Stakeholder-Sensitive Social Welfare–Oriented Benefit Analysis for Sustainable Infrastructure Project Development
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 140, Issue 9
Abstract
There is a need for better involving stakeholders in the development of sustainable civil infrastructure systems and for incorporating their input in the decision-making process. In this paper, we present a new model for analyzing the sustainability of infrastructure project alternatives from a stakeholder-centric perspective: the stakeholder-sensitive, social welfare–oriented sustainability benefit analysis model ( Model). The model evaluates infrastructure project alternatives based on a proposed sustainable construction social welfare function (SC-SWF). The SC-SWF is a measure of the collective social, environmental, and economic benefits to all stakeholders. It can help identify project solutions that offer social (group) welfare based on the social, environmental, and economic benefits to individual stakeholders. The theoretical foundation of the proposed SC-SWF is grounded in the areas of social choice theory and social welfare theory. The proposed model and its practical application are illustrated through a hypothetical case study. This research contributes to the body of knowledge by advancing the knowledge in the area of social welfare theory and the fundamental research in infrastructure system decision theory. The proposed analysis may guide infrastructure system decision making and may lead to better understanding of how to plan and design infrastructure systems in a way that maximizes the collective social, environmental, and economic benefits to stakeholders.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the National Science Foundation. This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant 1254679. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
References
Arrow, K. (1963). Social choice and individual values, 2nd Ed., Wiley, New York.
Atkinson, A., and Brandolini, A. (2010). “On analyzing the world distribution of income.” World Bank Econ. Rev., 24(1), 1–37.
Barr, N. (1998). The economics of the welfare state, 3rd Ed., Stanford Press, Stanford, CA.
Bellu, L. (2006). “Social welfare, social welfare functions and inequality aversion.” Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 〈www.fao.org〉 (Nov. 8, 2011).
Carstens, L. (2010). “Defining, inspiring, and implementing sustainability.” Natl. Civic Rev., 99(3), 11–16.
Cowell, F. (2003). Measuring inequality, 3rd Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.
De la Garza, J., Prateapusanond, A., and Ambani, N. (2007). “Preallocation of total float in the application of a Critical Path Method based construction contract.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 836–845.
Dell’Isola, A., and Kirk, S. (2003). Life cycle costing for facilities, 1st Ed., Wiley, New York.
Farzin, Y. (2010). “Sustainability, optimality, and development policy.” Rev. Develop. Econ., 14(2), 262–281.
Feldman, A., and Serrano, R. (2006). Welfare economics and social choice theory, 2nd Ed., Springer, New York.
“Generation.” (2011). 〈http://www.merriam-webster.com〉 (Sep. 20, 2011).
Hallowell, M. (2011). “Risk-based framework for safety investment in construction organizations.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 592–599.
Ibbs, W., and Nguyen, L. (2007). “Alternative for quantifying field-overhead damages.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 736–742.
Ibbs, W., Nguyen, L., and Simonian, L. (2011). “Concurrent delays and apportionment of damages.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 119–126.
Illinois Dept. of Transportation (IDOT). (2010). Stakeholder involvement plan for agency and public involvement, IDOT, Springfield, IL.
Johnson, H. (1997). Green plans, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE.
Kaplow, L., and Shavell, S. (2001). “Any non-individualistic social welfare function violates the Pareto principle.” J. Political Econ., 109(2), 281–286.
Kelman, S. (1981). “Cost-benefit analysis: An ethical critique.” J. Gov. Soc. Regul., 5(1), 33–40.
Miller, H., and Wu, Y. (2000). “GIS software for measuring space-time accessibility in transportation planning and analysis.” GeoInformatica, 4(2), 141–159.
Mokorosi, P. (2007). “Can benefits be shared equitably among a variety of stakeholders in a transboundary river basin?” Proc., 8th WaterNet/WARFSA/GWP-SA Symp., Global Water Partnership, Stockholm, Sweden.
Moore, J. (1995). “Cost-benefit analysis: Issues in its use in regulation.” National Council for Science and the Environment. 〈http://ncseonline.org〉 (Sep. 20, 2011).
Mukhopadhaya, P. (2001). Efficiency criteria and the Sen-type social welfare function, Working Paper 0114, Dept. of Economics, National Univ. of Singapore, Singapore.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). (2011). Cost/benefit analysis of converting a lane for bus rapid transit-phase II evaluation and methodology, Research Results Digest 352, Summary of NCHRP Project 20-65, Washington, DC.
Omura, M. (2004). “Cost-benefit analysis revisited: Is it a useful tool for sustainable development?” Kobe Univ. Econ. Rev., 50, 43–58.
Organization for Economic Co-operation, and Development (OECD). (2010). “Mean age of mothers at first childbirth.” 〈http://www.oecd.org〉 (May 22, 2011).
Ott, K., and Thapa, P. (2003). Greifswald’s environmental ethics, Steinbecker Verlag Ulrich Rose, Greifswald, Germany.
Padilla, E. (2002). “Intergenerational equity and sustainability.” Ecol. Econ., 41(1), 69–83.
Sánchez, T. W., Stolz, R., and Ma, J. S. (2003). Moving to equity: Addressing inequitable effects of transportation policies on minorities, Civil Rights Project at Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA.
Sargent, R. (2007). “Verification and validation of simulation models.” Proc., 39th Conf. on Winter Simulation: 40 Years! The Best Is Yet To Come, IEEE Press, Washington, DC, 124–137.
Sen, A. (1992). Inequality reexamined, 1st Ed., Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Sen, A. (1997). On economic inequality, 1st Ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
Utomo, C., and Idrus, A. (2010). “Value-based group decision on support bridge selection.” World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 43, 153–158.
Wanyama, T., and Far, B. H. (2007). “A protocol for multi-agent negotiation in a group-choice decision making process.” J. Network Comput. Appl., 30(3), 1173–1195.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 140 • Issue 9 • September 2014
Copyright
© 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 8, 2013
Accepted: Aug 19, 2013
Published online: May 20, 2014
Published in print: Sep 1, 2014
Discussion open until: Oct 20, 2014
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.