Risk-based approaches to sustainability in civil engineering

Infrastructure project sustainability assessment typically entails the use of specialised assessment tools to measure and rate project performance against a set of criteria. This paper looks beyond the prevailing approaches to sustainability assessments and explores sustainability principles in terms of project risks and opportunities. Taking a risk management approach to applying sustainability concepts to projects has the potential to reconceptualise decision structures for sustainability from bespoke assessments to becoming a standard part of the project decisionmaking process. By integrating issues of sustainability into project risk management for project planning, design and construction, sustainability is considered within a more traditional business and engineering language. Currently, there is no widely practised approach for objectively considering the environmental and social context of projects alongside the more traditional project risk assessments of time, cost and quality. A risk-based approach would not solve all the issues associated with existing sustainability assessments but it would place sustainability concerns alongside other key risks and opportunities, integrating sustainability with other project decisions.

Articulating current service development practices: a qualitative analysis of eleven mental health projects.

BACKGROUND: The utilisation of good design practices in the development of complex health services is essential to improving quality. Healthcare organisations, however, are often seriously out of step with modern design thinking and practice. As a starting point to encourage the uptake of good design practices, it is important to understand the context of their intended use. This study aims to do that by articulating current health service development practices. METHODS: Eleven service development projects carried out in a large mental health service were investigated through in-depth interviews with six operation managers. The critical decision method in conjunction with diagrammatic elicitation was used to capture descriptions of these projects. Stage-gate design models were then formed to visually articulate, classify and characterise different service development practices. RESULTS: Projects were grouped into three categories according to design process patterns: new service introduction and service integration; service improvement; service closure. Three common design stages: problem exploration, idea generation and solution evaluation - were then compared across the design process patterns. Consistent across projects were a top-down, policy-driven approach to exploration, underexploited idea generation and implementation-based evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into where and how good design practices can contribute to the improvement of current service development practices. Specifically, the following suggestions for future service development practices are made: genuine user needs analysis for exploration; divergent thinking and innovative culture for idea generation; and fail-safe evaluation prior to implementation. Better training for managers through partnership working with design experts and researchers could be beneficial.