Answer

Contents

Chapter 1 Research outline. 5

Introduction. 5

Research Problem.. 6

Importance of Research. 6

Aim of Research. 7

Research Question. 7

Sub Question. 7

Keywords. 7

Chapter 2 Literature Review.. 8

Background. 8

Infrastructure Sustainability. 8

Sustainability Frameworks. 9

Local Government and Planning Minister’s Council Framework. 9

Inter-American Development Bank IDB Invest Infrastructure Sustainability Framework. 11

Building Information Modeling (BIM). 12

Theoretical Framework and its application to the research. 12

Research methodology. 13

Sample Size. 13

Qualitative research. 14

Quantitative Research. 14

Data Sources. 15

Ethical Issues. 15

Research Validity and Reliability. 15

Work Plan and Schedule. 16

Case Study Application of Eco-Engineering Framework. 16

Australia’s High-Speed Railway. 16

Economic KPIs. 16

Environmental KPIs. 17

Social KPIs. 18

Performance KPIs. 18

Mumbai-Ahmedabad High- Speed Railway Project. 18

Environmental KPIs. 18

Social KPIs. 19

Performance KPIs. 20

Economical KPIs. 20

Research Gap. 20

Conclusion. 21

Reference. 23

Chapter 1 Research outline

Introduction

Infrastructure investment that is carefully planned and prioritized produces competitiveness, improves productivity, and facilitates long-term sustainable economic growth and development. However, this economic benefit varies depending on the institutional and regulatory maturity and across sectors with different countries harbouring different priorities depending on economic growth (Zhang et al. 2019). It is important to conduct the Comprehensive Sustainability Evaluation of High-Speed Railway Projects in accordance with the Process of Analytic Hierarchy (Chang, Yang & Dong 2018). Although the economic aspects are usually the major focus of infrastructure development, their impacts on the environment and the lifestyle and behaviour of people are fundamental to their successful planning, prioritization, implementation, and operation (Krajangsri & Pongpeng 2019). To produce maximum impact from infrastructure investments, the Australian government is required to develop infrastructure plans for short, medium, and long-term projects and translate the plans into a list of priorities that represent actionable projects. Since infrastructure is highly intrusive and is a major financial outlay, it should be carefully evaluated for its economic, environmental, and social impacts to ensure it fulfils the needs of the current population and is preserved to meet the future generational needs (Upadhyay & Joshi 2015). Therefore, qualitative research is required to analyse the possible outcomes for various infrastructures and their impacts on the project stakeholders.

The Queensland Rail is one of the comprehensive and prestigious corporations that undertake projects of immense impact in the transport sector. Therefore, when prioritizing the project phases, their national importance is requisite. Additionally, the projects should be based on a suitable sustainability project to ensure the present and future needs of the stakeholders are considered and met. The high-speed rail projects are a major undertaking for any government as they are pursued to enhance transport efficiency and effectiveness. Therefore, their prioritization is a process that should be well thought and carefully scrutinized to ensure the routes taken are optimal and serve the environmental, social, economic, and performance aspects before such huge projects are approved. This literature review seeks to evaluate the concept of sustainability as applied to infrastructure and specifically the HSR projects both in Australia and also compares the impacts of the same infrastructural advancement in a country like India which is far more densely populated as compared to Australia. It also examines the prioritization of public infrastructure, specifically the high-speed railway sustainability framework.

Research Problem   

The Rail infrastructural projects are development elements prioritized for their impact on the national outcome and the time aspect. Other than the economic impact the projects are set to fulfil, they must also meet the environmental and social standards and requirements (Buenk, Grobbelaar & Meyer 2019). International infrastructure organizations should develop projects that are highly sustainable to meet stakeholder expectations. This research is therefore anchored on the best framework that can be adopted to ensure the planning and prioritization of projects meet the required sustainability criteria.

Importance of Research

Infrastructure development is a key component of economic growth because it meets the current demands and lays down future growth foundations. The implication is that other than the economic benefits infrastructure offers, it should align with the prospect of sustainable growth and development (Buenk, Grobbelaar & Meyer 2019). The Queensland Rail and Indian railways engage in various railway infrastructure development projects that must be prioritized to sustainably address the rail transport challenges and meet the needs and concerns of economic, environmental, and social stakeholders. Krajangsri and Pongpeng (2019), stresses the importance of infrastructure as the needs of mankind keeps on evolving with time.

Therefore, this research is important because it helps nurture better performance management of infrastructure projects internationally. Furthermore, Sustainability assessment for High-Speed Rail aids in the documentation of the project’s environmental, economic, and social impacts and not merely its performance (Bešinović 2020).  Rail projects such as the East Coast High-Speed Rail and Mumbai‐Ahmedabad High-Speed Railway connect various states and regions which makes them of high national importance (Robertson 2016). Although the current constraints of human resources and fencing can delay a project, an efficient framework should be developed to ensure their sustainability is not compromised. The research will evaluate the application of the proposed Local Government and Planning Minister’s Council sustainability framework to the Australian’s HSR projects. The research also evaluates the eco-engineering framework and how it aids in project prioritization and planning for rail projects with reference to the East Coast HSR and Mumbai-Ahmedabad HSR systems.

In regard to the pandemic that has led to mass loss of sources of income among the citizens, rebuilding the smart infrastructure advancement will enable the economy back to its feet (Rice & Martin 2020). Specifically, by making amendments to project prioritization within the sustainability framework, infrastructure prioritization and planning can be optimized even under the daunting situation.

Aim of Research

The research will be conducted to understand the direction of infrastructural development efforts for HSR projects. The proposed Local Government and Planning Minister’s Council sustainability framework will be evaluated for its competency in prioritization and planning of Australia’s infrastructure projects. The eco-engineering framework will also be evaluated against the East Coast HSR and Mumbai-Ahmedabad HSR systems. Using the evaluation information and as proposed by Radcliffe (2019), recommendations on changes that can be made to the assessment plan to assess the overall importance of the projects to address the national macro-economic issues will be made. As corporations mandated by the Australian government to conduct projects, Queensland Rail and Indian Railways need financial aid. Therefore, the ultimate goal of these organizations should be to identify projects of utmost importance and come up with an appropriate framework to ensure its outcome is sustainable.

Research Question

What is the most applicable framework for the assessment of High Speed Rail project sustainability?

Sub Question

What improvements can be made to existing sustainability frameworks to make them more applicable to a range of high-speed international rail projects?

Keywords

Infrastructure, Sustainability, framework, project, economy, prioritization, planning.

Chapter 2 Literature Review

Background

The infrastructure assessment framework cannot be complete without factoring in the sustainability impact assessment. Since infrastructure is highly intrusive and is a major financial outlay, it should be overly evaluated for its economic, environmental, and social impacts to ensure it fulfills the needs of the current population and is preserved to meet the future generational needs (Upadhyay & Joshi 2015). Although the economic aspects are usually the major focus of infrastructure development, their impacts on the environment and the lifestyle and behavior of people are fundamental to their successful planning, prioritization, implementation, and operation (Krajangsri & Pongpeng 2019). The high-speed rail projects are a major undertaking for any government as they are pursued to enhance transport efficiency and effectiveness. Therefore, their prioritization is a process that should be well thought and scrutinized to ensure the routes taken are optimal and serve the environmental, social, economic, and performance aspects before such huge projects are approved. This literature review seeks to evaluate the concept of sustainability as applied to infrastructure and specifically the HSR projects. It also examines the prioritization of public infrastructure, specifically the high-speed railway sustainability framework and its application to the Mumbai‐Ahmedabad High-Speed Railway Project and Australia’s High-speed railway as the case studies.

Infrastructure Sustainability

Infrastructure is at the center stage of quality of life. However, the need for evolution is adequate which means that infrastructure in the future will be significantly different from the current features (Krajangsri & Pongpeng 2019). To combat this future uncertainty, Australian infrastructure should be planned to embrace possible changes and make provisions to meet unprecedented demand. A robust assessment framework must be adopted to ensure prioritization of projects is in line with the country’s vision, risk management, adaptation to change, and works for Australian’s present and future needs (Bešinović 2020).

According to Thomé et al. (2016), sustainability considerations are made depending on their relevance to the project. While making these allowances, it is important to understand and possibly mitigate or avoid short-term and long-term impacts while maximizing the project benefits. The sustainability development for various projects involves a review of the sustainability principles of Building Queensland standards for applicability, review of project drivers, interests, and stakeholders, collaboration with the design, social and environmental team, and sustainability assessment refinement and completion.

Sustainable transport should be safe, accessible, efficient, resilient, affordable, and minimizes carbon and other emissions that harm the environment (Chen et al. 2016). As the backbone of sustainable transport, rail infrastructure connects to most of these sustainable development targets. For instance, rail transport is known for multi-stakeholder partnerships, promotion of environmentally suitable technology, climate-related risk resilience, sustainable transport accessibility, infrastructure resilience, and energy efficiency sustainability goals (Bešinović 2020).

One of the sustainability aspects considered during rail infrastructure assessment is the economic advancement in terms of its input towards economic growth, diversity, and development. The contribution of a project to the regional and local diversity and economic development scales is a fundamental priority for infrastructure assessment. The contribution of the rail during the construction phase and operations in terms of the present value of gross state product is a fundamental aspect. For instance, rail projects increase the efficiency of labor markets by bringing people and activities closer to one another hence creating a dense economic activity (Ke et al. 2017). Also, cost and time savings for travelers during their course of work cannot be ignored because rail infrastructure makes city centers more accessible and hence creates employment growth in locations that are highly productive (Wei 2016).

Sustainability Frameworks

Local Government and Planning Minister’s Council Framework

Champion (2009) claims that Australia is lacking in financial planning in the long run. The instability of around 35% of the council proves the point, the country had a $14.6bn worth of backlogs in case of infrastructures. This can significantly affect the sustainability of the project if not linked with a proper framework. Champion (2009), believes that the expectations of the communities and renewal of infrastructures were superseded by the revenue received to the local government. 

Champion (2009) states that the Local Government and Planning Minister’s Council (LGPMC) has put forward the following framework to ease the situation:

• Analysing the sustainability of the local government
• Proper planning and allocating the assets accordingly
• Estimating the budget of the project in advance 

According to Champion (2009), to address the issue of infrastructure prioritization, the Local Government and Planning Minister’s Council proposed a supposedly suitable framework. The framework involves three dimensions with the first one being the analysis of the infrastructure project for sustainability at the local government. According to O’Riordan (2016), a project that lacks an appropriate sustainability model is likely to fail. This implies that for project success, a comprehensive analysis of the political, educational, cultural, legal, economic, social, and ecological environments should be comprehensively analyzed (Gijzel et al. 2019). Analysis of the infrastructure project sustainability at the local level helps to determine its adaptability, viability, political expediency, acceptability, and relevance (Loo & Mahdavinejad 2017). These are the key aspects that establish the importance of a project both at the local and national levels and will help to disclose the project indicators that determine their priority levels.

The second stage is proper planning and asset allocation. Project planning can be translated as investment portfolio development and should be clear and deliberate (Pinha & Ahluwalia 2018). For infrastructure projects, project planning should first factor in the current investments, debts, and assets to be able to define the short-term and long-term financial goals of the project. Also, a risk analysis should be carried out to determine the project’s volatility and the forecast expected returns (Pinha & Ahluwalia 2018). For instance, the HSR project is a low risk and high return infrastructure project that will not only offer cheap and reliable transport for the population but also create economic growth and high returns (Vasconcelos et al. 2019). The HSR projects have significantly reduced the time taken to commute from one place to another as compared with traditional railway systems.

The third stage is creating a budget estimate for the infrastructure project. Project prioritization is also a function of its budget estimate (Kwon & Kang 2018). To establish budgets for infrastructure projects, the projected expenses and income throughout its lifecycle should be assessed and compared to similar projects (Powe 2020). Bosch-Rekveldt, Bakker and Hertogh, (2018), backs this claim by stating that Funds available should be evaluated and the project pre-design requirements determined. Finally, the options available for preliminary design should be assessed to pick on the most optimal alternative (Kwon & Kang 2018). A comprehensive budget estimate for HSR systems should include VAT, contingency, consultant fees, inflation, external contracts, equipment, fittings, and fixtures, site investigations, financing costs, and cost of planning, approval fees, acquisition of property and land, and the cost of construction (Lichtenberg 2016).

Inter-American Development Bank IDB Invest Infrastructure Sustainability Framework

Another sustainability infrastructure framework proposed by the Inter-American Development Bank IDB Invest seeks to assess infrastructure projects in terms of their socio-environmental, economic, financial, and institutional sustainability (Peplow & Augustine 2017). The framework is not only used in assessment for prioritization but also used for the assessment of sustainable infrastructural developments throughout the project’s life cycle. The economic and financial sustainability aspects include the positive net economic return generated by infrastructure while considering its costs and benefits as well as its negative and positive spillovers and externalities throughout the project cycle. The implication is that economically and financially sustainable infrastructure should be supported by payment availability and precisely targeted subsidies to generate a revenue stream that covers for its cost. It also incorporates a risk assessment to determine how uncertainties can be distributed transparently and fairly to absorb their impacts on the project outcomes.

Environmental sustainability on the other hand includes climate resilience and is geared towards preservation, restoration, and integration of the natural environment. The assessment limits all environmental pollution types that can be experienced throughout the cycle while supporting the efficient and sustainable use of natural resources (Peplow & Augustine 2017). The design considerations for infrastructure projects is such that they offer resilience against natural disaster and climate risks. The assessment should therefore be based on the sustainability performance of previously developed or built similar infrastructure.

Social sustainability assessment includes checking for the inclusivity of infrastructure and how it affects communities, contributes to social wellbeing, enhances livelihood, and serves stakeholders throughout its lifecycle. It should be able to generate transparent and equitable services through avoidance of involuntary displacement through alternative designs, promotion of diversity, safety, health, and equity, and integration of heritage and cultural conservation.

Institutional sustainability aligns with international and national commitments as directed by consistent and transparent government systems throughout the lifecycle of the project. This is effectively assessed through ensuring the project planning, implementation, and operation procedures are defined clearly and the institutional capacity is robust. Under the diverse and innovative HSR infrastructure developments, institutional sustainability is essential to foster effective project management, innovative thinking, and facilitate the transfer of knowledge.

Building Information Modeling (BIM)

Liu et al. (2018), identifies the Building Information Modeling (BIM) as another assessment framework that can be used to ensure that project sustainability is achieved. The proponents of this framework point out the planning phase as the largest area for sustainability opportunities where sustainable designs can be considered as a critical factor for success. The model is used to conduct performance analysis of infrastructure projects with its suitability for sustainability assessment anchored on the capacity to support sustainability analysis at the early design phase. However, the framework has been criticized for its issues related to compliance, regulation, and interoperability. The framework utilizes sustainable rating systems with indicators that assess the economic, social, and environmental performance of infrastructure using electronic sustainability tools. The careful application of the Building Information Modeling could fit with the sustainability aspects of the HSR system.

Theoretical Framework and its application to the research

This paper is founded on the theoretical framework of sustainable infrastructure. As a concept, sustainable infrastructure is a key social, economic, and environmental sustainability enabler (Reiner & Rouse 2017). Competitiveness and productivity accrued from quality infrastructure facilitate trade and contributes to employment and economic growth in general. Additionally, infrastructure services that have broad coverage such as high-speed rail projects support human capital formation, equity, and social inclusion (Voghera & Giudice 2019). Besides, with the project’s capacity to incorporate green technology, it helps in environmental safeguarding and contributes to the global process of DE carbonization by reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

According to Halisçelik and Soytas (2019), as the part is the 2030 sustainable development agenda, infrastructure projects, including HSR development must align with the 17 sustainable development goals put forward by the United Nations. The sustainable development goals outlined include poverty eradication, hunger eradication, promotion of wellbeing of the society, quality education, good health, gender equality, Availability of clean water and sanitization, clean and low cost energy, growth in the economy and decent work, and industrial infrastructure and innovation (Halisçelik & Soytas 2019). The other sustainable development goals include a reduction in inequalities, development of sustainable communities and cities, responsibility in production and consumption, advancement towards climate action, protection of life below water and on land, upholding of peace, justice, and strong institutions and making partnerships that favor these goals (Hák, Janoušková and Moldan 2016).

However, delivering sustainable infrastructure is a challenge that extends beyond the construction to functional markets, affordable finance, government transparency, smart regulation, procurement efficiency, sound planning, and good policy (Reiner & Rouse 2017). Many people especially those in the middle and lower economic class face an overstrained transport network. Hence there is a growing need to develop a resilient system such as the HSR that can offer comfort, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness to ensure they can carry out their daily duties effectively (Voghera & Giudice 2019). However, prioritizing on a sustainable infrastructure project requires clarity in terms of its economic, social, and environmental aspects (De Gooyert 2020). This implies that other than the professional perspectives where technical indicators are derived, stakeholder involvement is important to ensure other indicators of sustainability can be evaluated (Pakzad, Osmond and Corkery 2017). Although attaining full sustainability for infrastructure projects may not be ideal, organizations involved in the HSR project should establish the most optimal sustainability framework that can align with the UN sustainable development goals.

Research methodology

The methodology adopted for this research will be built on a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. The qualitative research will be explorative where various sustainability frameworks are contrasted against each other to evaluate their level of comprehensiveness in assessing the alignment of the HSR projects to sustainable development goals. The quantitative research will include questionnaires filled by high ranking engineers responsible for the planning and implementation of the HSR projects for both countries.

Research Instrument and research approach 

In understanding the evolution and development of high speed rail in Australia and India, a comparative study was conducted on secondary source. A number of sources were selected for the study to determine literature review applied in meeting the study objective. The research outlined steps to be applied in ensuring only relevant sources were used to gather data on state of high speed rail. Thus, the following provides guidelines applied for collecting relevant research information.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

 To ensure that only relevant sources were used, ten data bases were identified for selection of secondary sources containing information on high speed rail. On the other hand, the selection based its criteria on journals that were published from 1998-2020 to be included for the study. Application of this selection method was used to ensure that selected sources addressed contemporary issues associated with high speed rail in Australia as well as India. From the database, a total of 15 articles were selected containing information on high speed tail. However, however, from the selected total, seven articles were not pear previewed and therefore they were eliminated from the study.

From the applied method,

Raghuram, G. and Udayakumar, P.D., 2016. Dedicated high speed rail network in india: issues in development.

The author provides an overview of how extensive cost of providing high speed rail can be attained by collaboration between two partner countries. According to this journal, the author review development memorandum signed by India and Japan to help in understanding the setting up of high speed rail (HRS) that was estimated to cost INR 976.36 billion. The authors outlined that the Ministry of Railways begun by conducting a feasibility study on different routes at it was critical in planning of the actual construction cost. The article revealed relevant information route fixation, technology application and gauge selection among other issues to attain development.

Robertson, S. (2016). The potential mitigation of CO2 emissions via modal substitution of high-speed rail for short-haul air travel from a life cycle perspective–An Australian case study. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 46, 365-380.

According to Robertson (2016) the study objective was to provide an evaluation for management of CO2 emitted by replacing high short haul air travel by high speed rail across Sydney and Melbourne. Previously it had been established that this replacement would limit air pollution arising from CO2 produced. Contrarily, it was realized that the mode of travel determines CO2 concentrations thus each system had CO2 mitigation measures in place. Findings of this study showed that line haul reduced CO2 levels per load which was higher that emission from air mode. The author thus recommended substitution of high speed rail for short haul air travel as it had a reduction level of up to 18% as per projected year of 2056.

India railway vision 2020, Indian Railways. December 2009. Retrieved from: https://indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/directorate/infra/downloads/VISION_2020_Eng_SUBMITTED_TO_PARLIAMENT.pdf

According to this publication, the Minister of Railways issued a developmental plan for upgrading regional railway connection to meet some objectives. According to the government, railway was viewed as a vehicle for inclusion to attain national development and integration. According to the minister expansion of rail way will meet needs of people by improving geographical connections, availing income and bringing people from different ethnic groups together. The minister focused on environmental considerations as well as employment of a number of people through expansion of railway network systems. Vision 2020 discussed in this publication was to increase railway line by 30,000km, adopt use of high speed rails and application of 33,000 kilometers of electrified trains.

High speed rail study, Phase 1, jully 2011, Retrieved from :https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/rail/publications/high-speed-rail-study-reports/files/HSR_Phase1_Report_Main_body.pdf :

Review of this publication provided strategic case study to implement high speed rail network system that was proposed by Australian Minister of Infrastructure and Transport. According to the minister directive, a two phase study was ordered on 5^th of August 2010 to evaluate a number of factors that would improve performance of high speed rail. In the first phase of the study, the key issues captured in the study were assessment on cost ranges, potential sites for establishing rail stations and future demands on high speed rail together with effects of social and regional developments that would impact on high speed rail network development. However, this study was realized to have not covered the financial aspects of connecting the east coast of Australia and the accumulative benefits that were to be realized from this region. Phase two of the study was therefore commissioned to analyze financial feasibility, rout alignment factors and patronage estimates to identify the financing considerations to be applied.

Bukovac, S. and Douglas, I., 2019. The potential impact of High Speed Rail development on Australian aviation. Journal of Air Transport Management, 78, pp.164-174.

The authors of this article outline that eastern border of Australia experiences annual grow of 3% on the air traffic. Further, there is speculation that needs for long distant freight will create crowding on a number of airports by 2020. In response this this rising demand, the government interventions to solve this issue using high speed rail had never bore any fruit for the past 3 decades. The outcomes are that failure to build high speed rail has resulted in low competition by local airlines. Additionally, speculations hold that congestion emission may result in change of transportation position. In the long run, the market share for air transport will be used by high speed rail in the east cost of the country following travel habits and international outcomes.

Charles, M.B., Ryan, N. and Kivits, R.A., 2012. Moving towards sustainable intercity transport: A case study of high-speed rail in Australia. International journal of sustainable development, 15(1-2), pp.125-147.

From the authors’ perspective, high speed rail is increasingly becoming a common place in global regions despite futile development attempts by the Australian government. The article therefore offers evaluation of a scenario that can be used in planning of developing HSR to achieve sustainability and mobility in eastern coast of Australia. The article provides determination of stakeholders and strategies to design future framework that could see effective adoption of HSR. In authors point of view, there is specific guide for transition from the current means to acceptable pathway that will eventually enhance adoption. Following states of compromised outcomes, the authors recommend stakeholders’ roles and responsibility to ensure future adoption of HSR.

Williams, P.A., 1998. Australian Very Fast Trains: A Chronology. Department of the Parliamentary Library.

In this article, the author provides chronological steps by Australian government to introduce high speed rail since the pioneer French project in 1980. Consequently, the author states that the largest line was designed to cover cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra that received support from several development oriented leaders. However, this project was abandoned when it failed to meet federal tax changes that would see its success. Since this failure, other proposals such as creating linkage of Canberra and Sydney have since been applied with debates on its future. The author further proceeds to establish existence of similarity on consecutive rail projects that have ever been developed. In conclusion, the author realized that the cost of improving rail system in the country were expensive beyond government willingness to support the infrastructure development project.

Golya A, Sharma D, Garg D, Sharma J, Netula O & Mohamed A K, Detailed Study on High Speed Rails in India. March 2020 : Retrieved from: http://www.ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRTA020005.pdf

The publication outlines key measures the Republic of India has undertaken to join global leaders in embracing technology to address issues of defense and transport. The transport system of the country has taken considerations on emerging changes to facilitate movement to attain key roles. The major objectives of this article are to determine the roles of global corporation in developing Indian rail transport analyze international monetary functions in high speed rail project and estimate arising challenges that the country is facing in implementation of HSR. Findings of the study provide gaps in meeting regional transport systems and social issues that limit uses of HSR.

Sample Size

The questionnaires will be sent to 90 participants from environmental, financial, and engineering branches the HSR project implementation teams. The three groups of 30 participants and 15 from each country each are significant for the study because they will inform the researcher on the compliance of the HSR projects to sustainability goals. Since they are all informed practitioners in their respective fields, they will give first-hand experience and content on how the project’s sustainability assessments were conducted.

Qualitative research

The qualitative research will comprise a comprehensive literature review on the four sustainability frameworks outlined concerning the assessment of HSR projects. This explorative study will start by developing an understanding of the HSR systems in both India and Australia. This will be followed by the identification of relevant approaches that have been undertaken towards achieving sustainability for the two HSR systems. The third step will concern outlining the economic, environmental, and social indicators relevant to HSR project sustainability (Pakzad, Osmond and Corkery 2017). The fourth step will be to assess the HSR projects using each of the four sustainability frameworks and according to the indicators provided. The fifth step is a multi-criteria decision analysis where the performance of each framework in assessing various sustainability indicators is compared. This step will be performed in a tabulated format with a checklist containing identified indicators on the left column and the sustainability frameworks on the first row. Each framework will be rated on a scale of 1-5 depending on its comprehensiveness in assessing the sustainability indicators. The application of each framework will be demonstrated in the Mumbai and Australia’s East Coast HSR systems.

Quantitative Research

Similar to the study by Wernicke and Talmy (2018), questionnaires will be used to collect quantitative data for examining the effectiveness of sustainability frameworks for the HSR projects. Since Engineers are busy individuals, it is difficult to make arrangements and have face-to-face communication with them. However, due to their in-depth understanding of the HSR system principles from its initiation to its completion, well-structured questions can create room for information on its sustainability assessment from a broad spectrum of respondents without inconveniencing their fulfillment of assigned duties and responsibilities.

For this study, open-ended questionnaires will be developed to assess the extent to which the two HSR projects have been designed to comply with the outlined sustainability indicators. Once the questionnaires are developed, the respondent emails will be obtained from the organizations depending on the hierarchy levels, and professional expertise of HSR project practitioners. The participants will be sent a request to seek their approval for participation with an attached confidentiality and privacy terms form. The participants that respond to the email with a signed form will be provided with the questionnaires and offered a one-month duration to fill them and send them back. These questionnaires will be analyzed using the SPSS software to evaluate check the sustainability indicators considered for each project. Once the results are obtained, they will be counterchecked against the four-sustainability framework to determine the most suitable to be used in the assessment of the HSR project for prioritization.

Data Sources

Data will be obtained from a comprehensive search of government publications, HSR system project implementation plans, sustainability policies, and engineering designs. Other data will be obtained from professionals working in the implementation and operation of the HSR projects through a series of questionnaires sent via email.

Ethical Issues

As recommended in Knottnerus & Tugwell (2018), the study will take into consideration various ethical aspects. Firstly, all study participants will be treated courteously and respectfully. Informed consent will be incorporated in the privacy and confidentiality forms by making clear all the research methods and aims to the participants. Social media participants’ anonymity and confidentiality will be maintained. Finally, the detailed project results report will be availed to the Queensland Rail, India Railways, and the University body to act as a baseline for further study and alternative recommendations.

Research Validity and Reliability

According to Bashir & Marudhar (2018), validity will affect study design and methods. The internal validity of the data is affected by the variability of the subject because there is not a single sustainability framework that is sufficient enough to vouch for the HSR project’s environmental, economic and social sustainability throughout the project planning, prioritization, and implementation procedure. Therefore, the framework is subject to constant revisions depending on the existing situation.

The test-retest reliability of the data is guaranteed. Infrastructure sustainability is a key component of the 2030 sustainable development goals. Because of the huge benefits attached to the HSR project and its high return on investment rate, as well as its use of green technology to fuel the operation, it is inevitable for the proponents to think in a manner that will promote its implementation. Besides, the questionnaires will be obtained from professionals in the main fields. Thus, data the reliability of data obtained will have a 95% confidence level.

Work Plan and Schedule

Case Study Application of Eco-Engineering Framework

The eco-engineering framework will be employed to sustainability assessment of the Mumbai‐Ahmedabad high-speed railway project and Australia’s high-speed railway system to determine the comprehensiveness and areas that need to be changed to make infrastructure Australia Assessment Framework comprehensive and inclusive. This framework uses specific economic, social, environmental, and performance KPIs to assess the sustainability of infrastructure projects and act as a support guide for decisions (Mickovski & Thomson 2017).

Australia’s High-Speed Railway

Economic KPIs

In terms of economic KPI, the Australian High-Speed Rail (HSR), the system is estimated to cost approximately $84 billion to cater for the project management, the rolling stock, and contingency (Melbourne Energy Institute 2015). However, when the rail is fully in operation, it is estimated that its gross fare revenue will amount to about $7 billion annually which means in 2030. With an estimated 4% annual passenger growth, the HSR is expected to repay the capital laid down in about 40 years of operation. In terms of timesaving, the HSR system will utilize ten-minute frequencies during peak hours for trains at the Sydney station which is considered the busiest. This will help meet the demand at an 85% occupancy estimate and hence increase the efficiency of travel across the south and north directions (Melbourne Energy Institute 2015).

Environmental KPIs

The environmental KPIs include the effects of the infrastructure design, construction, and maintenance places on the ecology which entails the fauna, flora, soil, air, and water (Mickovski & Thomson 2017). The HSR system is fully powered using renewable energy hence does not contribute to the carbon print (Ke et al. 2017). For journeys that can be substituted with the HSR, the system allows passengers to travel with no emissions. According to the Melbourne Energy Institute (2015), regional travel carbon dioxide emissions will be cut by approximately 150 million tones. Also, after about 5 years, the HSR emissions created from construction activities will be offset completely.

Social KPIs

The social effects are the changes in the behavior of local people. The HSR is expected to increase household mobility and travel for business trips and normal visits because of its low cost and high-efficiency services. This increases opportunities for social interactions, higher house pricing, and investment attractiveness. Due to the changes in house prices, many families are also likely to change residential areas.

Performance KPIs

Once the HSR is in operation, it is expected to be the dominant transport means for 350 to 1300 km journeys. This will transfer more travelers from the long car and current air travels. Besides, the high-speed rail is expected to connect six major cities and 12 regional centers using 21 stations. This will facilitate 45% of regional travel which increases transport effectiveness among Australia’s population.

Mumbai-Ahmedabad High- Speed Railway Project

Environmental KPIs

According to Rawal (2020), the preservation of wildlife is a fundamental sustainability aspect of the project. To ensure wildlife is preserved, the MAHSR will utilize elevated corridors and animal underpasses (GPS Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2019). This coupled with avoidance of reserve bypass will ensure that the railway system does not interfere with the natural movement of wild animals. According to Chatterjee (2020), another expected environmental effect of the infrastructure is increased storm surges, saline intrusion, increased coastline erosion instances, and high flooding risk due to the mangrove ecosystems along with the railway system. Additionally, its construction will destroy mangroves at some places leading to disruption of flora and fauna species (GPS Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2019). For sustainability purposes, afforestation will be well planned and conducted on these specific sites to allow an ecosystem recovery within five years. The train is also likely to cause noise pollution due to sound and speed (GPS Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2019). However, elevated corridors fitted with noise barriers and boundary walls on both sides will be constructed to alleviate the severe impacts of the sound (Chatterjee 2020).

Source: Railpro.com

The train is also electrically powered with an autotransformer feeding system (Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) 2020). This promotes green technology by minimizing the emission of greenhouse gases into the environment (Chen et al. 2016). Parker and Zingoni de Baro (2019), states that considering that transport is one of the biggest carbon emission industry, implementation of HSR that operates on electricity and is efficient, more than other transport modes for inter-city travel will improve the emission rates hence complying with the eco-engineering sustainability framework. The idea is further supported by (GPS Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2019).

Social KPIs

According to Ravi (2019), one of the social impacts for the HSR is the resettlement of the residential colony in Kathor. The HSR is also expected to lead to mass resettlement in Ahmedabad, Kheda, Vadodara, and Palghar. Farmers in the region are also likely to lose estates to the rail system infrastructure and with the low education among the rural areas through which the rail passes, it means they will lose their source of livelihood. The system also supports inclusive socio-geographic developments and strengthens regional and national integration (Chen et al. 2016).

Performance KPIs

The HSR system will create room for speed freight trains (Wei 2016). This implies that slow passenger trains will be replaced with passenger services that offer maximum speeds to measure up with international standards. This will offer the system resilience to overcome laxity and low capacity as well as offer rail transport stability compared to the other modes of transport (Chen et al. 2016). The 509km corridor will traverse through various major regions and cities through undersea tunnels, underground stations, tunnels, and viaducts for minimal interruption with normal activities (Ravi 2019).

Economical KPIs

The high-speed railway project will require a large upfront financial lay down because of a lack of pre-existing corridors. The construction cost is estimated at Rs 500 billion and the rolling stock cost at RS 70 billion respectively with about Rs 2 billion operating costs, Rs 1.5 billion maintenance cost, and 2.5 billion infrastructure cost respectively (Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) 2020). Therefore, the project will require collaboration between India Railways and the state governments to enable its successful implementation. On the positive side, the railway system will facilitate quick commuter services between metropolitan cities. However, large rice fields will be lost through the implementation of the project (Chatterjee 2020). The HSR is a hybrid for large-scale productive employment. During its design, construction, and operation, the HSR system will open up employment opportunities for individuals from various sectors hence improve their livelihood. It is to be noted that the problems related to infrastructural renewal backlog can’t just be resolved by stakeholders, but other influential parties are to be involved (Siriwardhane & Khan 2019).

Research Gap

Rose and Manley (2012) claim that product innovation plays an important role in infrastructure products. Even though innovative products have high potential in the construction field it involves high risk because of their complex nature. It will always remain a sustainability concern as it is to be analysed how this will affect the environment in the long run. Rose and Manley (2012) have conducted qualitative research by interviews with the major stakeholders to find that unmatched product specifications are a major issue that hinders the project sustainability. Yang et al. (2015) support this claim by stating that Australia has one of the fastest-growing transport infrastructures in the world and it is important to implement a conceptual framework to the system to backtrack the sustainable knowledge to the profound projects. 

Staples and Dalrymple’s (2011) interviews have deduced that there is still a lot of room for improvement in this section. The research also unveiled that broader public value creation is to be encouraged (Staples & Dalrymple 2011). The recent advancement in Australian Infrastructural advancement is the HSR project expected to be a better alternative for the short-haul air travels the project extends from Sydney to Melbourne. Even though the major issue dealing with the project is the CO2 emission and the funding for the project (Robertson 2016).

Although the assessment framework proposed by the Local Government and Planning Minister’s Council covers the financial, sustainability, sustainability, and asset planning and allocation aspects, it is not a comprehensive assessment for the project sustainability. For instance, it does not factor in various innovative concepts that increase the performance of the HSR system. Besides, it concentrates more on the project budgeting other than its economic impact on the present and future generations. The eco-engineering framework on the other hand utilizes specific KPIs to assess project sustainability and deduce key considerations that are utilized on delivering an overall sustainable project. The economic, social, environmental and performance aspects are rich project assessment areas that inform on the suitability of the project and its ability to produce desirably sustainable outcomes (Powe 2020). This outlines the required changes that can be made to the Infrastructure Australia assessment framework to ensure HSR project prioritization meets the demands of sustainable development.

Conclusion

Public ownership of infrastructure is necessary if the facility is totally for the good of the public. A good example of public ownership is the Queensland Rail which is meant to serve as public transport from one station to another. Therefore, the organization must strive to supply public rails such as the high-speed rail framework that offer strong positive characteristics. Additionally, for infrastructure projects that generate significant benefits to the community such as rail transport, the government is tasked with funding responsibility and prioritization and planning tasks (Haller 2016). For instance, other than the obvious benefit of rail transport to facilitate commuting from one region to another, it increases the value of land in the surrounding communities. To ensure that such infrastructure is not underprovided, the government may opt to tax the landowners who benefit from it or install the infrastructure in totality. Regardless, the government will play a significant role in ensuring that the projects are implemented successfully and that proper financing structures are laid down. Negative externalities are also produced by infrastructure services and assets. Some of the negative impacts of rail infrastructure are pollution, traffic accidents, and noise. Public transport is also prone to congestion due to the large number of people who commute from one point to another at a given time. Therefore, for sustainability purposes, technologies should be implemented to minimize the negative direct and indirect effects. This eco-engineering framework is an efficient tool that can be utilized to assess the sustainability impacts of public infrastructure in terms of their economic, social, performance, and environmental effects. Applying this framework to high-speed railway systems from Australia and India reveals the similarities differences in their design, planning, and prioritization aspects that can be considered in making changes to the infrastructure Australia assessment framework for efficient and effective prioritization of projects.