The concept of value in sustainable infrastructure systems: a literature review

Abstract

Infrastructure choices and decisions widely employ the language of value, whether to articulate what is worthwhile or to debate which principles or approaches are most appropriate to specific contexts. As the world strives to achieve long-term sustainability goals, incorporating sustainability values into infrastructure decision-making becomes progressively more important. Yet, the term ‘value’ has been used under different meanings and implications throughout the infrastructure sustainability literature, obstructing the debate on which values are important and what is valuable to infrastructure decision-making processes. This paper reviews how the concept of value has been used to position different sustainability dimensions of large infrastructure systems. Specifically, a conceptual framework proposed by Tadaki et al is used to highlight different notions of infrastructure value under four general headings: value as a magnitude of preference, as a contribution to specified goals, as a means of communicating key priorities, and as a representation of historical relations. This review shows that the discussion of infrastructure value has often focussed on monetary measures to the exclusion of other relevant measures of value. However, if long-term sustainability goals are to be met, a transformation of the ways that value is understood and measured in the context of infrastructure systems is required. This review discusses key similarities, interdependencies, and disparities between published notions of infrastructure value in order to provide a conceptual reference guide that highlights the variety of perspectives that are both implicit and explicit among practitioners and academics.

Recent progress towards smart transportation systems using triboelectric nanogenerators

“…This system plays a crucial role in guaranteeing the safety of traffic. As a result, most countries prioritize the building of modern infrastructure [170,171]. Furthermore, the inescapable degradation of infrastructure systems resulting from prolonged operation in severe conditions and substantial vehicle loads is also a cause for concern [172].…”

Results from a survey of life cycle assessment-aligned socioenvironmental priorities in US and Australian communities hosting oil, natural gas, coal, and solar thermal energy production

“…Not all values are easily aligned with the types of analysis that are granted authority in decision processes (or even quantifiable) (Chan et al 2016, Grubert 2018a, Rawluk et al 2019, which reflects a fundamental limitation of decision support tools and requires humility from analysts. Nonetheless, within the context of decision support tools, the ability to quantitatively and rigorously incorporate values as an organized set of magnitudes of preference (Brown 1984, Tadaki et al 2017, Zuluaga et al 2021 aligned with the issues that have been defined as relevant to the decision context (ISO 2006) can extend the usefulness of these tools for decision makers tasked with weighing challenging tradeoffs with societal implications.…”