In the article “Developing
Sustainable Infrastructure in New Cities”, Cho (2014) states that developing
cities cannot sustain steady growth by ignoring economic, social, environmental
challenges and the impact of rapid urban expansion. The writer introduced the
Envision Sustainability Rating System, a tool from Harvard University used to
measure the sustainability of newly built infrastructure. She then mentions the
King Abdullah Economic City (KAEC) that is being built with the Envision
Certification firm at its roots, citing positive impacts on local communities.
According to Cho, infrastructure sustainability has a huge role to play in the
swift expansion of developing cities. I agree with her and I think countries must
look thoroughly into their city planning before they start construction, but
she did not mention critical points like how Envision is readily accessible to developing countries and
other alternative rating systems.
The first thing to know about
Envision is how available it is, and how a lot of their material is found free
online. The rating system has been great tool for benchmarking a project
against others and gaining recognition in the industry since its introduction 3
years ago. It is the current reference for best practices in all types of
infrastructure (Nelson, 2015). Envision offers many services, including the
Envision checklist, the Envision sustainability infrastructure rating system and
the Envision Sustainability Professional course. Firstly, the checklist is used
as an educational tool to help users familiarise with the sustainability characteristics
of infrastructure design, it can also be used as a precursor to the
sustainability infrastructure rating system. The rating system is what Envision
uses to evaluate projects. A third party reviewer is needed to certify a
project for an award using the same rating system found free online. Lastly,
Envision conducts courses to train Envision Sustainability Professionals so
that these professionals can go back to their project team and guide them with
the Envision philosophy. Both the checklist and the rating system are free, only
the third party reviewer and the course cost a little bit of money. All the
materials provided by Envision are easy to use and anyone with an internet
connection can have access to their services. I think it is absolutely critical
that Envision is visible to developing countries where cities are still being
planned, and this is something Cho failed to mention.
One other point that Cho did not
talk about is the existence of alternate rating systems in the industry. While Envision
is a very useful tool for all types of infrastructure, there are rating systems
out there that focus on projects that are much less complex and much smaller in
scale. In a small project where manpower is limited, a
self-assessed system employed by Envision can require extra time commitment
from a team that could already be working very hard. This is where systems like
Greenroads comes in. Although it only certifies roadway projects, it is purely
third party reviewed which means the project team can focus on the project and
not on the certification process. Project teams in developing countries with small
projects, low budget or limited manpower can find rating systems like
Greenroads extremely useful.
In conclusion, the article by Cho
talks about how important it is to build sustainable cities in developing
countries and how Envision aids this cause. However, she did not mention how
developing countries have easy access to Envision and the presence of other
rating systems that could be better suited to small projects.
