Creative destruction: building toward sustainability

Abstract

The engineering community at large, and the civil engineering community in particular, has the opportunity and arguably the obligation to promote a development agenda that considers not only the economics of development, but also the health of the environment and society at large. In this paper, we contemplate the challenge of sustainable development and its effect on project scale and scope. We discuss the inherent opportunity to drive the "creative destruction" of the development industry, using innovation to exploit inefficiencies in the planning and management of engineering systems to create a range of "future" products and services that challenge existing practice. We review the impact of procurement policy, contract pricing, prescriptive codes, and public policy on innovation. Several examples of innovative design and sustainable development introduced into the planning and management of Canadian civil engineering projects are provided. We assert that the most effective means of promoting the sustainability of built environment and civil infrastructure systems will be through inter- and intra-industry collaboration with the support of public policy-makers.Key words: sustainable development, civil, engineering, infrastructure, innovation, creative destruction, environment, collaboration.

Fostering sustainability in infrastructure development schemes

“…Unlike buildings and facilities, infrastructure displays less obvious ongoing costs: there are fewer, less frequent bills to be paid and so it can be harder to demonstrate that savings can be made. Despite the possible deterioration of a piece of infrastructure and subsequent increased costs in its maintenance, plus the environmental and social impacts, little is done by infrastructure operators to seek innovative solutions in operation or in procuring new projects (Hartshorn et al, 2005). Possible reasons for this include a perceived increase in potential costs, risks and fear of the untested or untried (Hartshorn et al, 2005;Roberts and Sims, 2007).…”

“…Despite the possible deterioration of a piece of infrastructure and subsequent increased costs in its maintenance, plus the environmental and social impacts, little is done by infrastructure operators to seek innovative solutions in operation or in procuring new projects (Hartshorn et al, 2005). Possible reasons for this include a perceived increase in potential costs, risks and fear of the untested or untried (Hartshorn et al, 2005;Roberts and Sims, 2007). The lack of attention to infrastructure is particularly surprising given that highways, drainage systems and utilities supply all have a major impact on the priority areas for national sustainable development (Chandler et al, 2008;Forman and Alexander, 1998;Lin, 2005), for example through: the consumption of large quantities of primary and secondary construction materials and generation of waste; some of the most heavily consumed materials, cement and asphalt, requiring large amounts of energy in their production and transportation leading to significant greenhouse gas emissions; depletion of natural resources leading to environmental degradation along with loss of natural habitats and major impacts (visual, increased noise, increased emissions, loss of habitat, etc.…”

Application of improved grey relational projection method to evaluate sustainable building envelope performance

“…Buildings are energy gluttons and have a large impact on the global climate change and other energy-related environmental issues [2]. Building energy consumption accounts for approximately 40% of the global energy demands [3][4][5][6].…”

The role of sustainability advisers in developing sustainability outcomes for an infrastructure project: lessons from the Australian urban rail sector

“…HERE IS INCREASING RECOGNITION that the 'status quo' of infrastructure project delivery is ineffective in holistically addressing environmental, social and economic dimensions (Hartshorn et al, 2005;Koo and Ariaratnam, 2008;Vanegas, 2003). There is also evidence of adverse environmental, social and economic impacts resulting from project delivery processes (Hartshorn et al, 2005;Ding, 2005;Shen et al, 2008;Edum-Fotwe and Price, 2009).…”

“…There is also evidence of adverse environmental, social and economic impacts resulting from project delivery processes (Hartshorn et al, 2005;Ding, 2005;Shen et al, 2008;Edum-Fotwe and Price, 2009). These issues relate to the concept of sustainability and its interface with the different stages of infrastructure project delivery (highlighted in Figure 1), or 'infrastructure sustainability'.…”