IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i9p7711-d1141967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Investment Decision Model for Underground Urban Utility Tunnel Based on MIVES and Real Option Theory from a Sustainable Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Zilian Deng

    (School of Management Science and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Xi He

    (School of Management Science and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Yingtao Chai

    (School of Management Science and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Ting-Kwei Wang

    (Department of Civil Engineering, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung City 807618, Taiwan)

Abstract

Although the importance of urbanization, urban renewal and sustainable development have been increasingly recognized, with the accelerating process of urbanization, the urban above-ground space is no longer sufficient for the process of urbanization, and downward development of the city has become inevitable. Underground Urban Utility Tunnel (UUUT) is an effective measure to promote the sustainable development of urban underground space (UUS). However, decision makers still cannot fully consider the economic, social, environmental and technological factors, as well as the future risks of the project and the value of flexibility in management. In this paper, an investment decision model for UUUT is proposed that combines the Integrated Value Model for Sustainable Assessment (MIVES) and the real option theory, which comprehensively considers the social, economic, environmental and technological impacts, and assists the government in carrying out the investment decision analysis of UUUT from a sustainability perspective by applying the real option theory to the economic evaluation process. The primary process of this study can be divided into four steps. (1) establishment of the investment decision index system for UUUT; (2) determination of the quantitative criteria for each indicator; (3) calculation of the feasibility of UUUT; and (4) a case study to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed model, as well as the achieved results. The proposed investment decision model can be used as an auxiliary tool in the early planning stage of UUUT, and also for the comparison and selection of different options for UUUT.

Suggested Citation

  • Zilian Deng & Xi He & Yingtao Chai & Ting-Kwei Wang, 2023. "An Investment Decision Model for Underground Urban Utility Tunnel Based on MIVES and Real Option Theory from a Sustainable Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7711-:d:1141967
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7711/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7711/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johansson,Per-Olov & Kriström,Bengt, 2015. "Cost-Benefit Analysis for Project Appraisal," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107121027, January.
    2. Julian Canto-Perello & Maria P. Martinez-Garcia & Jorge Curiel-Esparza & Manuel Martin-Utrillas, 2015. "Implementing Sustainability Criteria for Selecting a Roof Assembly Typology in Medium Span Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Johansson,Per-Olov & Kriström,Bengt, 2015. "Cost-Benefit Analysis for Project Appraisal," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107548220, January.
    4. Staniewski, Marcin W. & Szopiński, Tomasz & Awruk, Katarzyna, 2016. "Setting up a business and funding sources," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 2108-2112.
    5. Knoke, Thomas & Gosling, Elizabeth & Paul, Carola, 2020. "Use and misuse of the net present value in environmental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. H. Christopher Frey & Sumeet R. Patil, 2002. "Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 553-578, June.
    7. Kenneth J. Arrow & Anthony C. Fisher, 1974. "Environmental Preservation, Uncertainty, and Irreversibility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 88(2), pages 312-319.
    8. Titman, Sheridan, 1985. "Urban Land Prices under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 505-514, June.
    9. Curiel-Esparza, Jorge & Mazario-Diez, Julio L. & Canto-Perello, Julian & Martin-Utrillas, Manuel, 2016. "Prioritization by consensus of enhancements for sustainable mobility in urban areas," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(P1), pages 248-257.
    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. David Boix-Cots & Francesc Pardo-Bosch & Pablo Pujadas, 2024. "Introducing the Comprehensive Value Function for Sustainability Full-Spectrum Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-14, March.

    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. Florio, Massimo & Forte, Stefano & Sirtori, Emanuela, 2016. "Forecasting the socio-economic impact of the Large Hadron Collider: A cost–benefit analysis to 2025 and beyond," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 38-53.
    2. Florio, Massimo & Sirtori, Emanuela, 2016. "Social benefits and costs of large scale research infrastructures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 65-78.
    3. Johansson, Per-Olov, 2016. "On lessons from energy and environmental cost–benefit analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 20-25.
    4. Massimo Florio & Francesco Giffoni & Gelsomina Catalano, 2020. "Should governments fund basic science? Evidence from a willingness-to-pay experiment in five universities," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 16-33, January.
    5. Per-Olov Johansson & Bengt Kriström, 2015. "On the Social Cost of Water-Related Disasters," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(03), pages 1-26.
    6. Johansson, Per-Olov, 2015. "Tradable Permits in Cost-Benefit Analysis," SSE Working Paper Series in Economics 2015:3, Stockholm School of Economics.
    7. Sandri, Serena & Schade, Christian & Mußhoff, Oliver & Odening, Martin, 2010. "Holding on for too long? An experimental study on inertia in entrepreneurs' and non-entrepreneurs' disinvestment choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 30-44, October.
    8. Wu, JunJie & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2007. "The effect of local land use regulations on urban development in the Western United States," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 69-86, January.
    9. Batabyal, Amitrajeet A., 1998. "Land development and preservation over time and under uncertainty: a review and a research agenda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 233-238, June.
    10. Shimon Fridkin & Michael Winokur & Amir Gamliel, 2024. "Development of a Quality Deterioration Index for Sustainable Quality Management in High-Tech Electronics Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-34, August.
    11. Harry R. Clarke & William J. Reed, 1990. "Applications of Optimal Stopping in Resource Economics," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 66(3), pages 254-265, September.
    12. Steffen Brenner & Rainer Schulz & Wolfgang Härdle, 2007. "Realoptionen und Immobilienbewertung: Eine Umsetzungsstudie," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 59(8), pages 1002-1028, December.
    13. Sara Savastano & Pasquale Lucio Scandizzo, 2009. "Optimal farm size in an uncertain land market: the case of Kyrgyz Republic," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(s1), pages 745-758, November.
    14. John Creedy & Hemant Passi, 2018. "Public Sector Discount Rates: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 51(1), pages 139-157, March.
    15. Gelsomina CATALANO & Massimo FLORIO & Francesco GIFFONI, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Basic Research: A Contingent Valuation Experiment on the Large Hadron Collider," Departmental Working Papers 2016-03, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    16. Johansson, Per-Olov, 2016. "On the Treatment of Emissions Trading and Green and White Certificates in Cost-Benefits Analysis," SSE Working Paper Series in Economics 2016:2, Stockholm School of Economics.
    17. Massimo FLORIO & Francesco GIFFONI, 2017. "Willingness-to-Pay for Science as a Public Good: A Contingent Valuation Experiment," Departmental Working Papers 2017-17, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    18. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Newman, David H., 2005. "Spatial analysis of rural land development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 732-744, August.
    19. Per-Olov Johansson & Ginés de Rus, 2015. "On the Treatment of Foreigners and Foreign-Owned Firms in Cost–Benefit Analysis," Working Papers 2015-13, FEDEA.
    20. Richard S. J. Tol & In Chang Hwang & Frédéric Reynès, 2012. "The Effect of Learning on Climate Policy under Fat-tailed Uncertainty," Working Paper Series 5312, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.

    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:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7711-:d:1141967. 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.