource combination capabilities, translating complex science/engineering knowledge into salient, valuable market propositions, i.e. appropriate market outcomes, and leveraging relationships may further influence bricolage decisions. ---------- Results and Implications: Intended ventures have been identified within the CAUSEE sample and have agreed to participate and secondary data collection for triangulation purposes has already commenced. Data collection of the case studies commenced 27th of May 2009. Analysis is expected to be completed finalised by 25th September 2009. This paper will report on the pattern of resource constraints and its impact on bricolage behaviours: its subsequent impact on resource deployment within venture creation and venture growth. As such, this research extends the theory of bricolage through the systematic analysis of constraints on resource management processes in sustainability ventures. For practice, this research may assist in providing a better understanding of the resource requirements and processes needed for continued venture persistence and growth in sustainability ventures. In these times of economic uncertainty, a better understanding of the influence on constraints and bricolage: the interplay of behaviours, processes and outcomes may enable greater venture continuance and success.

What is early childhood education for sustainability?

Julie Davis canvasses the literature to explain why sustainability issues are important for young children and why early childhood educators should become engaged with EfS. She outlines the short history of ECEfS in Australasia and internationally, emphasising its marginalised and fragile early phase that is now beginning to coalesce into a robust international movement. She then highlights two recent studies undertaken in child care centres that illustrate the learning and actions that are possible when education for sustainability is incorporated into early childhood curriculum and pedagogy. Julie ends the chapter by identifying the qualities that might characterise early childhood education for sustainability, stressing its requirement to be transformative education that builds the capabilities of young children as agents of change for sustainability. In so doing, she draws together theoretical strands from both early childhood education and EfS, beginning the process of constructing a theoretical framework for ECEfS.

Creating deep and broad change through research and systems approaches in early childhood education for sustainability

The co-authors raise two matters they consider essential for the future development of ECEfS. The first is the need to create deep foundations based in research. At a time of increasing practitioner interest, research in ECEfS is meagre. A robust research community is crucial to support quality in curriculum and pedagogy, and to promote learning and innovation in thinking and practice. The second 'essential' for the expansion and uptake of ECEfS is broad systemic change. All level within the early childhood education system - individual teachers and classrooms, whole centres and schools, professional associations and networks, accreditation and employing authorities, and teacher educators - must work together to create and reinforce the cultural and educational changes required for sustainability. This chapter provides explanations of processes to engender systemic change. It illustrates a systems approach, with reference to a recent study focused on embedding EfS into teacher education. This study emphasises the apparent contradiction that the answer to large-scale reform lies with small-scale reforms that build capacity and make connections.

Early childhood education for sustainability : why it matters, what it is, and how whole centre action research and systems thinking can help

The global financial crisis, global pandemics, global warming and peak oil are indicative of a world facing major environmental, social and economic problems. At the same time, world population continues to rise and global inequalities deepen. Children are the most vulnerable to the impacts of unsustainable living with specific harms arising because of their physical and cognitive vulnerabilities. Nevertheless, children do not have to be victims in the face of these challenges. Education, including early childhood education, has an important role to in building resilience and capabilities in children that equip them as active and informed citizens now and in the future and who are capable of contributing to healthy and sustainable ways of living. Drawing on educational change literature, action research, education for sustainability, health promotion and systems theory, this paper outlines three strategies that can help reorient early childhood education towards sustainability. One strategy is the adoption of whole centre approaches to sustainability and education for sustainability. This means working across the whole of a centre’s operations – curriculum and pedagogy, physical and social environments, its partnerships and community connections. The second strategy – applied in conjunction with the first – is the use of action research to investigate the early childhood setting and to create the desired changes. The third strategy is the adoption of systems thinking as a way of leveraging support and momentum for change so that education for sustainability goes beyond the initiatives of individual teachers and centres, and becomes a systems-wide imperative.

Leadership for creating cultures of sustainability

This chapter discusses the vital role of leadership in creating change for sustainability in an early childhood education and care setting. The author's experiences and perspectives as the past Director of Campus Kindergarten, a long day care centre that has had a Sustainable Planet Project for over a decade, are drawn upon as she explores the theoretical underpinnings that helped to shape her work as an innovative leader and a leader of innovation. Four frames of leadership, organisational culture, professional development and organisational change, and their contributions to creating and shaping the Sustainable Planet Project, are outlined. The style of educational and organisational leadership is highlighted as essential in creating a culture of sustainability. There is an emphasis on 'whole settings' approaches to change and the creating of 'learning communities' for sustainable living. Importantly, the recognition of children as leaders and change agents for sustainability is explored.

Repositioning an ethic of sustainability in early childhood education, with Reconciliation as central

In this chapter I raise questions about the current scope and purpose of early childhood education for sustainability (ECEfS) and the ways ECEfS is enacted in practice. This is to highlight why social, political and economic areas of concern should be central in ECEfS alongside an environmental focus. Specifically, this chapter establishes the place of Reconciliation in ECEfS because it is one of the most pressing ethical, social, political and economic issues on the Australian landscape. To reposition an ethic of sustainability is to broaden the scope and purpose of sustainability work so that particular regard is given to the place of Reconciliation in ECEfS. An ethic of sustainability is also concerned with the responsibility of non-Indigenous educators to take ownership of Reconciliation work in education curricula and contexts.

Responding to sustainability challenge and cost implications in highway construction projects

Highway construction often requires a significant capital input; therefore it often causes serious financial implications for developers, owners and operators. The recent industry-wide focus on sustainability has added a new dimension to the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the economical scale of ‘going green’. Comprehensive analysis of the whole-of-life highway development that responds to sustainability challenges is one of the primary concerns for stakeholders. Principles of engineering economics and life cycle costing have been used to determine the incremental capacity investments for highway projects. However, the consideration of costs and issues associated with sustainability is still very limited in current studies on highway projects. Previous studies have identified that highway project investments are primarily concerned with direct market costs that can be quantified through life cycle costing analysis (LCCA). But they tend to ignore costs that are difficult to calculate, as those related to environmental and social elements. On a more positive note, these studies proved that the inclusion of such costs is an essential part of the overall development investment and a primary concern for decision making by the stakeholders. This paper discusses a research attempt to identify and categorise sustainability cost elements for highway projects. Through questionnaire survey, a set of sustainability cost elements on highway projects has been proposed. These cost elements are incorporated into the extension of some of the existing Life Cycle Costing Analysis (LCCA) models in order to produce a holistic financial picture of the highway project. It is expected that a new LCCA model will be established to serve as a suitable tool for decision making for highway project stakeholders.

Developing a life-cycle costing analysis model for sustainability enhancement in road infrastructure project

With increasing pressure to provide environmentally responsible infrastructure products and services, stakeholders are putting significant foci on the early identification of financial viability and outcome of infrastructure projects. Traditionally, there has been an imbalance between sustainable measures and project budget. On one hand, the industry tends to employ the first-cost mentality and approach to developing infrastructure projects. On the other, environmental experts and technology innovators often push for the ultimately green products and systems without much of a concern for cost. This situation is being quickly changed as the industry is under pressure to continue to return profit, while better adapting to current and emerging global issues of sustainability. For the infrastructure sector to contribute to sustainable development, it will need to increase value and efficiency. Thus, there is a great need for tools that will enable decision makers evaluate competing initiatives and identify the most sustainable approaches to procuring infrastructure projects. In order to ensure that these objectives are achieved, the concept of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA) will play significant roles in the economics of an infrastructure project. Recently, a few research initiatives have applied the LCCA models for road infrastructure that focused on the traditional economics of a project. There is little coverage of life-cycle costing as a method to evaluate the criteria and assess the economic implications of pursuing sustainability in road infrastructure projects. To rectify this problem, this paper reviews the theoretical basis of previous LCCA models before discussing their inability to determinate the sustainability indicators in road infrastructure project. It then introduces an on-going research aimed at developing a new model to integrate the various new cost elements based on the sustainability indicators with the traditional and proven LCCA approach. It is expected that the research will generate a working model for sustainability based life-cycle cost analysis.

Incorporating sustainability measures in life-cycle financial decision making for highway construction

Public awareness and the nature of highway construction works demand that sustainability measures are first on the development agenda. However, in the current economic climate, individual volition and enthusiasm for such high capital investments do not present as strong cases for decision making as the financial pictures of pursuing sustainability. Some stakeholders consider sustainability to be extra work that costs additional money. Though, stakeholders realised its importance in infrastructure development. They are keen to identify the available alternatives and financial implications on a lifecycle basis. Highway infrastructure development is a complex rocess which requires expertise and tools to evaluate investment options, such as environmentally sustainable features for road and highway development. Life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is a valuable approach for investment decision making for construction works. However, LCCA applications in highway development are still limited. Current models, for example focus on economic issues alone and do not deal with sustainability factors, which are more difficult to quantify and encapsulate in estimation modules. This paper reports the research which identifies sustainability related factors in highway construction projects, in quantitative and qualitative forms of a multi-criteria analysis. These factors are then incorporated into past and proven LCCA models to produce a new long term decision support model. The research via questionnaire, model building, analytical hierarchy processes (AHP) and case studies have identified, evaluated and then processed highway sustainability related cost elements. These cost elements need to be verified by industry before being integrated for further development of the model. Then the Australian construction industry will have a practical tool to evaluate investment decisions which provide an optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

Contesting ‘sustainability’ in infrastructure planning : The debate of the public interest in Brisbane’s Boggo Road Busway development

Sustainable infrastructure demands that declared principles of sustainability are enacted in the processes of its implementation. However, a problem arises if the concept of sustainability is not thoroughly scrutinised in the planning process. The public interest could be undermined when the rhetoric of sustainability is used to substantiate a proposed plan. This chapter analyses the manifestation of sustainable development in the Boggo Road Busway Plan in Brisbane, Australia against the sustainability agenda set in the South East Queensland Regional and Transport Plans. Although the construction of the Busway was intended to improve public transport access in the region, its implementation drew significant environmental concerns. Local community groups contested the ‘sustainability’ concept deployed in Queensland’s infrastructure planning. Their challenges resulted in important concessions in the delivery of the Busway plan. This case demonstrates that principles of sustainable infrastructure should be measurable and that local communities be better informed in order to fulfil the public interest in regional planning.

Assessing the sustainability of urban ecosystems : an innovative approach

At the turn of the millennium, the Earth’s human population has reached unprecedented levels and its natural resources are being pushed to the limit. Thus, cities are focused on sustainable development and they have begun to develop new strategies for improving the built environment. Sustainable development provides the best outcomes for the human and natural environments by improving the quality of life that protects and balances the ecological, social and economic values. This brings us to the main point: to build a sustainable built environment, cities need to redesign many of their technologies and planning policies within the context of ecological principles. As an environmental sustainability index model, ASSURE is developed to investigate the present environmental situation of an urban area by assessing the impacts of development pressure on natural resources. It is an innovative approach to provide the resilience and function of urban ecosystems secure against the environmental degradation for now and the future. This paper aims to underline the importance of the model (ASSURE) in preserving biodiversity and natural ecosystems in the built environment and investigate its role in delivering long-term urban planning policies.

Towards sustainable urban futures : evaluating urban sustainability performance of the Gold coast, Australia

Creating sustainable urban environments is one of the challenging issues that need a clear vision and implementation strategies involving changes in governmental values and decision making process for local governments. Particularly, internalisation of environmental externalities of daily urban activities (e.g. manufacturing, transportation and so on) has immense importance for which local policies are formulated to provide better living conditions for the people inhabiting urban areas. Even if environmental problems are defined succinctly by various stakeholders, complicated nature of sustainability issues demand a structured evaluation strategy and well-defined sustainability parameters for efficient and effective policy making. Following this reasoning, this study involves assessment of sustainability performance of urban settings mainly focusing on environmental problems caused by rapid urban expansion and transformation. By taking into account land-use and transportation interaction, it tries to reveal how future urban developments would alter daily urban travel behaviour of people and affect the urban and natural environments. The paper introduces a grid-based indexing method developed for this research and trailed as a GIS-based decision support tool to analyse and model selected spatial and aspatial indicators of sustainability in the Gold Coast. This process reveals parameters of site specific relationship among selected indicators that are used to evaluate index-based performance characteristics of the area. The evaluation is made through an embedded decision support module by assigning relative weights to indicators. Resolution of selected grid-based unit of analysis provides insights about service level of projected urban development proposals at a disaggregate level, such as accessibility to transportation and urban services, and pollution. The paper concludes by discussing the findings including the capacity of the decision support system to assist decision-makers in determining problematic areas and developing intervention policies for sustainable outcomes of future developments.