IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i16p6413-d396777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of a New Business Model to Measure Organizational and Project-Level SDG Impact—Case Study of a Water Utility Company

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Mansell

    (Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK
    Nathu Puri Institute for Engineering & Enterprise, London South Bank University, London SE1 0AA, UK)

  • Simon P. Philbin

    (Nathu Puri Institute for Engineering & Enterprise, London South Bank University, London SE1 0AA, UK)

  • Tim Broyd

    (Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK)

Abstract

Achievement of the United Nations’ 2030 Global Goals for Sustainability is of paramount importance. However, for engineers and project managers to take meaningful action, they need the practical tools, processes and leadership to turn grand rhetoric into viable engineering solutions. Linking infrastructure project sustainability performance to sustainable development goals (SDG) targets is problematic. This article builds on the previous development of an innovative infrastructure business model, called the “Infrastructure SDG Impact-Value Chain” (IVC) to link local-level project delivery with global-level SDG impacts. It uses a case study of a water utility company to demonstrate how the IVC business model can integrate the “triple bottom line” to ensure the balanced definition of success across economic, environmental and social thematic areas. The results led to a proposed methodology for business leaders to align stakeholders on a common definition of project success during the design phase. The study includes the selection of longer-term outcomes and strategic SDG impacts, which, it is suggested, are improved definitions of project success. Although the findings that are from a single case study cannot automatically be extended to the entire water industry, the study’s methodology has potential to be used to evaluate multiple projects across different sectors. The practical application is significant since it offers the flexibility to be used at both project and portfolio levels, thereby linking tactical delivery to organisational SDG impacts and leading to improved investment decisions with increased likelihood of success in achieving the SDG 2030 targets.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Mansell & Simon P. Philbin & Tim Broyd, 2020. "Development of a New Business Model to Measure Organizational and Project-Level SDG Impact—Case Study of a Water Utility Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-24, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6413-:d:396777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6413/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6413/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charl de Villiers & Leonardo Rinaldi & Jeffrey Unerman, 2014. "Integrated Reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 27(7), pages 1042-1067, August.
    2. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    3. Karl Widerquist, 2018. "The Bottom Line," Exploring the Basic Income Guarantee, in: A Critical Analysis of Basic Income Experiments for Researchers, Policymakers, and Citizens, chapter 0, pages 93-98, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. John Barrett & Glen Peters & Thomas Wiedmann & Kate Scott & Manfred Lenzen & Katy Roelich & Corinne Le Qu�r�, 2013. "Consumption-based GHG emission accounting: a UK case study," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 451-470, July.
    5. Costanza, Robert & Patten, Bernard C., 1995. "Defining and predicting sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 193-196, December.
    6. David Griggs & Mark Stafford-Smith & Owen Gaffney & Johan Rockström & Marcus C. Öhman & Priya Shyamsundar & Will Steffen & Gisbert Glaser & Norichika Kanie & Ian Noble, 2013. "Sustainable development goals for people and planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7441), pages 305-307, March.
    7. Ralph P. Hall & Shyam Ranganathan & Raj Kumar G. C., 2017. "A General Micro-Level Modeling Approach to Analyzing Interconnected SDGs: Achieving SDG 6 and More through Multiple-Use Water Services (MUS)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Scott Thacker & Daniel Adshead & Marianne Fay & Stéphane Hallegatte & Mark Harvey & Hendrik Meller & Nicholas O’Regan & Julie Rozenberg & Graham Watkins & Jim W. Hall, 2019. "Infrastructure for sustainable development," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(4), pages 324-331, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rohit Agrawal & Abhijit Majumdar & Kirty Majumdar & Rakesh D. Raut & Balkrishna E. Narkhede, 2022. "Attaining sustainable development goals (SDGs) through supply chain practices and business strategies: A systematic review with bibliometric and network analyses," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3669-3687, November.
    2. Annebeth Roor & Karen Maas, 2024. "Do impact investors live up to their promise? A systematic literature review on (im)proving investments' impacts," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 3707-3732, May.
    3. Dimitrios Bouras & Styliani (Stella) Sofianopoulou, 2023. "Sustainable Development Assessment of Organizations through Quantitative Modelling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Paul Mansell & Simon P. Philbin & Efrosyni Konstantinou, 2020. "Delivering UN Sustainable Development Goals’ Impact on Infrastructure Projects: An Empirical Study of Senior Executives in the UK Construction Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-29, September.
    5. Iñaki Heras‐Saizarbitoria & Laida Urbieta & Olivier Boiral, 2022. "Organizations' engagement with sustainable development goals: From cherry‐picking to SDG‐washing?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 316-328, March.
    6. Francisco J. Tapiador & Andrés Navarro & Josu Mezo & Sergio de la Llave & Jesús Muñoz, 2021. "Urban Vegetation Leveraging Actions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    7. María Garrido-Ruso & Beatriz Aibar-Guzmán & Albertina Paula Monteiro, 2022. "Businesses’ Role in the Fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-35, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul Mansell & Simon P. Philbin & Efrosyni Konstantinou, 2020. "Redefining the Use of Sustainable Development Goals at the Organisation and Project Levels—A Survey of Engineers," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-39, August.
    2. Paul Mansell & Simon P. Philbin & Efrosyni Konstantinou, 2020. "Delivering UN Sustainable Development Goals’ Impact on Infrastructure Projects: An Empirical Study of Senior Executives in the UK Construction Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-29, September.
    3. Rigby, Dan & Woodhouse, Phil & Young, Trevor & Burton, Michael, 2001. "Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 463-478, December.
    4. Ingrid Boas & Frank Biermann & Norichika Kanie, 2016. "Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability governance: towards a nexus approach," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 449-464, June.
    5. Vincenzo Formisano & Bernardino Quattrociocchi & Maria Fedele & Mario Calabrese, 2018. "From Viability to Sustainability: The Contribution of the Viable Systems Approach (VSA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Louisa Pollok & Sebastian Spierling & Hans-Josef Endres & Ulrike Grote, 2021. "Social Life Cycle Assessments: A Review on Past Development, Advances and Methodological Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-29, September.
    7. Nessa Winston, 2021. "Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities," Working Papers 202106, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    8. Christopher Meyer & Laima Gerlitz & Monika Klein, 2022. "Creativity as a Key Constituent for Smart Specialization Strategies (S3), What Is in It for Peripheral Regions? Co-creating Sustainable and Resilient Tourism with Cultural and Creative Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-31, March.
    9. Else Ragni Yttredal & Nathalie Homlong, 2020. "Perception of Sustainable Development in a Local World Heritage Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-19, October.
    10. Lucie Kvasničková Stanislavská & Ladislav Pilař & Klára Margarisová & Roman Kvasnička, 2020. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Media: Comparison between Developing and Developed Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, June.
    11. Alexey Voinov, 2008. "Understanding and communicating sustainability: global versus regional perspectives," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 487-501, August.
    12. Karen Holm Olsen & Fatemeh Bakhtiari & Virender Kumar Duggal & Jørge Villy Fenhann, 2019. "Sustainability labelling as a tool for reporting the sustainable development impacts of climate actions relevant to Article 6 of the Paris Agreement," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 225-251, April.
    13. Piero Mella & Michela Pellicelli, 2017. "How Myopia Archetypes Lead to Non-Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-24, December.
    14. Lauriane Mouysset & Luc Doyen & François Léger & Frédéric Jiguet & Tim G. Benton, 2018. "Operationalizing Sustainability as a Safe Policy Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-9, October.
    15. Mähönen Jukka, 2020. "Integrated Reporting and Sustainable Corporate Governance from European Perspective," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-40, July.
    16. Nur Izzah Hamna A. Aziz & Marlia M. Hanafiah & Shabbir H. Gheewala & Haikal Ismail, 2020. "Bioenergy for a Cleaner Future: A Case Study of Sustainable Biogas Supply Chain in the Malaysian Energy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-24, April.
    17. Anette Hallin & Tina Karrbom‐Gustavsson & Peter Dobers, 2021. "Transition towards and of sustainability—Understanding sustainability as performative," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1948-1957, May.
    18. Szennay, Áron, 2020. "A vállalati társadalmi felelősségvállalás megközelítései és a fenntartható fejlődés [How popular approaches to corporate social responsibility relate to sustainable development]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 1057-1074.
    19. Laura Treviño-Lozano, 2022. "Framing Social Sustainability in Infrastructure Theory and Practice: A Review of Two Road Projects in Mexico from a Business and Human Rights Lens," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, February.
    20. Rendani Mavis Matakanye & Huibrecht Margaretha van der Poll & Binganidzo Muchara, 2021. "Do Companies in Different Industries Respond Differently to Stakeholders’ Pressures When Prioritising Environmental, Social and Governance Sustainability Performance?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-22, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6413-:d:396777. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.