A decision making approach for selection of sustainable pavements in Texas by integrating life cycle cost analysis (LCCA), life cycle assessment (LCA) of environmental and social impacts

Inti, S (2016) A decision making approach for selection of sustainable pavements in Texas by integrating life cycle cost analysis (LCCA), life cycle assessment (LCA) of environmental and social impacts. PhD thesis, University of Texas at El Paso, USA.

Abstract

A sustainable pavement can be defined as the one that minimally impacts future economic opportunities, social conditions, human health, and the environment and still fulfills the engineering objectives. In this study, one such effort was initiated by proposing a framework for selection of pavement design based on sustainable development. The concept of sustainability is widely believed to be founded on three criteria: economic, environmental, and social standards. Since the purpose of pavements it to provide service for many decades, assessing each criterion throughout the life of pavements is required, that is, based on life cycle assessments. The most widely used economic evaluation tool for pavements is Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA), which has been proposed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Practitioners have started using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) recommended by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), which has been recently adopted by the FHWA to estimate environmental impacts. There is no tool available for assessing the social impact of pavements. LCA provides the necessary information for decision-makers in selecting pavement designs, which minimally impacts the environment. However, it is observed that it has never been fully utilized in selecting pavement design and construction. The reasons might be due to a lack of standardized and validated databases for assessments, unavailability of well-defined methodologies to assess impacts during some phases of pavement, and also transforming the environmental impacts into meaningful data understandable to civil engineers. One more major area that is barely addressed in sustainable pavements is decision-making. Since sustainability needs to be evaluated regarding economic, environmental, and social criteria, the group decision becomes a complex and often fuzzy problem. It was concluded that the design and selection of sustainable pavements would require an integrated decision-making process. A tool for evaluating the social impact of pavements, filling in the LCA database gaps and evaluation approaches, and a systematic approach for comparing alternate pavement designs; thus, this dissertation is aimed to achieve the same. A multi-criterion group decision model was proposed in this study by combining the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) based preference aggregation method, and the α- Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique. The proposed decision model requires fewer inputs from decision-makers compared to conventional AHP. This study also contributed towards filling some of the deficits in life cycle assessments. This study identified models and databases that are reliable and applicable to LCA of pavements and are accessible to practitioners. The selection of pavement design based on social sustainability principles is also often ignored due to the complexity involved in the quantification of social issues (like violation of labor rights), throughout the life cycle of pavements. One such social indicator that can be reasonably quantified is traffic noise. Noise barrier walls are commonly constructed to reduce traffic noise levels to below the thresholds. Since various pavements generate different levels of traffic noise, each pavement type needs an accurate height of barrier wall to keep the traffic noise at acceptable levels. The construction costs and emissions associated with building and maintenance of barrier walls can be used to make a decision. In the end, the proposed framework and developed methodologies were demonstrated through a fictional case study. Four pavement designs were developed to perform for 30 years. The design software and inputs required for various assessments were selected for the state of Texas. LCCA, LCA, LCA-S were performed for analyzing the impacts for 30 years. Within LCCA, agency costs for constructing and maintaining highways for 30 years was estimated. Also, expenses incurred to users during maintenance operations was estimate under user costs. In LCA, ten air pollutants were assessed and then transformed into six impact categories. In LCA-S, traffic noise was calculated without barrier walls for 30 years and then barrier wall analysis was performed to keep the noise at acceptable levels. The life cycle costs (construction and maintenance) of barrier walls was estimated and categorized as social costs. Similarly, the LCA was performed for barrier walls and six impact categories were classified as social emissions. A decision-making template using traditional AHP was developed and eight experts from various fields like construction management, execution, environment, policy-making, etc. , were asked to provide their judgments. Six experts chose Design 4 as the preferred and two experts chose Design 1. The group decision was generated based on the expert’s individual inputs, and the group decision was in favor of Design 4. Even though this dissertation delivered an integrated framework for selecting sustainable designs, it needs to be further enhanced by including the overlooked parameters. The framework needs to be validated by applying it to a real highway project. (Abstract shortened by ProQuest. )

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Thesis advisor: Tandon, V
Uncontrolled Keywords: cost overrun; groundwater; tunnel; risk analysis; risk assessment; probability; risk analysis
Index terms: pavement design, ISO, tunnel, sustainable design, human health, life cycle assessment, groundwater, labour right, sustainable development, civil engineer, life cycle cost, methodology, decision-making, environmental impact, practitioner, agency, risk analysis, preference, pollutant, violation, complexity, quantification, judgment, international organization, case study, life cycle cost analysis, cost overrun, construction cost, life cycle, decision-making process, database, risk assessment, highway construction, social sustainability, standardization, economic evaluation, dissertation, estimate, data envelopment analysis, social impact
Subjects: sociology, measurement and scaling, decision analysis, data management, systems engineering, environmental health, infrastructure and transport systems, regulatory law, civil engineering, economics, public and environmental health, performance measurement, water management, employment law, standards development, financial and cost management, data analysis and analytics, profession, data collection methods, dispute resolution, value management, financial analysis, environmental hazards, transportation engineering, communities and social development, research methods, decision-making and reasoning, design process, financial risk, health safety and environment, strategic management, research dissemination and communication, practitioner, environmental impact
Topics: Quality Management, Legal Issues, Sustainability, Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, International Construction, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Cost Management
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here