IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p900-d481976.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External Benefit Assessment of Urban Utility Tunnels Based on Sustainable Development

Author

Listed:
  • Zi-Yun Zhang

    (Research Center for Underground Space & Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Fang-Le Peng

    (Research Center for Underground Space & Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Chen-Xiao Ma

    (Research Center for Underground Space & Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Hui Zhang

    (Research Center for Underground Space & Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Su-Juan Fu

    (Hebei Academy of Building Research, Shijiazhuang 050021, China)

Abstract

Urban utility tunnels (UUTs) can have great external benefits in terms of social and environmental aspects for the sustainable development of a city. However, the high initial construction cost has been the main obstacle to the promotion of UUT projects for a long time. Although several evaluation methods for the benefits of UUTs have been proposed, most of them focus on the cost assessment during the construction period and are limited in terms of their scientificity, the feasibility of the valuation methodology and the comprehensiveness of external categories. The external benefit assessment of UUTs during their service life remains lacking, leading to an incomplete insight into UUT projects. Therefore, a scientific evaluation method of the long-term external benefits of UUTs is still needed from the perspective of urban sustainable development. This paper proposes a composite market price method to carry out a simple but systematic evaluation of the positive externalities of UUTs in monetary terms. Detailed instructions on the operation of the method are also elucidated to further improve its practicability. The feasibility and validity of the method is then demonstrated through a case study of the UUT project in Xiong’an New Area, China. It is also concluded that UUTs can benefit all social subjects and that a classification of externalities based on different social subjects can foster better development and broader support for the implementation of UUTs.

Suggested Citation

  • Zi-Yun Zhang & Fang-Le Peng & Chen-Xiao Ma & Hui Zhang & Su-Juan Fu, 2021. "External Benefit Assessment of Urban Utility Tunnels Based on Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:900-:d:481976
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/900/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/900/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ratana Chuenpagdee & Jack L. Knetsch & Thomas C. Brown, 2001. "Environmental Damage Schedules: Community Judgments of Importance and Assessments of Losses," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 1-11.
    2. Wen-Der Yu & Shao-Shung Lo, 2005. "Time-dependent construction social costs model," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 327-337.
    3. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Notes on the Economic Evaluation of Transport Projects," World Bank Publications - Reports 11791, The World Bank Group.
    4. Vincenzo Del Giudice & Pierfrancesco De Paola & Benedetto Manganelli & Fabiana Forte, 2017. "The Monetary Valuation of Environmental Externalities through the Analysis of Real Estate Prices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    6. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Valuation of Time Savings," World Bank Publications - Reports 11800, The World Bank Group.
    7. Zhi Zhang & Jiaorong Ren & Kaichao Xiao & Zhenzhi Lin & Jiayu Xu & Wei Wang & Chuanxun Pei, 2019. "Cost Allocation Mechanism Design for Urban Utility Tunnel Construction Based on Cooperative Game and Resource Dependence Theory," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-16, August.
    8. Carson, Richard T & Flores, Nicholas A, 2000. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt75k752s7, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    9. Peter Mackie & John Nellthorp & James Laird, 2005. "Notes on the Economic Evaluation of Transport Projects," World Bank Publications - Reports 11787, The World Bank Group.
    10. Haibat Ali & Jae-ho Choi, 2019. "A Review of Underground Pipeline Leakage and Sinkhole Monitoring Methods Based on Wireless Sensor Networking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-24, July.
    11. Susana Martín-Fernández & Adrián Gómez-Serrano & Eugenio Martínez-Falero & Cristina Pascual, 2018. "Comparison of AHP and a Utility-Based Theory Method for Selected Vertical and Horizontal Forest Structure Indicators in the Sustainability Assessment of Forest Management in the Sierra de Guadarrama N," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    12. Qiao, Yong-Kang & Peng, Fang-Le & Wang, Yang, 2017. "Monetary valuation of urban underground space: A critical issue for the decision-making of urban underground space development," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 12-24.
    13. Xiaojuan Lin & Min Xu & Chunxiang Cao & Ramesh P. Singh & Wei Chen & Hongrun Ju, 2018. "Land-Use/Land-Cover Changes and Their Influence on the Ecosystem in Chengdu City, China during the Period of 1992–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    14. Chaofeng Liu & Yawei Li & He Yin & Jiaxin Zhang & Wei Wang, 2020. "A Stochastic Interpolation-Based Fractal Model for Vulnerability Diagnosis of Water Supply Networks Against Seismic Hazards," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, March.
    15. Matthew Cotton & Patrick Devine-Wright, 2013. "Putting pylons into place: a UK case study of public perspectives on the impacts of high voltage overhead transmission lines," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 1225-1245, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mikhail Miklyaev & Glenn P. Jenkins & Precious P. Adeshina, 2022. "Ex-Post Evaluation of The Algerian SWRO Desalination PPP Program," Development Discussion Papers 2022-14, JDI Executive Programs.
    2. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    3. Pamela Wicker & John C. Whitehead & Bruce K. Johnson & Daniel S. Mason, 2016. "Willingness-To-Pay For Sporting Success Of Football Bundesliga Teams," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(3), pages 446-462, July.
    4. Franz Hackl & Gerald J. Pruckner, 2005. "Warm glow, free‐riding and vehicle neutrality in a health‐related contingent valuation study," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 293-306, March.
    5. Marieka M. Klawitter & C. Leigh Anderson & Mary Kay Gugerty, 2013. "Savings And Personal Discount Rates In A Matched Savings Program For Low-Income Families," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 468-485, July.
    6. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    7. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.
    8. Jean-Daniel Rinaudo & Stéphanie Aulong, 2014. "Defining Groundwater Remediation Objectives with Cost-benefit Analysis: Does It Work?," Post-Print hal-00934930, HAL.
    9. Ali DOUAI, 2007. "Wealth, Well-being and Value(s): A Proposition of Structuring Concepts for a (real) Transdisciplinary Dialogue within Ecological Economics," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2007-18, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    10. Turpie, Jane K., 2003. "The existence value of biodiversity in South Africa: how interest, experience, knowledge, income and perceived level of threat influence local willingness to pay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 199-216, September.
    11. Dienes, Christian, 2015. "Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 122-129.
    12. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    13. Stenger, Anne & Harou, Patrice & Navrud, Ståle, 2009. "Valuing environmental goods and services derived from the forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-14, January.
    14. Kiprop, Jonah Kipsaat, 2015. "An Evaluation Of Farmers Willingness To Pay For Irrigation Water In Kerio Valley Basin Kenya," Research Theses 265580, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    15. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Hermann Donfouet & Ephias Makaudze & Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Eric Malin, 2011. "The determinants of the willingness-to-pay for community-based prepayment scheme in rural Cameroon," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 209-220, September.
    17. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Vassilopoulos, Achilleas & Lusk, Jayson L. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr., 2015. "Reference dependence, consequentiality and social desirability in value elicitation: A study of fair labor labeling," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202705, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Arne Hole & Julie Kolstad, 2012. "Mixed logit estimation of willingness to pay distributions: a comparison of models in preference and WTP space using data from a health-related choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 445-469, April.
    19. Maksym Polyakov & Morteza Chalak & Md. Sayed Iftekhar & Ram Pandit & Sorada Tapsuwan & Fan Zhang & Chunbo Ma, 2018. "Authorship, Collaboration, Topics, and Research Gaps in Environmental and Resource Economics 1991–2015," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 217-239, September.
    20. Daniel McFadden, 2009. "The human side of mechanism design: a tribute to Leo Hurwicz and Jean-Jacque Laffont," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 13(1), pages 77-100, April.

    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:13:y:2021:i:2:p:900-:d:481976. 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.