Journal of Cleaner Production: Li-Yin Shen, Vivian W.Y. Tam, Leona Tam, Ying-Bo Ji
Journal of Cleaner Production: Li-Yin Shen, Vivian W.Y. Tam, Leona Tam, Ying-Bo Ji
Journal of Cleaner Production: Li-Yin Shen, Vivian W.Y. Tam, Leona Tam, Ying-Bo Ji
Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong
School of Engineering, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 1797, Australia
c
Department of Marketing, College of Business and Public Administration, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA
b
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 8 February 2009
Received in revised form
15 October 2009
Accepted 17 October 2009
Available online 22 October 2009
This paper introduces a new approach for conducting project feasibility study by embracing the principles of sustainable development. Construction projects, in particular, infrastructures have major
inuence on the attainment of sustainable development, thus project sustainability needs to be
considered. This becomes a pressing issue particularly in those developing countries or regions, such as
China where a huge amount of construction works are currently performed and remain to happen in the
future. Previous study has addressed little on the relevance of project feasibility study to project
sustainability performance. The importance of incorporating sustainable development principles in
conducting project feasibility study is not effectively understood by project stakeholders. This paper
addresses major challenges of undertaking project feasibility study in line with sustainable construction
practice with reference to the Chinese construction industry. A case study approach is the major research
method in this study. The research team collected 87 feasibility study reports from various projects.
Attributes are used for measuring project performance, including 18 economic performance attributes,
nine social performance attributes, and eight environmental performance attributes. Research results
show that economic performance is given the most concern in the current practice of project feasibility
study, whilst less attention is given to the social and environmental performance. The study reveals the
insufciency of examining the performance of implementing a construction project from the perspective
of sustainable development. The results also suggest the need for shifting the traditional approach of
project feasibility study to a new approach that embraces the principles of sustainable development.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Feasibility study
Sustainability performance
Sustainable construction project
China
1. Introduction
Sustainability concerns the interactions, integrations and
signicant relationships among ecological, social, and economic
systems [1,2]. With reference to construction business, sustainability is about achieving a winwin outcome for contributing to
the improved environment and the advanced society, and at the
same time for gaining competitive advantages and economic
benets for construction companies. Other studies address the
importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in pursuing
sustainable construction [35]. By denition, CSR concerns ethical
behaviour related to the environment, society, and the economy
[1]. When construction companies set up sustainability as company
goals, they often set up CSR policies for implementing necessary
procedures. CSR is known to take responsibilities towards the
environment and acknowledge the social dimension of sustainability which is often overlooked [1].
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 61 2 4736 0105; fax: 61 2 4736 0833.
E-mail address: vivianwytam@gmail.com (V.W.Y. Tam).
0959-6526/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.10.014
255
256
Table 1
Attributes in project feasibility study.
Economic performance attributes
EPA1: Governmental strategic
development policy
EPA2: Tax policy
EPA3: Demand and supply analysis
EPA4: Market forecast
EPA5: Project function and size
EPA6: Market competition
EPA7: Location advantage
EPA8: Technology advantage
EPA9: Budget estimate
Social performance attributes
SPA1: Inuence to the local
social development
SPA2: Provision capacity of
employment
SPA3: Provision capacity of
public services
SPA4: Provision capacity of public
infrastructure facilities
SPA5: Provision of the infrastructures
for other economic activities
Investment plan
Life cycle cost
Life cycle prot
Finance risk assessment
Return of investment (ROI)
Net present value (NPV)
Pay-back period
Internal rate of return (IRR)
Waste assessment
Environmental friendly design
Energy consumption performance
Land consumption
257
Table 2
Application of attributes in feasibility study. PI residential; PII public sector; PIII industrial; PIV commercial; R application rate.
Attributes
PI (max: 29)
RI (%)
RII (%)
RIII (%)
RIV (%)
20
23
24
26
25
20
23
19
19
16
20
24
23
15
15
15
16
16
2
3
3
2
2
0
2
0
2
1
4
4
5
0
0
3
0
69
79
83
90
86
69
79
66
66
55
69
83
79
52
52
52
55
55
7
10
10
7
7
0
7
0
7
3
14
14
17
0
0
10
0
9
11
26
4
19
1
20
19
24
18
12
8
3
3
3
9
9
9
19
3
15
14
4
3
3
0
17
7
15
17
19
17
16
4
7
33
41
96
15
71
3
74
70
89
67
44
30
11
11
11
33
33
33
70
11
56
52
15
11
11
0
63
26
56
63
70
63
59
15
26
14
10
17
16
14
10
16
17
18
15
12
16
16
10
14
16
17
17
3
3
1
1
1
0
0
2
7
6
14
12
12
12
14
11
7
70
50
85
80
70
50
80
85
90
75
60
80
80
50
70
80
85
85
15
15
5
5
5
0
0
10
35
30
70
60
60
60
70
55
35
5
8
6
9
10
2
8
7
8
4
7
6
5
4
5
5
5
5
6
5
3
3
2
4
2
4
2
2
2
4
3
5
0
4
2
45
73
55
82
91
18
73
64
73
36
64
55
45
36
45
45
45
45
55
45
27
27
18
36
18
36
18
18
18
36
27
45
0
36
18
4.2. Clients
4.1. Government
258
[10] Turk AM. The benets associated with ISO 14001 certication for construction
rms: Turkish case. Journal of Cleaner Production 2009;17:55969.
[11] Tam WYV, Tam CM. Evaluations of existing waste recycling methods: a Hong
Kong study. Building and Environment 2006;41:164960.
[12] Tam WYV, Tam CM, Zeng SX. Towards adoption of prefabrication in
construction. Building and Environment 2007;42:364254.
[13] Lilja R. Negotiated environmental agreements in promoting material efciency in industry rst steps in Finland. Journal of Cleaner Production
2009;17:86372.
[14] Tam WYV. On the effectiveness of implementing a waste-management-plan
method in construction. Waste Management 2008;28:107280.
[15] World Commission on Environment and Developments. Our common future.
Oxford University Press; 1987.
[16] Maxwell D, Sheate W, Vorst RVD. Functional and systems aspects of the
sustainable product and service development approach for industry. Journal of
Cleaner Production 2006;14:146679.
[17] Fratila D. Evaluation of near-dry machining effects on gear milling process
efciency. Journal of Cleaner Production 2009;17:83945.
[18] OConnor M, Spangenberg JH. A methodology for CSR reporting: assuring
a representative diversity of indicators across stakeholders, scales, sites and
performance issues. Journal of Cleaner Production 2008;16:1399415.
[19] Graham D. Managing residential construction projects: strategies and solutions. McGraw-Hill Professional 2006.
[20] Hutchinson White. Feasibility study. From White Hutchinson. USA. Available
from: http://www.whitehutchinson.com; 2009. Accessed on May.
[21] Jorgensen TH. Towards more sustainable management systems: through life
cycle management and integration. Journal of Cleaner Production
2008;16:107180.
[22] Haapio A, Viitaniemi P. A critical review of building environmental assessment
tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2008;28:46982.
[23] Hischier R, Wager P, Gauglhofer J. Does WEEE recycling make sense from an
environmental perspective?: the environmental impacts of the Swiss takeback and recycling systems for waste electrical and electronic equipment.
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2005;25:52539.
[24] Wood C. Environmental impact assessment: a comparative review. Pearson
Education Limited 2003.
[25] Zhang Z, Wu X, Gong Z. Study of theories and applicable criteria on environmental impact assessment of buildings. Environmental Protection
2005;5:3942.
[26] Baba K. Necessity of common under standing of sustainability in construction
in Asia. Proceedings of CIB World Building Congress 1998. Gavle, Sweden; June
1998. p. 712.
[27] CIB. Sustainable development and the future of construction. CIB report
publication 225, United States of America 1998.
[28] Grifth A. Management system for construction. Longman; 2000.
[29] Grifth A, Stephenson P, Bhutto K. An integratal management system for
construction quality, safety and environment: a framework for IMS. International Journal of Construction Management 2005;5:5160.
[30] Ministry of Construction. A guide to sustainable development construction in
China. Ministry of Construction 1999.
[31] Poon CS, Yu TW, Ng LH. A guide for managing and minimizing building and
demolition waste. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University; 2001.
[32] Poon CS, Yu TW, Ng LH. On-site sorting of construction and demolition waste
in Hong Kong. Resources. Conservation and Recycling 2001;32:15772.
[33] Sjostrom C, Bakens W. Sustainable construction: why, how and what. Building
Research and Information 1999;27:34753.
[34] Tam CM, Tam WYV, Zeng SX. Environmental performance evaluation for
construction. Building Research and Information 2002;30:34961.
[35] Tam WYV, Le KN. Environmental assessment by power spectrum. Dubai. Joint
International Conference on Construction Culture, Innovation, and Management 2006:395403.
[36] Tam WYV, Tam CM, Zeng SX, Chan KK. Environmental performance
measurement indicators in construction. Building and Environment
2005;41:16473.
[37] Tse YCR. The implementation of EMS in construction rms: case study in Hong
Kong. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management
2001;3:17794.
[38] Shen LY, Tam WYV. Implementing of environmental management in the Hong
Kong construction industry. International Journal of Project Management
2002;20:53543.
[39] Treloar G. The environmental impact of construction: a case study. Sydney,
Australia: Australia and New Zealand Architectural Science Association; 1996.
[40] Brochner J, Ang GKI, Fredriksson G. Sustainability and the performance
concept: encouraging innovative environmental technology in construction.
Building Research and Information 1999;27:36772.
[41] Heerwagen JH. Green building, organizational success and occupant productivity. Building Research and Information 2000;28:35167.
[42] Hill RC, Bowen P. Sustainable construction: principles and a framework for
attainment. Construction Management and Economics 1997;15:22339.
[43] Shen LY, Wu YZ, Chan EHW, Hao JL. Application of system dynamics for
assessment of sustainable performance of construction projects. Journal of
Zhejiang University Science 2005;6:33949.
[44] Tam WYV, Tam CM, Tsui WS, Ho CM. Environmental indicators for environmental performance assessment in construction. Journal of Building and
Construction Management 2006;10:4556.
259