Triple-bottom-line assessment of urban stormwater projects

New guidelines have been developed and trialled in Australia to assist urban stormwater managers to assess options for projects that aim to improve urban waterway health. These guidelines help users to examine the financial, ecological and social dimensions of projects (i.e. the so-called “triple-bottom-line”). Features of the assessment process described in the guidelines include use of multi criteria analysis, input from technical experts as well as non-technical stakeholders, and provision of three alternative levels of assessment to suit stormwater managers with differing needs and resources. This paper firstly provides a background to the new guidelines and triple-bottom-line assessment. The assessment methodology promoted in the new guidelines is then briefly summarised. This methodology is compared and contrasted with European guidelines from the “SWARD” project that have been primarily developed for assessing the relative sustainability of options involving urban water supply and sewerage assets. Finally, the paper discusses how assessment methodologies that evaluate the financial, ecological and social dimensions of projects can, under some circumstances, be used to evaluate the relative progress of options for urban water management on a journey towards the widely pursued, but vaguely defined goal of “sustainable development”.

Download Full-text

A Preliminary Investigation into the Environmental and Social Dimensions on the Sustainability Triple Bottom Line

World Sustainability Series - Integrating Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development ◽

10.1007/978-3-030-59975-1_28 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 425-436

Author(s):

Franciele Lourenço ◽

Osiris Canciglieri Júnior

Keyword(s):

Preliminary Investigation ◽

Triple Bottom Line ◽

Social Dimensions ◽

Bottom Line

Download Full-text

Improving urban water supply in Mexico: a systematic review

Management of Environmental Quality An International Journal ◽

10.1108/meq-01-2018-0011 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 29 (5) ◽

pp. 859-876

Author(s):

Jorge Alejandro Silva Rodríguez de San Miguel ◽

Mara Maricela Trujillo Flores ◽

Fernando Lambarry-Vilchis

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Water Supply ◽

Federal Government ◽

Design Methodology ◽

General Nature ◽

Urban Water ◽

Urban Water Supply ◽

Urban Water Management ◽

Content Type ◽

Made In

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to analyse the measures taken by both the federal government of Mexico and its municipalities in relation to the country’s urban water supply and its management to improve it.Design/methodology/approachThe PRISMA guidelines were chosen as the framework for this systematic review of the available literature on urban water supply in Mexico, considering the most important and relevant legal and institutional considerations. They were paired with critical qualitative review. Overall, 21 main documents, between 2000 and 2016, were acceptable for inclusion.FindingsThe review closes by proposing that the approach, at present, is excessively rigid, and that greater flexibility would permit municipalities to identify more suitable means of managing their own water supplies with minimal support from the federal government.Originality/valueSeveral research articles have been written about the general nature of Mexico’s urban water supply and management at present. However, no attempt has been made to synthesise the evidence and arguments made in this significant body of research. Thus, the key purpose of this review is to do that with the intention of proposing a shift in the country’s approach to urban water management.

Download Full-text

Collaborative, Risk-Informed, Triple Bottom Line, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Planning Framework for Integrated Urban Water Management

Water ◽

10.3390/w10121722 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 10 (12) ◽

pp. 1722 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Jeanne Cole ◽

Sybil Sharvelle ◽

Neil Grigg ◽

Gary Pivo ◽

Jon Haukaas

Keyword(s):

Water Management ◽

Decision Making ◽

Water Supply ◽

Decision Analysis ◽

Performance Indicators ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Urban Water ◽

Urban Water Management ◽

Bottom Line ◽

Planning Framework

The historical division of water management into different sectors, with financially and technologically driven decision processes, makes taking a more holistic approach to finding sustainable solutions for urban water management difficult. Here, a planning framework for Integrated Urban Water Management (IUWM) that evolved during a two-year study evaluating alternative strategies for dual water supply within a local government context is described. The planning framework was developed to overcome the obstacles that surfaced over the course of the study. It provides a structured approach to strategic decision making that integrates triple bottom line (TBL), multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), uncertainty and sensitivity analyses, and participatory decision making into an exploration of water supply alternatives. TBL assured stakeholders that the decisions considered the financial, social, and environmental performance. MCDA provided visibility into the benefits and trade-offs of the alternatives by providing a quantitative method for comparing alternatives that incorporates incommensurate performance indicators and priorities of multiple stakeholders. Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses addressed concerns regarding decision risk and improved transparency into inputs driving uncertainty in the analysis. Finally, a flexible participatory process helped to circumvent socio-institutional barriers by adapting the methodology and increasing cooperation among stakeholders and multidisciplinary experts. The resulting collaborative, risk-informed, TBL-MCDA (CRTM) planning framework helps to refine the feasible set of alternatives by providing more transparency into the drivers, technologies, and stakeholders influencing the decision. The planning framework increased the number of participants that were involved in the study, increased interaction between participants, changed the structure of the decision problem, increased the number of performance indicators considered, and improved stakeholder cooperation in the decision process.

Download Full-text

Urban stormwater – greywater management system for sustainable urban water management at sub-watershed level

E3S Web of Conferences ◽

10.1051/e3sconf/20172200003 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 22 ◽

pp. 00003

Author(s):

Amarpreet Singh Arora

Keyword(s):

Water Management ◽

Management System ◽

Urban Water ◽

Urban Water Management ◽

Urban Stormwater ◽

Sustainable Urban Water Management

Download Full-text

Sustainability Identification of Steel and Concrete Construction Frames with Respect to Triple Bottom Line

Buildings ◽

10.3390/buildings11110565 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (11) ◽

pp. 565

Author(s):

Amir Oladazimi ◽

Saeed Mansour ◽

Seyed Abbas Hosseinijou ◽

Mohammad H. Majdfaghihi

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Environmental Economic ◽

Construction Industry ◽

Triple Bottom Line ◽

Steel Frame ◽

Social Dimensions ◽

Bottom Line ◽

High Importance ◽

Concrete Frame

As one of the most prominent industries in developed and developing countries, the construction industry has had substantial impacts on different aspects of the environment, society, and economy. In recent years, sustainable construction has been introduced as an approach to evaluate the various construction phases based on environmental, economic, and social dimensions, also known as the triple bottom line (TBL). To conduct a sustainability analysis of the buildings in Tehran, the capital city of Iran, two conventional construction frames were selected, namely steel frame and concrete frame. In this research, three conventional approaches for the evaluation of the TBL, namely the life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle cost (LCC), and social life cycle assessment (SLCA), were, respectively, used for the study of environmental, economic, and social impacts. The main results of the study are summarized as the following: Overall, based on the LCA results, the concrete frame led to almost 38% more environmental pollution than steel frame. In terms of the total prices of the buildings, considering their LCC and with respect to the present value (PV) method, the steel frame was almost 152,000 USD more expensive than the concrete frame. The quantified results of the social dimension by the SLCA method showed that concrete and steel buildings had a score of 0.199 and 0.189, respectively, which indicates that concrete had a slightly better social performance based on expert opinions. A multi-criteria assessment and sensitivity analysis of the results were conducted by a graphical tool, namely the mixing triangle, and showed that the overall preference of each alternative depends mainly on the importance weights given to each aspect of the assessment. However, one of the main findings of the research was that overall, giving a high importance weight to environmental dimension leads to sustainability preference of steel over concrete frame, while giving high importance weights to economic or social dimensions leads to sustainability preference of concrete over steel frame. Findings of the study are beneficial to decision-makers in the construction industry since they can decide on the best alternative among concrete and steel frames based on their strategies.

Download Full-text