kedar uttamkth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:460962/fulltext01.pdf · 2011. 12. 1. · kedar...

TRITA-LWR LIC 2060

ISSN 1650-8629

ISRN KTH/LWR/LIC 2060-SE

ISBN 978-91-7501-218-6

LINKING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

ASSESSMENT AND GREEN PROCUREMENT

IN THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR: OPPORTUNITIES AND PERSPECTIVES

Kedar Uttam

December 2011

Kedar Uttam TRITA LWR LIC 2060

ii

© Kedar Uttam 2011

Licentiate thesis

Environmental Management and Assessment Research Group

Department of Land and Water Resources Engineering

Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)

SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM, Sweden

Reference to this publication should be written as: Uttam, K. (2011) “Linking environmen-tal impact assessment and green procurement in the construction sector: opportunities and perspectives” TRITA LWR LIC 2060

Linking environmental impact assessment and green procurement in the construction sector: opportuni-ties and perspectives

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research project has been funded by FORMAS, the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning.

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to my three „Gurus‟ in this research: my supervisor Berit Balfors, co-supervisor Charlotta Faith-Ell, and Ulla Mörtberg. You all have been guiding me in this research journey with utmost patience and care. In India, there is a saying that the nature of guru‟s care is beyond thought and word. Today, I can firmly say that I have experienced such good care.

Special thanks to all the interviewees for providing me with appointments (de-spite your busy schedule) and responding to my questions. I also wish to thank Ann-Kristin Karlsson,WSP for the contact details. Tonnes of thanks to Jos Arts, Rijkswaterstaat (the Netherlands) for that inspirational feedback you gave on my research project during the conference at Puebla. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Steve Donohoe, University of Plymouth and his col-leagues for the discussion that we had regarding this research project. My sol-emn gratitude to Olof Hjelm, Linköping University for having agreed to be the opponent of this thesis.

My heartfelt thanks to my colleagues at the department: Prosun Bhattacharya, Aira Saarelainen, Britt Chow, Nandita Singh, Gunno Renman, Jerzy Buczak, Agneiszka Renman, Joanne Fernlund, Lea, Caroline, Imran, Sufie, Robert, Emma, Zahra, Mårten, Andrew, Selomme and others.Thanks to my colleague Juan Azcarate for his wise last-minute suggestions on Paper I and II.This thesis will be incomplete if I do not thank Benoît and Andreas Zetterberg, who helped me with the word formatting. Big thanks to my friend Tawhid for the coverpage photo. I wholeheartedly thank my pals Lea Levi, Martina, Linn, and Lina for all the encouragement.

Words are inadequate to thank my parents, grandmothers, Ammachi, Ketan, Natesh, Uday, Jesta, Nagaraj, Amma, Papa and Shikha for your unconditional love and emotional support. Lots of love to my Shruti, you are my greatest in-spiration.


iv


v

TABLE OF CONTENT

Acknowledgements iii

Table of Content v

Abstract 1

Introduction 1

Methods 4

Literature review 5

Interviews 5

Methodological limitation 6

Results and discussion 6

EIA follow-up and its role in improving the coordination between planning and

construction phases 6

Procurement contracts and partnering to improve coordination between

planning and construction phases 8

Towards inter-connecting impact assessment and green procurement 9

Opportunities to link impact assessment and green procurement 11

Envisaging partnerships in the inter-link 13

Priority areas for procuring green energy in the construction sector 15

Directions for future research 15

Conclusion 15

References 17

Other references 21

LIST OF PAPERS

I. Uttam K, Balfors B, Faith-Ell C. 2011. EIA and green procurement: Opportunities for

strengthening their coordination. Accepted by Environmental Impact Assessment Re-

view, October 2011.

II. Uttam K, Balfors B, Faith-Ell C, Mörtberg UM.2011. Procuring green energy in the

construction sector: perspectives on inter-connecting green procurement and impact

assessment. Manuscript


vi


1

ABSTRACT

The construction sector has been greatly responsible for environmental pollu-tion and problems related to sustainability. Hence, there is a crucial need to improve the sector‟s environmental performance. In terms of assessing the en-vironmental impacts of the construction sector at project and strategic level, policy instruments such as project-based environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA) play an important role. Another policy instrument, namely, green procurement has started to gain at-tention in the construction sector. Green procurement is a process that in-volves the incorporation of environmental requirements during the procurement of services and products. However, discussions on green pro-curement are rarely seen during the impact assessment (EIA and SEA) phase. Moreover, the construction process is usually multi-tiered, involving several stakeholders with varied objectives, which often leads to challenges concerning the translation of information produced in the impact assessment phase into action (during the construction phase). Therefore, this thesis aimed at analysing the way through which EIA as well as green procurement can improve the co-ordination between planning and construction phases. The thesis is based on literature review and interviews. This study envisaged an inter-connected pro-cess for EIA and green procurement, and reviewed the state of the art to moti-vate the postulation of such an inter-connected process. In addition, this study also reviewed recent development within procurement contracts, and focused on partnering in the construction industry. The results indicated that it would be appropriate to introduce green procurement during the pre-decision phase of an EIA. Further, the thesis chose renewable energy as a parameter for green procurement, and explored the perspectives of various categories of stakehold-ers in the Swedish construction on the inter-link between impact assessment and green procurement. The perspectives of the interviewed stakeholders indi-cate that the inter-link is required. However, the interview results show that there is a tendency in the Swedish construction sector to adopt various com-mercially available environmental assessment and certification tools. Further-more, the thesis has mapped directions for future research. Future study should focus on the establishment of mechanisms for inter-connecting impact assessment and green procurement. It should investigate how the inter-link could be facilitated by certification tools being adopted. The future research should also examine how the inter-link can be developed together with con-cerned stakeholders through partnering.

Key words: Environmental impact assessment; green procurement; con-struction sector; renewable energy

INTRODUCTION

The construction sector is a significant user of natural resources and energy. The Worldwatch Institute data shows that the construction sector consumes 40 percent of the total raw material flow into the global economy each year and more than a quarter of the world's annual appetite for wood

(Roodman and Lenssen, 1995). A substantial amount of energy is also used during the manufacturing and transportation of build-ing materials, installation, construction activ-ities (Yan et al., 2010). In addition, studies show that the energy use and the environ-mental impacts during operation constitute a majority of the total in the construction


2

sector (cf: Adalberth 2000; OECD, 2003). According to the Organization for Econom-ic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the construction sector‟s energy consump-tion accounts for 25 to 40% of final energy use in OECD countries (OECD, 2003). As a result of vast consumption of resources and energy, the sector has been greatly re-sponsible for environmental pollution and problems related to sustainability. The inci-dence of CO2 emissions is evident during the different phases of a building life cycle such as the production of materials, setting the site, exploitation, construction of the building, and demolition (González and Navarro, 2006).

As environmental and sustainability issues continue to become increasingly significant, the construction sector needs to act for three important reasons that Ofori (1992) has listed. Primarily, to contribute to the overall effort being made to address envi-ronmental issues and sustainability concerns. The second reason includes the sector‟s need to prepare for opportunities, which can be anticipated, with regard to the changes that will be required in terms of design, construction and management, the new materials it might have to use, and the pro-cesses it would have to adopt. Moreover, the reason why the construction sector is re-quired to act is also because it will have to take proactive measures for handling the array of environment-related statutes, regula-tions, policies and requirements. Such envi-ronmental requirements and “changing priorities in construction management” (Lam et al., 2010) have instigated the con-struction sector to respond to issues con-cerning sustainability. Sustainability in the construction business is concerned with achieving a win-win situation for contrib-uting to the improved environment and the advanced society, and simultaneously gain-ing competitive advantages for construction companies (Shen et al., 2010).

However, the construction sector is in cru-cial need of improving its environmental performance (Tam et al., 2006). According to Rikhardsson (1998), the improvement of environmental performance implies that the

sector must minimise the environmental impact of its activities, products or services. The construction sector is thereby com-pelled to ask itself many questions regarding the approaches to handle environmental problems within the overall design process, the suitable materials to be used, environ-mentally benign practices, and other such issues and aspects that influence its contri-bution to the improved environment (Ball, 2002). Furthermore, the sector is pushed by government authorities to adopt several policy instruments that guide “the better management of development in harmony with the environment” (Glasson et al., 2007). Three key policy instruments have been considered in this thesis, namely, green procurement, environmental impact assess-ment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Green procurement involves the procurement of construction services and products that meet environ-mental requirements, which must be stipu-lated such that it facilitates the contractor to comply with them and further enables the client to verify (Sterner, 2002). In the public sector, green procurement is referred to as “green public procurement”, which is de-fined by the European Commission as “a process whereby public authorities seek to procure goods, services and works with a reduced environmental impact throughout their life cycle when compared to goods, services and works with the same primary function that would otherwise be procured”. According to the Commission, the priority sectors involve, among others, construction and energy from renewable sources (CEC, 2008). Carlsson and Waara (2006) highlight that including environmental requirements in public procurement is a growing global phenomenon.

According to Glasson et al. (2007), the emergence of an increasing demand by clients for goods and services with less or no environmental damage, and also a growing market for clean technologies is creating a response from project developers. The pro-ject developers or construction contractors, thus, need to be signalled of potential con-flict. Glasson et al. (2007) identify a policy


3

instrument that can signal the developer of potential conflict and could be used to dis-cuss green solutions that offset negative environmental impacts. Such a policy in-strument is called EIA. Sadler and McCabe (2002) define “EIA as a systematic process to identify, predict and evaluate the envi-ronmental effects of proposed actions and projects”. Furthermore, they state EIA‟s twofold purposes a) it aids the decision-making process by providing information on the likely environmental consequences of proposed actions b) it intends to promote environmentally sound practices through the identification of appropriate mitigation measures. EIA is also considered as a plan-ning tool (Bichard and Frost 1988; McDon-ald and Brown 1995; Briffett 1999) in which design attributes and mitigation concepts are carefully examined prior to the final design (Marshall, 2002) Appropriate mitigation is an important outcome of EIA and the means by which development projects can be made environmentally feasible (Slinn et al., 2007). Ultimately, it is essential to determine the outcomes of EIA. Therefore, EIA should include a commitment to follow-up. EIA follow-up provides the project proponents the opportunity to implement measures to mitigate impacts and prevents EIA being just a pro forma practice (Marshall et al., 2005).

However, various researchers have identified challenges concerning the translation of information produced in the EIA phase into action (during the project implementation phase). For instance, Faith-Ell (2007) has noted that the environmental requirements in construction contracts were based on the knowledge of individuals within the gov-ernment (client) and not on a systematic discussion of relevant environmental infor-mation such as the EIA report. Further-more, her study shows that the execution of environmental requirements was dependent on the knowledge, resources and economy of contractors. Slotterback (2008) raises the issue that there is little attention to what happens after the EIA is completed and the implementation of mitigation measures begins. Arts et al. (2001) have identified

substantial differences between the project plans including the EIA report and their implementation. Ridgway (2005) has indicat-ed the need to improve the delivery of EIA commitments during the construction, in-stallation and commissioning phases of the project.

One of the most recent trends in EIA has been its application at the level of policies, plans and programmes (Glasson et al., 2007). This application of EIA, called the SEA is defined as a “process that aims to integrate environmental and sustainability considerations in strategic decision-making” (Therivel, 2004). With regard to SEA, it is important that concrete project decisions consider previous strategic decisions, and such an order of planning from strategic to project level is called tiering (van Buuren and Nooteboom, 2010). Tiering intends to link environmental assessments at different planning levels in order to facilitate better scoping of the assessment, and also, if nec-essary, to permit the postponement of de-tailed issues. A tiered approach, therefore, can minimise the problem of EIA being only a „snapshot in time‟ (Arts et al., 2005). However, a Canadian study shows that there is limited tiering of strategic- and project-level assessment and decision outcomes. Although SEA is often regarded as a tool that can complement and support lower tiered assessments by identifying preferred alternatives and directions for decision mak-ing, there is often no clear connection be-tween SEA and downstream environmental assessment input needs (Noble, 2009). Fur-thermore, in order to maintain a sense of perspective and promote continuity in the integration of environmental considerations, Lyhne (2011) argues that it is appropriate to investigate whether it would be possible for a single actor to assume the overall respon-sibility for SEA application throughout the strategic decision-making process (Lyhne, 2011).

However, the construction process is usually fragmented, in the sense that it involves several parties with different objectives, and might eventually lead to problems while assuming direct responsibility for environ-


4

mental protection (Ofori, 2000). One way that has been advocated to deal with frag-mentation and promote better communica-tion among project actors is evolved forms of contracting such as partnering. The con-cept of partnering in the construction indus-try is based on collaboration, trust and openness, which enables the combined effort of project actors towards meeting project objectives (Naoum, 2003; Kadefors, 2004; Lu and Hong Yan, 2007; Alderman and Ivory, 2007; Gadde and Dubois, 2010). Hence, there is a need to understand how such contracting forms together with policy instruments such as EIA and green pro-curement can be used to improve the coor-dination between planning and construction phases. It has to be noted that the coordina-tion between planning and construction phases in the context of this study is con-cerned with the translation of environmental requirements into action.

Therefore, the overall aim of this thesis is to bolster the knowledge of enhancing the environmental performance of the construc-tion sector. The specific aim is to analyse the way through which EIA as well as green procurement can improve the coordination between planning and construction phases. In so doing, the thesis envisages an inter-connected process for EIA and green pro-curement. Therefore, the objectives of this thesis are:

i. to review the recent development concerning the coordination between pro-ject planning and implementation, primarily within the purview of two policy instru-ments, EIA and green procurement (Pa-per I)

ii. to gain a better understanding of how various categories of stakeholders in the Swedish construction sector view the inter-link between impact assessment (EIA and SEA) and green procurement, by particularly focusing on their insights related to the procurement of renewable (green) energy in the construction sector (Paper II)

This thesis comprises of two papers. Paper I elucidates the state of the art by examining the role of EIA follow-up and construction

contracts in improving the coordination between project planning and implementa-tion. The Paper I reviews the state of the art also in terms of setting EIA as a basis for green procurement. Furthermore, Paper I identifies opportunities for connecting EIA and green procurement.

Paper II adopts renewable energy as a pa-rameter for green procurement and the reason for doing so has been described in the paper. The Paper II presents the per-spectives of various categories of stakehold-ers in the Swedish construction sector on the inter-link between impact assessment and green (energy) procurement. In addition, it also identifies certain priority areas that could encourage the procurement of renew-able energy in the construction sector, and further explores the perceptions of the stakeholders on those priority areas. Where-as, Paper I focused specifically on EIA and green procurement (not delved into SEA), Paper II has considered both EIA and SEA. Having stated this, it is important to acknowledge that the need to consider the tiering between project and strategic level was realised much later during the course of this research, especially when renewable energy procurement was chosen as a param-eter to be investigated.

METHODS

This study involved the conceptualisation of an inter-link between policy instruments. Therefore, it was necessary to explore why such a link would be advantageous, what could be the possible opportunities for the link considering the current development in the construction sector and how some of the key players view this link. The study ex-plored these questions using a qualitative approach. According to Ritchie (2003), there is general argument that the reason for adopting qualitative methods as the only method is centrally related to the objectives of the research. This indicates that it is the nature of the information required, which leads to a choice of a qualitative approach. Therefore, if the major purpose of the re-search is concerned with understanding context or process, then qualitative infor-


5

mation solely may be required. The argu-ment put forth by Ritchie (2003) corre-sponds to the motivation in this research to select a qualitative approach, in the sense that the key intention was to understand opportunities around the processes of im-pact assessment and green procurement for improving the coordination between project planning and construction phases. The quali-tative methods used in this study involved literature review and interviews.

Literature review

The literature was reviewed to explore pre-vailing development pertaining to EIA and green procurement. The review process examined international case studies where EIA had played an active role in planning, and in some cases also conducted in parallel to the procurement process. The reason why such case studies were referred was because it aided in understanding and analysing how EIA could set the context for green pro-curement (Paper I). The review also ad-dressed previous research on impact assessment and planning, drivers and barri-ers for green procurement, energy planning, and renewable energy policy (Paper II). In addition, the literature reviewed included various study reports on green procurement, developed by concerned authorities, and also policy documents such as EU directives and communication. Such reports and policy documents were deemed relevant to gain an understanding on green procurement from a sustainability perspective (Paper I).

Moreover, literature review helped in identi-fying “sensitizing concepts” (Blumer, 1954), which facilitated the detection of some of the priority areas that could encourage the procurement of renewable energy in the construction sector (Paper II).These con-cepts also provide foci for interviews (Hol-loway, 1997).

Interviews

Purposive sampling (Wright, 1996) was applied to identify categories of stakeholders in the Swedish construction sector. The logic behind this type of sampling is to iden-tify and select “information-rich” cases or

resource-persons. In this study, the intention was to capture the perspectives of the stake-holder categories on impact assessment, green procurement and the procurement of renewable energy in the construction sector. The sampling process, thereby, mapped three fundamental categories and these involved the contractor, client and energy supplier. Accordingly, these categories signi-fied the construction company, municipality and energy supply company.

Further, three largest1 Swedish construction companies were selected using the data from the Swedish Construction Federation. The participants from the construction compa-nies involved employees from the senior management level, and were primarily re-sponsible for environmental concerns in their company. One interview was conduct-ed with an employee from the energy supply company, who was a product manager from the marketing department and was also involved in procuring renewable energy. The municipal interviewee was an employee from the Stockholm Development Office, who has been involved as an environmental expert in the Stockholm Royal Seaport pro-ject2. The interviews focused on the inter-link between impact assessment and green procurement, and the priority areas for encouraging the procurement of renewable energy.

The interviews were guided by a general interview protocol, wherein interviewees were, beforehand, provided with infor-mation on the research project and interview questions. Permission was sought from the interviewees to audio record the interview. The questions were semi-structured using a set of open-ended questions to stimulate discussion. The interviews varied in length from 45 to 90 minutes. Interviews were transcribed and the transcribed data was thoroughly analysed.

1 Based on turnover

2 Proposed large scale construction project in

Stockholm


6

Methodological limitation

In Sweden, the EIA Directive is primarily implemented by chapter 6 (section 1 to 10) of the Swedish Environmental Code. Fur-ther, chapter 6 (section 11 to 18, 21) also includes most of the provisions of the SEA Directive (Sheate et al., 2005). The Swedish translation of EIA is miljökonsekvens-bedömning (MKB) and that of SEA is miljöbedömning. However, both EIA report or the environmental impact statement (EIS) and the SEA report are termed as miljökonsekvensbeskrivning (MKB) (Fig. 1) in Swedish (SFS, 1998; Naturvårdsverket, 2009). These conflicting terminologies posed as limitations during the interview process, in the sense that there are possibilities wherein interviewees might have perceived SEA report as EIS and vice-versa. Such misperceptions led to challenges in differen-tiating between EIA and SEA. For instance, when asked about EIA, they might have responded to the question, taking SEA pro-cess or SEA report into consideration. This limits the study by making it difficult to understand whether the interviewees‟ per-spectives are related to the EIA or the SEA process. Nonetheless, Paper II refers to impact assessment process, and includes discussions from the standpoint of both EIA and SEA.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The following sections present and discuss the results of the literature review and inter-views. At the outset, the role of EIA follow-up in strengthening the link between plan-ning and implementation phases has been elucidated. This is followed by a description and analyses on how innovative forms of contracting such as partnering are playing a role in bridging the gap between project planning and construction. The succeeding sections put forth the possible opportunities for linking impact assessment and green procurement. Furthermore, some of these sections present and analyse the perspectives of the key players in the construction sector on the inter-link between impact assessment and green procurement, and the priority areas that could promote the procurement of renewable energy.

EIA follow-up and its role in improv-ing the coordination between plan-ning and construction phases

During the formal assessment of project acceptability, comprehensive mitigation measures in an EIA report or environmental impact statement (EIS) can facilitate a pro-ject‟s approval process (Marshall, 2002). However, during the post-decision stage of a project, additional actions are required to

Fig. 1. Conflicting ter-minologies in EIA and SEA processes in Swe-den (Faith-Ell, 2011)

SEA Directive EIA Directive

Miljökonsekvensbedömning (MKB) Environmental Impact As-sessment (EIA) Ch. 6 of the Environmental Code § 1-10

Miljöbedömning Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Ch.6 of the Environmental Code § 11-18, 21

Miljökonsekvensbeskriv-ning (MKB) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Ch. 6 of the Environmental Code § 7

Miljökonsekvensbeskrivning (MKB) SEA report Ch. 6 of the Environmental Code § 12 + (§ 7)


7

prevent detrimental environmental impacts, which call for the practice of EIA follow-up to track the real effects of the project. Therefore, the rationale for EIA follow-up is to maintain control over uncertainties linked to a prospective activity and to provide information regarding the impacts of an activity and when they are likely to occur. EIA follow-up indicates activities that in-volve aspects such as monitoring and eval-uation as well as management of the environmental consequences that occur (Arts et al., 2001). The key aims of EIA follow-up are to improve project implemen-tation with regard to environmental protec-tion outcomes and to provide timely feedback on EIA processes (Morrison-Saunders et al., 2003). Marshall et al. (2005) address how EIA follow-up needs to be conducted. They highlight that the roles in EIA follow-up should be made clear in pre-decision EIA documentation and subse-quent EIA approvals and management sys-tems. Having emphasized this, they indicate that it is necessary to develop a series of well-defined steps outlining responsibilities within and among the different stakeholders. Moreover, they acknowledge the need to have objectives for EIA follow-up, which may include controlling projects and their environmental impacts, improving scientific knowledge, creating community awareness and integration with other information such as state of the art environment reports. Furthermore, they state that in order to maintain focus, EIA follow-up should in-volve continuous scoping. In addition, Mar-shall et al. (2005) underscore the need to adopt performance criteria, which should be enacted through well-defined methodologies for monitoring, evaluation, management and communication.

In order to ensure that the predicted envi-ronmental issues are effectively controlled during the project implementation phase and thereby to protect the EIA follow-up process, researchers have promoted the idea of linking EIA with environmental man-agement system (EMS) (Marshall, 2002; Sánchez and Hacking 2002; Marshall, 2005; Ridgway, 2005; Slinn et al., 2007). EMS is a

management tool that facilitates an organisa-tion to identify the environmental impacts resulting from its activities and to improve its environmental performance (NCSI, 2009). However, some recent studies indi-cate challenges concerning the adoption of EMS. For instance, Lundberg (2011) study on the Swedish rail projects shows that the EIA follow-up was performed based on the suggestion to link EIA and EMS. However, her study reports the lack of influence from the EIA on project management, in the sense that the findings and commitments presented in the EIA were not fully incorpo-rated in the formulation of follow-up activi-ties. Furthermore, she points out that the follow-up during the construction phase was largely based on the general environmental requirements and construction organisa-tion‟s EMS, and thus the EIA follow-up was limited. Lam et al. (2011) indicate that alt-hough EMS is widely used in the construc-tion industry, merely promoting EMS may not ensure addressing sufficient environ-mental considerations. A Spanish study shows that the EMS application at construc-tion sites seemed to be considered as a for-mality and a tactic to access the tender of contracting organisations, rather than a genuine commitment towards improving the environmental performance of companies in the construction sector (Rodríguez et al., 2011).

In the neighbouring Portugal, the amended EIA regulations have specifically provided a post-evaluation phase. Arts et al. (2001) study showed that the post-evaluation phase focuses on the following: (a) the require-ment of a detailed project proposal with an impact assessment compliance report show-ing that the original EIA decision was con-sidered in the further development of the project and that the design has incorporated the proposed mitigation measures and (b) monitoring and auditing in all cases with an additional procedure under which EIA au-thority can perform audits to check the compliance of the construction, operation and decommissioning of projects with the original EIA decision, and to verify the accuracy and functioning of monitoring


8

programs. If unpredicted negative impacts are detected, EIA authority may also impose management adjustments and/or additional mitigation.

Whereas, a review of the Canadian Envi-ronmental Assessment Act by Noble and Storey, (2005) revealed that there is a lack of a regulatory framework to undertake broadly based follow-ups that adequately examine the nature of impact predictions and their link to design requirements of mitigation measures. Furthermore, Noble and Storey, (2005) highlighted that the practice of EIA follow-up allocates a disproportionate amount of time and effort to the prediction of outcomes, although none of the predicted outcomes might be those that are highly anticipated. They argued that deliberating about what needs to be achieved from both a project standpoint and a broader sustaina-bility perspective will help the proponents, regulators and the public to focus on fun-damental and crucial issues. In contrast, Tennøy (2008) argues that uncertainty in EIA predictions and inadequate communi-cation about such uncertainty poses chal-lenges on follow-up, thereby leading to an increased risk of “unpredicted, unconsidered and unwanted environmental impacts” that in reality may not be subjected to mitigation.

Procurement contracts and partner-ing to improve coordination between planning and construction phases

Following-up with environmental issues and delivering improved environmental perfor-mance demands a high-level coordination and cooperation among project stakehold-ers. The tone for the interaction between client and contractors needs to be well es-tablished. Therefore, procurement plays a significant role in environmental perfor-mance because it sets a tone for communica-tion. However, traditional procurement procedures, in which it is common to ap-point the lowest bidder (Kadefors, 2004), are considered to be a failure in terms of meet-ing client criteria and achieving project ob-jectives due to the increasing project size and complexity. This failure led to the evolu-

tion of the concept of partnering (Naoum, 2003).

Partnering highlights the significance of “clear communication, inclusion, exclusive-ness and equality” (Alderman and Ivory, 2007). The role of the contractor in the partnering system is progressive in the sense that the contractor or the market party is involved at an earlier stage and participates in the designing process (Kadefors et al., 2007). In other words, the essence of early market involvement is that contractors who will be responsible for construction (and usually also operation and maintenance) are involved before the consent decision, in preparing the design and also the EIA (Arts et al., 2007). However, one of the debatable issues in partnering is the identification of a mechanism for transfer of environmental information from the EIA to the contracts (Faith-Ell, 2008). Arts et al. (2006) discuss a framework formulated by the Dutch gov-ernment wherein the market parties are involved before the consent decision in a way that they prepare alternatives in compe-tition that are integrated in the EIA. There-fore, the procedures for EIA and procurement/contracting are intertwined very early in the construction procurement process. The exchange of information be-tween the two procedural tracks takes place at certain points in the procedure. These points are referred to as „knots‟ and are specific instances during the process when decisions are made. Initially, the terms of reference (ToR) are prepared by the transport ministry, which is used to invite market parties to propose solutions for the identified infrastructure issue. During the preliminary stage, this involves formulating an outline of the proposed solution. This information is then included in the Notifica-tion of Intent, which is subject to public review as a part of the EIA process. The outcomes of this consultation are integrated into the guidelines for EIA, which serves as valuable information when advancing to the next stages of the EIA study and the pro-curement process. The result is a more fo-cused ToR, providing the basis for elaboration of the preliminary bids by the


9

market parties. Ultimately, the winning party‟s bid and the consent decision are merged in a contract. One of the advantages that Arts et al. (2006) have recognised is the improved relationship between the planning stages of a project and its subsequent con-struction, operation and maintenance stages due to the early involvement of the imple-menting (market) party. However, complexi-ties have been identified in the resulting processes and procedures. Some of the issues that they have recognised include the decisions regarding timing to initiate collab-oration , conflicting viewpoints between an economically favourable bid (from a pro-curement perspective) and an environmen-tally favourable alternative, and the market‟s apprehensions concerning the issue of intel-lectual property.

Towards inter-connecting impact assessment and green procurement

The integration of environmental concerns in public procurement raises the question of the „actual change‟ that will result from it (Carlsson and Waara, 2006). A pertinent question could also be concerning the mechanisms adopted for implementing such initiatives. There is a need to determine whether the scope of existing mechanisms will allow for green public procurement to achieve actual reform.

This study has intended to put forth a postu-lation that the inter-connection between EIA and green procurement could be one way to improve the coordination between planning and construction phases. There-fore, the state of the art was reviewed to explain what has motivated the postulation of such a link.

In the construction sector, green procure-ment constitutes part of the decision making processes in both the stages of procure-ment-prequalification and tender evaluation. Green preferences or environmental re-quirements can thus be one of the criteria adopted during the bid evaluation stage (Varnäs et al., 2009). However, Bouwer et al. (2006) study shows that some tender docu-ments are confusing, “containing scattered green elements”. Therefore, it is important

to employ a meticulous process for estab-lishing the necessary environmental re-quirements. In certain cases, environmental requirements were based on the results of a specific environmental impact study and evaluation, and they were further incorpo-rated in the tendering process. ICLEI's (2007) study exhibits such a process being implemented by the metro rail system exten-sion project in the city of Porto in northern Portugal. The environmental criteria were based on the results of an EIA study. The inclusion of environmental criteria in the tender documents has had an influence on several aspects of the Porto project, such as the use of improved construction methods with reduced energy requirements and the development of an excavation method that has a low impact on the ground surface.

Varnäs et al. (2009) describes another similar example of a city tunnel project in Sweden. The technical specifications for this project were drawn simultaneously with EIA. This facilitated the identification of environmen-tal impacts because the methods (that caused impacts) to be employed in the pro-ject were identified and described. Moreo-ver, the information regarding these impacts served in determining the environmental requirements in the tender documents. The tender documents also described the steps that the contractor should take to comply with the environmental requirements and monitoring measures. In addition to the environmental requirements, the procure-ment process also focused on the environ-mental evaluation criteria. This aided the client in understanding how contractors intended to plan and achieve their environ-mental goals. Therefore, the environmental preferences during the course of the pro-curement process facilitated the link be-tween the EIA and the contractors‟ management of environmental work. Their study also revealed that a factor contributing to this link was that those individuals tasked to the EIA also continued working on the project‟s environmental issues after the completion of the EIA. It should be men-tioned that green procurement is not merely the mandatory environmental requirements


10

that are transferred from the EIA to the tender documents. Green procurement is also the extra criteria/ambitions concerning environmental objectives that might be relevant to context-specific issues and can help the bidding market parties achieve additional advantages in terms of winning the contract (Fig. 2). There is still opportuni-ty for improvement to enhance the context-specificity of requirements in contracts by considering issues contemplated during the EIA process (Arts and Faith-Ell, 2010). EIA could, thus, provide the necessary room for formulating additional goals (Paper I).

In terms of SEA, Fischer (2006) argues that integration is imperative. However, the linkages between SEA and other planning instruments are not well developed yet. Nevertheless, there is widespread agreement that lessons can be learnt from other in-struments and thereby benefits can be gained from their inclusion in an SEA (Fischer, 2006). In addition, Tang (2008) describes the integrated principle3 for SEA, which indicates that environmental assess-ment should have broad scope to include all of the strategically critical environmental issues, and should also be tiered to policies in relevant sectors. However, the stages in the SEA process where such policies could

3based on the definition from international

association for impact assessment.

be tiered needs to be investigated in future. Discussion on such stages was not a part of Paper II or the interview process because the intention was mainly to understand various perceptions on the inter-link.

The responses from the interviews showed variations between the interviewees‟ percep-tions on the inter-link. The interviewee from the energy supply company perceived im-pact assessment as a „working tool‟ that in certain ways contributes to the awareness of environmental impacts of the actions pro-posed. He highlighted that such awareness among the customers is the basic driving force for development in the area of green procurement, and impact assessment could facilitate in that development process by providing information on the environmental impacts of the services/products they use. An interviewee from a construction compa-ny acknowledged that it is important to inter-link impact assessment and green pro-curement, and that it will be challenging to do so given the problems concerning the coordination between project planning and implementation phases. She contemplates that impact assessment is more active during the planning phase and therefore there is a need to adopt a tool that is widely in use during the implementation phase. Further-more, she referred to the use of Building Research Establishment‟s Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) for Com-munities in her company (Paper II).

State of the environment

time

Without mitigation

With mitigation

Environmental sustainable outcomes

Green procurement

Info EIA report

Standard env. Requirements

(permits / contracts)

“optimization” (ambition / goal)

“acceptability” (mitigation)

Start of construction / operation

Fig.2. Comparison of EIA, standard contracting and green procurement (Arts and Faith-Ell, 2010)


11

BREEAM was the first commercially availa-ble environmental assessment tool for build-ings. The building is awarded credit based on the level of performance against each set criterion. The BREEAM rating achieved is presented on the BREEAM certificate (Grace, 2000). In addition, a certification scheme called BREEAM for Communities has been developed to facilitate planners and project developers to determine whether the environmental, social and economic sustain-ability objectives of a development project have been addressed at the stages of prelim-inary planning and/or final planning. Fur-thermore, it can be used in conjunction with EIAs and SEAs (BRE Global, 2011). An-other interviewee claimed that his company had developed a list of demands that were connected to environmental issues, and has been incorporated into procurement prac-tice. Although some of those demands have been based on legislation, most of them were internally established by the company. He also highlighted that the company has a systematic way to track sources when they have to deal with international purchases and suppliers outside Sweden. However, when asked whether the internal list of de-mands had any relation with impact assess-ment reports, he was uncertain about it. Nonetheless, he acknowledged the need to link impact assessment and green procure-ment and that impact assessment can serve as an input to develop and improve the procurement process. However, he also mentioned that they have not had that in-depth experience with impact assessment in order to route it in their procurement pro-cess. He indicated that although they have considered certain recommendations made in the impact assessment report, the connec-tion between that report and their internal list of demands may not be so clear. The interviewee from the third construction company mentioned that the idea to link impact assessment and green procurement may only be partially correct. Further, he stated that it is rather important to focus on life cycle assessment (LCA) of the energy production process and use the analysis to procure energy that is most beneficial from a

product‟s lifecycle perspective. LCA is a tool used to “assess the environmental impacts and resources used throughout a product‟s life from raw-material acquisition through production use and disposal” (Finnveden et al., 2003). However, Grace (2000) argues that LCA evaluates the environmental im-pacts of a product on basis of material and energy input-output data, and it only partial-ly facilitates a planner. This is because only a fraction of the impacts that are associated with the functional unit are considered, not the whole scenario (Finnveden et al., 2003). However, the interviewee from the con-struction company who endorsed LCA also highlighted that his company is attempting to investigate ways for incorporating green procurement. Further, the interviewee from the municipality focused her attention on two documents, namely, environmental programme (miljöprogrammet) and action programme (handlingsprogram). She de-scribed them in the context of the Stock-holm Royal Seaport project. The environmental programme has set goals to undertake project‟s environmental resp-onsibilities. The goals inter alia include in-creasing energy efficiency and renewable energy use, and selecting environmentally friendly materials and services for construc-tion (Exploateringskontoret, 2010). The action programme adopts these goals to develop specific environmental and sustain-ability requirements for each of the con-struction phases in the project (Exploateringskontoret, 2011). Her overall opinion was that the action programme had contributed more to environmental re-quirements than the impact assessment. Nonetheless, she also mentioned that impact assessment and the action programme are linked, and that the action programme facili-tates in setting environmental requirements for the developer (Paper II)

Opportunities to link impact assess-ment and green procurement

It can be argued that even if EIA was weak in its role of advising decision makers, its continuation in the immediate future is justified because of its informative and stim-


12

ulating role in the planning process (McDonald and Brown, 1995). Bichard and Frost (1988) consider EIA to be a planning tool available for ensuring the identification of all aspects of a project during the design phase. For instance, EIA is mandatory at two stages of the road planning process in Sweden. First, EIA is required in the feasi-bility study, a study in which different road corridors are investigated. Second, EIA is necessary in the road design plan, a stage during which details regarding the localisa-tion and design of the road are resolved (Isaksson et al., 2009). The opportunities for initiating green procurement at the stage of EIA (thereby linking EIA and green pro-curement) could be associated with the integration of project planning and EIA (Paper I). The integration of EIA and pro-ject planning could provide the opportunity for linking green procurement. This direct relationship is illustrated in Fig.3.

According to Morrison-Saunders and Bailey (1999), EIA involves three phases: the pre-decision, post-decision and transition phas-es. These phases of the EIA process are based upon the timeline of events as related to the principal decision stage of a particular project. The pre-decision phase of EIA involves the following elements: the pro-ject‟s initial planning and designing, the development of the environmental impact statement and its review by the public and significant decision making. The post-decision phase is the phase after which a project is approved; the transition phase overlaps both the pre-decision and post-decision phases. Furthermore, Morrison-Saunders and Bailey (1999) discuss that the majority of environmental management activities are initiated during the pre-decision phase of EIA; therefore, the influence of EIA on the number of environmental man-agement activities is significant during this phase. Considering this statistic, it could be argued that the pre-decision phase is the appropriate phase for the initiation of green procurement measures (Fig.4). Further-more, as Paper I highlights, it is important to consider certain stages of EIA for proposing

the establishment of green procurement practices. These specific stages of EIA in-clude those that involve scoping, the study of alternative designs and the drafting of the EIA report. The proposition of green pro-curement in the EIA should focus on an-swering the question of how the proposed project can be made more sustainable (Pa-per I).

The interviewees at the construction com-panies perceived impact assessment as a process that they, as senior managers, have not been directly involved with and that it is managed within the subordinate organisa-tional tiers. Nevertheless, most of the inter-viewees from the construction companies acknowledge the need to inter-link. Their responses indicated various approaches towards establishing such an inter-link. For instance, the interviewee who referred to BREEAM for Communities suggested con-sidering BREEAM for Communities be-cause it will be useful from the standpoint of both impact assessment and green procure-ment (Paper II). Therefore, BREEAM for Communities can be identified as an oppor-tunity that could facilitate the inter-link between impact assessment and green pro-curement.

Fig.3. Integrating EIA with project planning could facilitate EIA’s link with green procurement (Paper I)


13

Envisaging partnerships in the inter-link

In order to understand how partnering could facilitate the impact assessment and green procurement link, certain approaches to analyse partnering, such as partnering flower (Nyström, 2005) and differentiated partnering (Gadde and Dubois, 2010), are explored. Nyström (2005) applies Ludwig Wittgenstein‟s idea of family-resemblance to the partnering concept. He describes the resulting analysis using a partnering flower

(Fig.5), wherein the centre contains the two common components to all partnering ar-rangements: trust and mutual understanding. The remaining components are represented in petals. There is no specific petal or set of petals that needs to be present. Linking different sets leads to several variants of partnering. The different designs of partner-ing projects can be accommodated within the same structure. The flower as an entirety forms the base for illustrating, understand-ing and describing the whole family of all

Fig.4. The three phases of EIA and the potential link with green procurement is depicted

by dotted lines (Paper I)

Public review Developing the envi-ronmental impact statement

Pre-decision phase Post-decision phase

Project planning and designing

Green procurement planning

Transition phase


14

partnering variants. He concludes that the partnering flower may prove to be useful in the procurement phase of a construction project, both as a description of the concept, if necessary, and as an initiating point for discussions between the client and the con-tractor on framing a specific partnering project (i.e. which petals to add). The part-nering flower could thus facilitate discus-sions on green procurement by adopting it as a component or a partnering petal. For instance, one of the petals in Fig.5 could represent sustainability, and instruments such as green procurement could be inte-grated within.

This component could also be strengthened by the impact assessment process. Recipro-cally, impact assessment process could also be benefitted from the partnering flower (through petals such as trust building, regu-lar meetings) (Uttam et al., 2011). For part-nering to function well, trust and commitment-based “collaborative climate” (Eriksson and Westerberg, 2011) is an una-voidable necessity and could be highly im-

perative in the context of the impact as-sessment and green procurement linkage.

Gadde and Dubois (2010) recommend the differentiated approach to partnering that emphasizes on collaborative efforts. Their approach differentiates between three levels of partnering and is an extension of current project partnering. Firstly, local partnering, where better conditions for local perfor-mance would be attained if the interaction between the parties is extended in time, and less reliance on competitive tendering would make long-term relationships effective. The second is central level partnering, which involves long term contracts with specific suppliers for standardized products that are used across a wide range of projects. The third level is intermediate partnering. This concerns agreements, for instance, regarding the supply of prefabricated systems. Partner-ing on the intermediate level would promote interaction between parties, thereby creating a permanent network through long-term and regular contracts with these suppliers. The long term interaction might also enable joint

Fig.5. Partnering flower. Adapted from Nyström (2005)


15

product development or innovation.

Hjelm's (2004) study shows that knowledge creation is most likely imperative in such partnerships. He indicates that apart from the knowledge that companies have about their products, it will also be important to disseminate new knowledge through training programmes and so on. Furthermore, he states that it is essential to investigate whether the knowledge has been translated to action and if learning has occurred. One of the interviewees had also highlighted the importance of training programmes, not only in partnerships but also within organi-sations (Paper II).

An important issue that emerged from the interviews was the need to involve end users in the green procurement process (Paper II). The involvement of end users as partners can leads towards “a more expansive agenda for research on multi-stakeholder collabora-tion”, or in other words, “re-invigorated agenda on partnership” (Bendell et al., 2010). According to Bendell et al. (2010), “a re-invigorated agenda on partnership” could include it being a) interdisciplinary, particu-larly capturing insights from political science and development studies into management studies b) action oriented, so that research delves into issues that arise due to multi-stakeholder engagement c) critical, so that existing practices are questioned and new and difficult questions are asked, and should explore these features in different settings rather than relating new research to existing traditions.

Priority areas for procuring green energy in the construction sector

The set of priority areas that are necessary for procuring renewable energy in the con-struction sector were provided to the inter-viewees. These areas included partnerships; planning for renewable energy procurement at initial stages of a development project; renewable energy technology, and policy integration. The priority areas and also the interviewees‟ perceptions on them have been described in Paper II. No significant differences exist between the interviewees‟ perceptions concerning priority areas such as

partnerships, planning at early stages, renew-able energy technology, and policy integra-tion. Partnership and planning at early stages for procurement of green energy have been regarded as the top priorities. Although many consider renewable energy technology as a significant priority, they have associated it with partnerships and planning as well (Paper II).

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE

RESEARCH

The perspectives of the interviewees have helped in mapping the directions for future research. Future research should investigate the contribution of impact assessment pro-cess towards the procurement process. This should also include possible modifications of impact assessment as well as the estab-lishment of mechanisms for inter-conne-cting green procurement and impact assess-ment. In so doing, future research should also investigate how the inter-link could be facilitated by tools such as BREEAM for Communities (Paper II).

Furthermore, core issues to explore are how and to what extent green procurement could be considered a type of strategic initiative (to be incorporated in impact assessment scop-ing and alternative designs). In addition, it is important to identify other components (such as EIA follow-up) to which green procurement could be linked and to thor-oughly examine how such integration would strengthen the link between project planning and its implementation. Research should also investigate the mechanisms through which the linkage could be established, together with various stakeholders and con-cerned authorities, under the contractual arrangement (partnering) that has been discussed in this thesis (Paper I).

CONCLUSION

The three important policy instruments that are pertinent to the construction sector, primarily from an environmental perspec-tive, are EIA, SEA and green procurement. This thesis presents a postulation that a clear and systematic planning and discussion of green procurement at the level of EIA can


16

improve the coordination between project planning and implementation phases.

The thesis initially examines the role of EIA follow-up and procurement contracts in the coordination between project planning and implementation. Further, the state of the art was reviewed to motivate the postulation of an inter-connected process for EIA and green procurement. This was primarily done by addressing specific examples wherein the results of the EIA were used to develop the environmental criteria in the tender docu-ments. Furthermore, this thesis identified various opportunities for connecting EIA and green procurement. The EIA‟s process components, such as scoping, the study of specific design alternatives, and the EIA report preparation, would be appropriate for planning and proposing green procurement practices to be undertaken during the project implementation stage. Furthermore, the thesis has put forth the perspectives of the different categories of stakeholders in the Swedish construction industry on the inter-link between impact assessment and green procurement, especially in the context of procuring renewable (green) energy in the construction sector. Although they demon-strate varied perceptions, most of the inter-

viewees acknowledge the need to inter-link. The interviews indicate that the reliance on certification tools such as BREEAM for Communities would grow in the near future and thereby, policy instruments such as green procurement may have to be routed through those tools. Furthermore, inter-viewees‟ perceptions on some of the priority areas (that could encourage procurement of renewable energy) indicate that partnerships and planning for procurement at early stages are the topmost priorities.This thesis also presented some of the partnering concepts such as differentiated partnering that could aid the process of inter-connecting impact assessment and green procurement.

Future research should investigate the mechanisms for inter-connecting impact assessment and green procurement. In so doing, future study should examine how the inter-link could be facilitated by tools such as BREEAM for Communities. It is im-portant to identify other components (such as EIA follow-up) to which green procure-ment could be linked. Future research should also explore how partnerships need to be arranged within the context of the inter-link.


17

REFERENCES

Adalberth, K. 2000. Energy Use and Environmental Impact of New Residential Buildings. Swe-den: Lund University. 132 p.

Alderman N, Ivory C. 2007. Partnering in major contracts: Paradox and metaphor. International Journal of Project Management. 25(4): 386-393.

Arts J, Caldwell P, Morrison-Saunders A. 2001. Environmental impact assessment follow-up: good practice and future directions - findings from a workshop at the IAIA 2000 conference. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 19: 176-185.

Arts, J. and Faith-Ell, C. 2010. Impact Assessment in Green Procurement and Partnering Con-tracts. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment. Geneva ,Switzerland: April 6-11, 2010.

Arts J, Faith-Ell C, Chisholm A., 2007. Can early market involvement strengthen EIA? In Pro-ceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assess-ment. The 27th Annual Conference of IAIA. Seoul, Korea: June 3-9, 2007.

Arts J, Nijsten R, Sandee P. 2006. Very early contracting in EIA: Dutch experience with parallel procedures for procurement and EIA. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment. Stavanger, Norway: May 23-26, 2006.

Arts J, Paul T, Voogd H. 2005. EIA and SEA tiering: the missing link? In Position Paper of the Conference on International experience and perspectives in SEA. A Global Conference on Strategic Environmental Assessment, Prague,Czech Republic: September 26-30 ,2005.

Ball J. 2002. Can ISO 14000 and eco-labelling turn the construction industry green? Building and Environment. 37(4): 421-428.

Bendell J, Eva C, Juliet R. 2010. Beyond partnerism: toward a more expansive research agenda on multi-stakeholder collaboration for responsible business. Business Strategy and the Environ-ment. 19 ( 6): 351-355.

Bichard E, Frost S. 1988. EIA in the UK planning system. Land Use Policy. 5(4): 362-364.

Blumer H. 1954. What is Wrong with Social Theory. American Sociological Review. 18: 3-10.

Bouwer, M. Jonk, T. Berman, R. Bersani, H. Lusser, V. Nappa. et al.2006. Green Public Pro-curement in Europe 2006-Conclusions and recommendations, The Netherlands: Virage Milieu and Management bv. 37 p.

BRE Global. 2011. BREEAM Communities Scheme Document. BRE Global Ltd. 18 p

Briffett, C., 1999. Environmental impact assessment in Southeast Asia: fact and fiction? Geo-Journal. 49(3):333-338.

van Buuren A, Nooteboom S. 2010. The success of SEA in the Dutch planning practice: How formal assessments can contribute to collaborative governance. Environmental Impact As-sessment Review 30 (2): 127-135.

Carlsson L,Waara F. 2006. Environmental Concerns in Swedish Local Government Procure-ment. In: Advancing Public Procurement: Practices, Innovation and Knowledge-Sharing, Piga G, Thai K (eds.). PrAcademics Press: Boca Raton, FL; 239-256.

Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 2008. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Public Procurement for a better environment.

Eriksson PE, Westerberg M, 2011. Effects of cooperative procurement procedures on construc-tion project performance: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Project Manage-ment. 29(2): 197-208.


18

Exploateringskontoret. 2010. Comprehensive programme for environment and sustainable city development (The environmental programme).Övergripande program för miljö och hållbar stadsutveckling i Norra Djurgårdsstaden. Stockholmsstad. 59 p.

Exploateringskontoret. 2011. Environment and Sustainability Action Programme.Miljö och håll-barhet vid markanvisning HANDLINGSPROGRAM

Vid planering, projektering, byggande och förvaltning av bostäder, kontor och handel inom Ängsbotten. Stockholmsstad. 14 p.

Faith-Ell C. 2007. EIA and then what? Client and contractor responses to environmental re-quirements. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference of IAIA. The 27th Interna-tional Association for Impact Assessment Conference. Seoul, Korea : June 3-9, 2007.

Faith-Ell C.2008. The role of EIA in Contracting for Infrastructure Projects in Sweden. In Pro-ceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assess-ment. Perth, Australia: May 4-10, 2008.

Finnveden G, Nilsson M, Johansson J, Persson Å, Moberg Å, Carlsson T. 2003. Strategic envi-ronmental assessment methodologies--applications within the energy sector. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23 (1): 91-123.

Fischer TB. 2006. Conference Report: Conclusions Stream C: Linkages between SEA and other assessment or planning . Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 8 (4): 495-504.

Gadde L, Dubois A. 2010. Partnering in the construction industry--Problems and opportunities. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 16(4): 254-263.

Glasson J, Therivel R, Chadwick A. 2007. Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment. Routledge: New York. 423 p.

González MJ, Navarro JG. 2006. Assessment of the decrease of CO2 emissions in the construc-tion field through the selection of materials: Practical case study of three houses of low envi-ronmental impact. Building and Environment, 41(7): 902-909.

Grace M. 2000. BREEAM-A practial method for assessing the sustainability of buildings for the new millennium. In Proceedings, Sustainable Building 2000. Sustainable Building 2000, 22-25 October 2000 Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Grace, M., 2000. BREEAM-A practial method for assessing the sustainability of buildings for the new millennium. In Proceedings, Sustainable Building 2000. Sustainable Building 2000. Maas-tricht, The Netherlands: October 22-25, 2000.

Hjelm O. 2004. 'Advantage Eco-design'-A partnership for promoting eco-design activities in small companies. In Proceedings of The 12th International Conference of the Greening of Industry Network - Partnerships for Sustainable Development. 12th International Conference of Greening of Industry Network. Hongkong: November 7-10, 2004.

Holloway I. 1997. Basic concepts for qualitative research. Wiley-Blackwell: London :186p

Isaksson K, Richardson T, Olsson K. 2009. From consultation to deliberation? Tracing delibera-tive norms in EIA frameworks in Swedish roads planning. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29(5): 295-304.

Kadefors A. 2004. Trust in project relationships-inside the black box. International Journal of Project Management, 22(3): 175-182.

Kadefors A, Björlingson E, Karlsson A. 2007. Procuring service innovations: Contractor selec-tion for partnering projects. International Journal of Project Management 25 (4): 375-385.

Lam PT, Chan EHW,Chau CK, Poon CS, Chun KP. 2011. Environmental management system vs green specifications: How do they complement each other in the construction industry? Journal of Environmental Management. 92(3): 788-795.


19

Lam PT, Chan EHW,Chau CK, Poon CS, Chun KP. 2010. Factors affecting the implementation of green specifications in construction. Journal of Environmental Management. 91(3): 654-661.

Lu S, Yan H. 2007. An empirical study on incentives of strategic partnering in China: Views from construction companies. International Journal of Project Management. 25(3): 241-249.

Lundberg K. 2011. A Systems Thinking Approach to Environmental Follow-Up in a Swedish Central Public Authority: Hindrances and Possibilities for Learning from Experience. Envi-ronmental Management. 48(1): 123-133.

Lyhne I. 2011. Between policy-making and planning: SEA and strategic decision-making in the Danish energy sector. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. 13(3): 319-341.

Marshall R. 2002. Professional practice: Developing environmental management systems to de-liver mitigation and protect the EIA process during follow up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 20(4): 286–292.

Marshall R. 2005. Environmental impact assessment follow-up and its benefits for industry. Im-pact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 23: 191-196.

Marshall R, Arts J, Morrison-Saunders A. 2005. International principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 23: 175-181.

McDonald GT, Brown L. 1995. Going beyond environmental impact assessment: Environmental input to planning and design. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 15(6): 483-495.

Morrison-Saunders A, Bailey J. 1999. Exploring the EIA/Environmental Management Relation-ship. Environmental Management. 24(3): 281-295.

Morrison-Saunders A, Baker J.Arts J. 2003. Lessons from practice: towards successful follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 21: 43-56.

Naoum S. 2003. An overview into the concept of partnering. International Journal of Project Management. 21(1): 71-76.

Naturvårdsverket. 2009. Practical guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes. Handbok med allmänna råd om miljöbedömning av planer och program. 145 p.

NCSI. 2009. Environmental Management System Tool. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Australian Government. 87 p.

Noble BF, Storey K. 2005. Towards increasing the utility of follow-up in Canadian EIA. Envi-ronmental Impact Assessment Review. 25(2): 163-180.

Noble BF. 2009. Promise and dismay: The state of strategic environmental assessment systems and practices in Canada. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 29(1): 66-75.

Nyström J. 2005. The definition of partnering as a Wittgenstein family-resemblance concept. Construction Management and Economics. 23(5): 473 - 481.

Ofori G. 2000. Greening the construction supply chain in Singapore. European Journal of Pur-chasing & Supply Management. 6(3-4): 195-206.

Ofori G. 1992. The environment: the fourth construction project objective? Construction Man-agement & Economics. 10(5): 369-395.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2003. Environmentally Sustainable Buildings: Challenges and Policies. Paris, France: OECD Publications Service: Par-is; 195 p.

Ridgway B. 2005. Environmental management system provides tools for delivering on environ-mental impact assessment commitments. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 23: 325-331.


20

Rikhardsson PM. 1998. Information Systems for Corporate Environmental Management Ac-counting and Performance Measurement. Greener Management International. Greenleaf Pub-lishing. (21).

Ritchie J. 2003. The Applications of Qualitative Methods to Social Research. In : Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers, Ritchie J, Lewis J (eds.). Sage Publications.336p.

Rodríguez G. Alegre FJ, Martínez G. 2011. Evaluation of environmental management resources (ISO 14001) at civil engineering construction worksites: A case study of the community of Madrid. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(7): 1858-1866.

Roodman D, Lenssen N. 1995. A Building Revolution: How Ecology and Health Concerns are Transforming Construction, Worldwatch Institute:Washington, DC; 67 p.

Sadler B, McCabe M. (eds.). 2002. EIA Training Resource Manual. United Nations Environment Programme: Geneva; 561 p.

Sánchez LE, Hacking T. 2002. An approach to linking environmental impact assessment and environmental management systems. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 20: 25-38.

Svensk författningssamling (SFS). 1998. Swedish Environmental Code. Miljöbalk. 96 p.

Sheate W, Byron H, Dagg S, Cooper L. 2005. The relationship between the EIA and SEA Direc-tives, Imperial College London Consultants Ltd: London; 113 p.

Shen L, Tam VWY, Tam L, Ji Y. 2010. Project feasibility study: the key to successful implemen-tation of sustainable and socially responsible construction management practice. Journal of Cleaner Production. 18(3): 254-259.

Slinn P, Handley J, Jay SA. 2007. Connecting EIA to environmental management systems: les-sons from industrial estate developments in England. Corporate Social Responsibility and En-vironmental Management. 14(2): 88-102.

Slotterback CS. 2008. Evaluating the implementation of environmental review mitigation in local planning and development processes. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 28(8): 546-561.

Sterner E. 2002. 'Green procurement' of buildings: a study of Swedish clients' considerations. Construction Management and Economics. 20(1): 21 - 30.

Tam VWY, Tam CM, Zeng SX, Chan KK. 2006. Environmental performance measurement indicators in construction. Building and Environment 41 (2): 164-173.

Tang Z. 2008. Integrating the principles of strategic environmental assessment into local com-prehensive land use planning. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. 10(02): 143-171.

Tennøy A. 2008. Consequences of EIA Prediction Uncertainty on Mitigation, Follow-Up and Post-Auditing. In: Standards and Thresholds for Impact Assessment, Schmidt M, Glasson J, Emmelin L, Helbron H (eds.) Springer-Verlag: Berlin; 447-461.

Therivel R. 2004. Strategic environmental assessment in action. Earthscan: London;288p.

Uttam K, Balfors B, Faith-Ell C, Mörtberg UM . 2011. Procuring green energy in the construc-tion sector. In IAIA11 Conference Proceedings. 31st Annual Meeting of the International As-sociation for Impact Assessment. Puebla,Mexico: May 28- June 4, 2011.

Varnäs A, Faith-Ell C, Balfors B. 2009. Practice report: Linking environmental impact assess-ment, environmental management systems and green procurement in construction projects: lessons from the City Tunnel Project in Malmo, Sweden. Impact Assessment and Project Ap-praisal 27: 69-76.

Wright LT. 1996. Exploring the in-depth interview as a qualitative research technique with Amer-ican and Japanese firms. Marketing Intelligence and Planning 14 (6): 59-64.


21

Yan H, Qiping S, Linda C.H. Fan, Yaowu W, Lei Z. 2010. Greenhouse gas emissions in building construction: A case study of One Peking in Hong Kong. Building and Environment 45, (4): 949-955.

OTHER REFERENCES

Faith-Ell, Charlotta: WSP, Stockholm. Personal communication November 2011.

ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability.2007. Green procurement for public transport - environmental criteria used to extend the Porto light rail

system. Case study collection: Procura+ Sustainable Procurement Campaign. Available at: http://www.procuraplus.org/fileadmin/template/projects/procuraplus/files/CD-ROM/Case_Studies/Transport_Porto_portugal_01.pdf [accessed 27 March 2010].

Tawhid, Amanullah. Coverpage photo December 2010.


22

kedar uttamkth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:460962/fulltext01.pdf · 2011. 12. 1. · kedar...

Documents