THE IDENTIFICATION OF CRITERIA USED FOR

INFRASTRUCTURE SUSTAINABILITY TOOLS

Nur Shahirah Nadhilah Wahab1, Rozana Zakaria2
(1)
Postgraduate Student, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University Teknologi Malaysia, 81310
UTM Skudai, Johor, Malaysia. Corresponding e-mail: nsnwbs@gmail.com

(2) Asoc. Professor, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM
Skudai, Johor, Malaysia Corresponding e-mail: rozana@utm.my

Abstract:

Keyword: Sustainable Development, Sustainable Infrastructure, Green Infrastructure,

Sustainability Tools, Green Rating Tools, Criteria.

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background of study

The increase in the number of population has influenced the need to construct new structures
as the demand of living is increasing. In Malaysia, this industry could be considered as one
of the key drivers for economic stability (Hamid et al., 2014). According to an article written
in October 2016, the construction contracts worth 49.5 billion ringgit has been awarded in
Malaysia and it is expected that the construction growth will remain strong in 2017 (Nikkei,
2016).

Infrastructures and buildings are increasing in number as cities are developed to support the
economic growth. However, at the same time, it is said that they are one of the largest
consumers of natural resources. The consumption of electricity and other primary resources
were increasing while trying to keep up with the extensive development and hence causes
depletion of primary energy resources as well as increased in greenhouse gases emission
(Chin, 2016).
In early 1970s, many moves and efforts could be seen in addressing this issue. The
sustainable development concept was introduced in Bruntlands Report 1987 which the
main idea of this concept is to balance the economic, social and environmental goals to
achieve a healthy world. Sustainable infrastructure and green infrastructure are the two main
terminologies that have been evolved under sustainable development concept that supports
its idea and focusing more on the infrastructure development.

Sustainability rating tools were developed, mainly to assess the sustainability performance
of the project. There are many rating tools being introduced globally, including CEEQUAL
(Civil Engineering Environmental Quality Assessment and Award Scheme), LEED for
Neighbourhood Development (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design),
BREEAM Communities (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment
Method), and a few others. Malaysia also has developed a few green rating tools including
pH JKR (Penarafan Hijau JKR), MyGHI (Malaysian Green Highway Index) and LCCF
(Low Carbon Cities Framework), MyCREST (Malaysian
Carbon Reduction and Environmental Sustainability Tool).

1.2 Problem Statement

In general, sustainability tools were being introduced which each of them targets specific
markets, regions and outcomes. Each of these tools demonstrate their capacity in realizing
the sustainability level of a project. Besides that, each tools have different in nature, have
their own specified sustainability criteria and assessment frameworks which may have
caused the difficulty for the stakeholders or developers to compare which tools are
appropriate to be used to assess the sustainability performance of the projects.

The sustainability tools have their own specific focused area where it should be used in the
different stages of construction works, such as the design stage, construction stage,
operation and maintenance stage. However, most of the tools does not cover the whole life
cycle of the infrastructure development and its operation. Thus, it needs to incorporate more
than one sustainability tools to achieve a successful assessment of the sustainability
performance.

The problem arise when some of the assessment areas of the life cycle phase may be
overlapping with each other. The possibility for this to happen due to some of the main
criteria addressed in one of the tools are similar or almost similar to the other tools which
are being incorporated with. This may cause confusion to the users to choose the best
assessment tools to be used.

New initiatives has been taken by the government for the past few years in supporting
sustainable development purpose by making it compulsory to assess the sustainability
performance of various government programs and projects. Malaysia has developed a few
of its own sustainability tools for infrastructure, including pH JKR, MyGHI, LCCF and
MyCREST. However, in these tools could be considered as new and not all of them are
focusing on the whole project performance, but are focusing only on specified themes.

Therefore, the critical questions that need to be investigated are What are the level of
acceptance of the infrastructure sustainability tools in Malaysia?, How developed are the
tools in Malaysia as compared to the more established sustainability tools?, What are the
difficulties faced by the assessors and users in using the tools?, How similar are the
existing sustainability tools? and What are the important criteria that need to be addressed
in infrastructure sustainability?.
1.3 Aim and Objective
This study aims to determine the important criteria that can be incorporated in Malaysian
infrastructure sustainability tools. The aim will be supported by the following objectives:

a) To compare CEEQUAL with Malaysian infrastructure sustainability tools.

b) To determine the similarities in addressing important criteria of sustainability in
infrastructure development.
c) To evaluate the level of acceptance on the similarities of the important criteria to be used
in Malaysian infrastructure sustainability tools.

1.4 Scope of Study

This qualitative study will be carried out by focusing on CEEQUAL as the benchmark to
be compared with three Malaysian infrastructure sustainability tools, which are pH JKR,
MyGHI and LCCF. The analysis will be done in by comparing the main criteria addressed
by each of the tools in order to determine the similarities between them.

This study also to be undertaken to evaluate the level of acceptance of the similarities that
will be obtained from the comparison of the important criteria to be used in Malaysian
infrastructure sustainability tools. This will be supported based on the data to be collected
from the target respondents, which are professionals in the sustainability and infrastructure
area through interviews.

2.0 Literature Review

Sustainable development has the meaning of a dynamic process which enables all people
to realize their potential and improve their quality of life in ways that simultaneously protect
and enhance the Earths life support system (Chambers et. al., 2008).

Sustainable infrastructure however can be defined as the goal to improve the harmony
between the built and natural environment by mitigating negative environmental, social and
economic consequences related to infrastructure performance, which could should include
consideration for exposure to natural hazards (Padgett et. al., 2009).

2.1 Brief History of Sustainability Tools

The sustainability rating tools in built environment, such as commercial, public facilities
and residential, started to be used since 1990s and 2000s where the earliest tools, BREEAM
(UK) was launched in 1990s, LEED (US) in 2000, and Greenstart (Australia and New
Zealand) in 2003 and 2007 respectively (Griffiths, 2014). However, there were issues arise
in the 2000s where they highlighted that there were no tools to be used for infrastructure,
other than buildings, such as roads, railways, water supply and wastewater system, energy
generation and distribution system. Thus, in 2003, CEEQUAL was launched as an
infrastructure rating tools which focusing on environmental management and performance,
then in 2012, Greenroads and Envision was launched in US and Infrastructure Sustainability
system launched in Australia (Griffiths, 2015).

Malaysian government had established the Construction Industry Master Plan (2006 2015)
where it focused on incorporating green technology into the countrys construction industry
and to enhance green building practices.(Hamid et al., 2014). Therefore, in order to support
this vision, Malaysia had established its own green rating tools which are GBI (Green
Building Index) (2009), GREEN PASS (Green Performance Assessment System) (2012),
pH JKR (2012), GreenRE (Green Real Estate) (2013) and LCCF (2011).
2.2 Brief Framework of Sustainability Tools
This study will be focusing on four of the sustainability tools, which are CEEQUAL, pH
JKR, MyGHI and LCCF. Therefore, below is the discussion of the simplified criteria and
the weightage being used in those tools.

2.2.1 CEEQUAL
CEEQUAL is a UK based environmental assessment and award programs for improving
environmental performance. It was launced in 2003 by the Institution of Civil Engineers
(ICE) with the support of the UK government. Then later in 2012, CEEQUAL International
was created in response to the UK users with the interest to use this system on their project
outside the UK. The objectives of CEEQUAL are; (1) to recognize the attainment of
environmental and social practice, (2) to promote improved sustainability performance in
project specification, design and construction and (3) to create a climate of environmental
awareness and continues improvement in the industry. This tool is only offers one rating
scheme and is a self-assessment system. There are five types of awards available; Whole
Project Award, Design Award, Construction Award, Design and Build Award and Client
and Design Award.

Table 1: The 12 Sections of CEEQUAL (Johansson, 2011)

Section Weightings (%) No of Questions
Project Management 10.9 20
Land Use 7.9 19
Landscape 7.4 15
Ecology & Biodiversity 8.8 15
The Historic Environment 6.7 16
Water Resources & Water Environment 8.5 15
Energy & Carbon 9.5 16
Material Use 9.4 26
Waste Management 8.4 20
Transport 8.1 14
Effects on Neighbors 7.0 18
Relations with the Local Community & other 7.4 14
Stakeholders

These 12 criteria will be assessed through self-assessment process where it is being carried
out by a trained CEEQUAL Assessor. According to CEEQUAL, it is best to do the
assessment as the project progresses which allows supporting evidence to be collected for
different phases of the works.

2.2.2 pH JKR
pH JKR was developed by the Malaysias Public Works Department (Jabatan Kerja
Raya,JKR) in 2012 to be used by the development of the government programs or projects
in order to assess the sustainability performance of the buildings which are administered by
the JKR. This sustainability tool has the objectives of; (1) to be a tool which measures the
level of sustainability performance in the government projects, (2) to facilitate the
improvement that could be done onto the projects from time to time and (3) to increase the
awareness on developing a construction based on sustainable development. This
sustainability tools are divided into two categories, award for building sector and award for
road sector.
 Table 2: 6 Assessment Criteria for Building (JKR, 2012)
Criteria Weightings (%) Marks
Sustainable Site Planning & Management 20 24
Energy Efficiency 37 43
Indoor Environmental Quality 22 26
Materials & Resources 7 8
Water Efficiency 9 10
Innovation 5 6

Table 3: 7 Assessment Criteria for Road System (JKR, 2012)

Criteria Weightings (%) Marks
Sustainable Site Planning & Management 14 12
Environment and Water 8 7
Access and Equity 20 17
Construction Activities 13 11
Materials and Resources 26 22
Pavement Technologies 13 11
Innovation 6 5

2.2.3 MyGHI
MyGHI is a development of an assessment framework for green highway in Malaysia,
which is a product from the collaboration of Malaysian Highway Authorities (MHA) with
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) and was launched in 2014. As the name shows that
this tool is designed specifically for highway development. The benefit obtained from this
tool are; (1) as a reference and guideline in the sustainable development of green highway,
(2) as a decision support tool in highway infrastructure development and (3) is developed
specifically for the tropical environment, cultural and social needs.

Table 4: 5 Criteria in MyGHI (UTM, 2014)

Criteria Weightings (%) Marks
Sustainable Design and Construction Activities 22 68
Energy Efficiency 21 64
Environmental and Water Management 19 60
Material and Technology 16 51
Social and Safety 22 67

2.2.4 LCCF
The Federal Town and Country Planning Department had developed a sustainable
development indicator known as Malaysia Urban Indicators Network (MURNInet) which
determines the level of of sustainability of each town in Malaysia. LCCF is a complementary
tool of MURNInet which provide more detail assessment of carbon assessment. LCCF is
use to determine the actual environmental impact of a development in terms of carbon
emission. The assessment using this system needs the cities to identify and list out the key
elements that they want to measure and once the elements are identified, they can choose to
be assess by City Based Approach or One-System Approach. In this framework, they had
categorized four main elements that contributes to greenhouse gases emission, which are
the urban environment, urban transport, urban infrastructure and buildings. These elements
comprises of 13 performance criteria to be assessed.
 Table 5: Performance Criteria for LCCF (KeTTHA, 2013)
Elements Urban Urban Urban Buildings
Environment Transportation Infrastructure
Performance Site Shift of Infrastructure Low Carbon
Criteria Selection Transport Provision Building
Urban Form Mode Waste Community
Urban Green Energy Sevice
Greenery & Transport Water
Air Quality Infrastructure
Green
Vehicles
Traffic
Management

2.3 The Important Criteria in Sustainable Infrastructure

3.0 Methodology

3.1 Introduction
It is expected that the sustainability tools to be investigated may have similarities, where
they will address the same main criteria that should be focused on in the assessment for
infrastructure sustainability. Therefore, the level of acceptance of the similarities of the
criteria which are found important to be used in infrastructure tools will be explored through
survey to be done with the target groups based on the identified criteria from the comparison
of each tools.

In general, this section discusses the methods that will be carried out in order to fulfill the
objectives of this study. This study aims to identify the similarities that the existing tools
may have and to determine the important that can be incorporated in Malaysian
infrastructure sustainability tools.

3.2 Data Collection

In this study, the respondents are to be selected from the professionals involve in Malaysian
construction industry and sustainability area. The target group of this study are the
Stakeholders, Architects, Engineering Consultants, Sustainability Tool Facilitators and the
users. The target area of construction however will be focusing on the infrastructure sector
in Malaysia.

There will be two methods of collecting the data. The first group of data will be obtained
through relevant information from the previous studies as well as the eligible data provided
for each of the sustainability tools involved. The information will be extracted and to be
compared between the tools to determine the similarities of the criteria that are being
addressed in the assessment.

The second group of data will be obtained from survey to discuss the level of acceptance of
the similarities and also to determine the most important criteria to be incorporated in
Malaysian infrastructure sustainability tools. This method is considered to be the best way
to gain comprehensive information to address the objective.

3.3 Data Analysis

All of the data to be collected based on the comparison and survey will be analyzed using
the content analysis, matrix comparison analysis and also statistical analysis. The
appropriate analysis will be used for each of the objectives of the study in order to identify
the most important criteria to be incorporated in Malaysian infrastructure sustainability
tools.

Table: Methodology to achieve the objectives of the study

Objective Method Instrument Analysis
1. To compare CEEQUAL and Comparison Sustainability Content
Malaysian infrastructure sustainability Tools Analysis
tools
2. To determine the similarities in Comparison Simplified Matrix
addressing important criteria of Criteria Comparison
sustainability in infrastructure
development
3. To evaluate the level of acceptance on Survey Questionnaire Statistical
the similarities of the criteria that are Analysis
found important to be used in Malaysian
infrastructure sustainability tools

4.0 Expected Findings

Through this study, it is expected that significant criteria to develop a sustainable
infrastructure can be determined. The infrastructure sustainability tools in Malaysia will be
compared to CEEQUAL and hence it will determine the similarities between the tools and
this will be achieved in checklist form where it will show better the significance of the
criteria. It is expected that through the data obtained, it will be the platform to further
develop the study by measuring the level of acceptance of the criteria found to be important
to be used in Malaysian sustainability tools through conducting a survey. The result from
the survey will show the most prominent criteria in the sustainability tools. It is anticipated
that addressing the similar criteria in existing infrastructure sustainability tools will aid in
selecting the most significant criteria to be assessed in the future Malaysian infrastructure
sustainability tools.