Kalyviotis, N (2022) Balancing economic, social and environmental value in transport infrastructure business models. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, UK.
Abstract
There is ongoing debate about the value of the benefits of infrastructure systems (specifically those of energy, water and wastewater, transport, waste, and communications) and how to prioritize infrastructure investments to encompass considerations of social, economic and environmental wellbeing. The use of the term 'infrastructure system' is related to interdependencies. Infrastructure systems operating in different countries and cities are interrelated in different ways, but all have a strong relationship to 'transport' - there is a cost and a utility associated with movement. Infrastructure systems are ultimately created to serve individuals, who place a value on them. In order to explore all forms of value realisation - the foundation for what are commonly termed business models - the relationship between an individual and the transport system needs to be established. The hypothesis being tested in this thesis is that it is possible to identify both the full range of value and interdependencies required, and hence to establish robust alternative business models, for transport infrastructure interdependencies management that incorporate considerations of social, economic and environmental wellbeing, noting that the interdependencies lie with the other four national infrastructure sectors in the UK (see above). Different research methods were used for each type of value. Economic value was studied using the research methodology of 'networks and cohorts' on input-output tables and applying linear analysis to the data. Social value was studied by collecting data with a structured interview process and analysing this with the appropriate statistical methods. Environmental value was taken from previous studies which linked it with the economic value (demand) of the input-output tables. Economic and environmental value interdependencies were analysed through Pearson's correlation coefficient of secondary data, while social value interdependencies were analysed through statistical analysis of primary data. The new business model captures a wide range of the values of social, economic and environmental considerations on infrastructure systems. The new business model permits better understanding of how the overall system works by policy makers and hence better decisions on which type of infrastructure to focus on if they want to add value to society.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | social value; wellbeing; policy; research methods; UK; statistical analysis; interview; business model; communication; investment |
| Index terms: | transport infrastructure, interview, society, movement, infrastructure sector, input-output table, well-being, infrastructure investment, secondary data, statistical analysis, social value, statistical method, research methodology, business model |
| Subjects: | data science, business, research design and methodology, mental health and wellbeing, data collection methods, statistical analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, sociology, economic analysis, health behaviours and lifestyles, communities and social development |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Procurement |
| 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