การศึกษาดัชนีชี้วัดความยั่งยืนสำหรับการพัฒนาโครงการโครงสร้างพื้นฐานของเมือง โดยใช้กระบวนการลำดับชั้นเชิงวิเคราะห์: กรณีศึกษา เทศบาลนครเชียงใหม่
คำสำคัญ:
ดัชนีชี้วัดความยั่งยืน, โครงการโครงสร้างพื้นฐานของเมือง, กระบวนการลำดับชั้นเชิงวิเคราะห์บทคัดย่อ
งานวิจัยนี้มีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อระบุและจัดลำดับความสำคัญของดัชนีชี้วัดความยั่งยืนสำหรับโครงการโครงสร้างพื้นฐานของเมือง โดยประยุกต์ใช้กระบวนการลำดับชั้นเชิงวิเคราะห์ (Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP) มีกรณีศึกษา คือ เทศบาลนครเชียงใหม่ กลุ่มตัวอย่างที่ใช้ในการศึกษานี้ คือ ตัวแทนชุมชนในเขตเทศบาลนครเชียงใหม่ที่เคยได้รับการอบรมความรู้ด้านการพัฒนาโครงการโครงสร้างพื้นฐานของเมือง ทำการเลือกตัวอย่างแบบเจาะจง (Purposive Sampling) และใช้กระบวนการลำดับชั้นเชิงวิเคราะห์ในการวิเคราะห์ข้อมูล ผลที่ได้จากการศึกษาพบว่า สามารถจัดโครงสร้างความสัมพันธ์ของดัชนีชี้วัดได้เป็น 3 ลำดับชั้น ประกอบด้วย 3 เกณฑ์หลัก 11 เกณฑ์รอง และ 32 ดัชนีชี้วัด ผลการวิเคราะห์แสดงให้เห็นว่าดัชนีชี้วัดความยั่งยืน 7 ลำดับแรกมีค่าน้ำหนักความสำคัญที่แตกต่างจากค่าน้ำหนักความสำคัญของลำดับถัดไป และมีค่ารวมกันมากกว่าร้อยละ 40 ของทั้งหมด อีกทั้งยังครอบคลุมการพัฒนาที่ยั่งยืนทั้ง 3 ด้าน อันได้แก่ ด้านเศรษฐกิจ ด้านสิ่งแวดล้อม และด้านสังคม โดยดัชนีชี้วัดความยั่งยืนที่มีความสำคัญเป็นลำดับแรกคือ “การนำขยะหรือของเสียจากโครงการมาใช้ซ้ำหรือแปรใช้ใหม่” ผลที่ได้จากการศึกษานี้สามารถนำไปใช้เป็นเกณฑ์ในระบบสนับสนุนการตัดสินใจคัดเลือกโครงการโครงสร้างพื้นฐานของเมืองในอนาคต
เอกสารอ้างอิง
1. UNDESA. World economic and social survey 2013: sustainable development challenges. New York: United Nations publication; 2013.
2. Philipp R, Ricky B. Cities: investing in energy and resource efficiency. In: United Nations Environment Programme, corp. editors. Towards a green economy: pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication. United Nations Environment Programme; 2011. p. 453-492.
3. UN Population Division. World urbanisation prospects: the 2014 revision. New York: UN, Department of Economic and Social Affairs; 2014.
4. Ugwu OO, Kumaraswamy MM, Wong A, Ng ST. Sustainability appraisal in infrastructure projects (SUSAIP): Part 1. Development of indicators and computational methods. Automation in Construction. 2006; 15(2): 239-51.
5. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987.
6. Chen M-C, Ho T-P, Jan C-G. A System Dynamics model of sustainable urban development: assessing air purification policies at Taipei city. Asian Pacific Planning Review. 2006; 4(1): 29-52.
7. Nathan HSK, Sudhakara Reddy B. A conceptual framework for development of sustainable development indicators. Mumbai: Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research; 2008 Mar. 47 p. Report No.: WP-2008-003.
8. Egilmez G, Tatari O. A dynamic modeling approach to highway sustainability: strategies to reduce overall impact. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2012; 46(7): 1086-96.
9. Mosadeghi R, Warnken J, Tomlinson R, Mirfenderesk H. Comparison of Fuzzy-AHP and AHP in a spatial multi-criteria decision making model for urban land-use planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 2015; 49(0): 54-65.
10. Awasthi A, Chauhan SS, Omrani H. Application of fuzzy TOPSIS in evaluating sustainable transportation systems. Expert Systems with Applications. 2011; 38(10): 12270-12280.
11. Fernández-Sánchez G, Rodríguez-López F. A methodology to identify sustainability indicators in construction project management-Application to infrastructure projects in Spain. Ecological Indicators. 2010; 10(6): 1193-1201.
12. Chiang Mai Province Governor Office. Annual report 2016 [Internet]. 2017 [updated 2017 Feb; cited 2018 Mar 18]. Available from: http://www.chiangmai.go.th/managing/public/D8/8D01Feb2017150134.pdf. Thai.
13. Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1980.
14. Shiau T-A, Liu J-S. Developing an indicator system for local governments to evaluate transport sustainability strategies. Ecological Indicators. 2013; 34(0): 361-371.
15. Zhang Y, Sun Y, Qin J. Sustainable development of coal cities in Heilongjiang province based on AHP method. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology. 2012; 22(1): 133-137.
16. Aly S, Vrana I. Evaluating the knowledge, relevance and experience of expert decision makers utilizing the Fuzzy-AHP. Agricultural Economics – Czech. 2008; 54(11): 529-535.
17. Cheng EWL, Li H. Construction partnering process and associated critical success factors: quantitative investigation. Journal of Management in Engineering. 2002; 18(4): 194-202.
18. Lam K, Zhao X. An application of quality function deployment to improve the quality of teaching. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. 1998; 15(4): 389-413.
19. Wong JKW, Li H. Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in multi-criteria analysis of the selection of intelligent building systems. Building and Environment. 2008; 43(1): 108-125.
20. Ugwu OO, Haupt TC. Key performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustainability—a South African construction industry perspective. Building and Environment. 2007; 42(2): 665-680.
21. Shen LY, Wu YZ, Zhang XL. Key assessment indicators for the sustainability of infrastructure projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 2011; 137(6): 441-451.
22. Sahely HR, Kennedy CA, Adams BJ. Developing sustainability criteria for urban infrastructure systems. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering. 2005; 32(1): 72-85.
23. Yao H, Shen LY, Tan YT, Hao JL. Simulating the impacts of policy scenarios on the sustainability performance of infrastructure projects. Automation in Construction. 2011; 20(8): 1060-1069.
24. Lim SK. Framework and processes for enhancing sustainability deliverables in Australian road infrastructure projects [PhD thesis]. Queensland University of Technology; 2009.
25. Elbarkouky MMG. A Multi-Criteria Prioritization Framework (MCPF) to assess infrastructure sustainability objectives and prioritize damaged infrastructure assets in developing countries. Journal of Sustainable Development. 2012; 5(9): 1-13.
26. Danko CC, Lourenco JM, editors. A discussion on indicators and criteria for sustainable urban infrastructure development. Proceedings of the Workshop Sustainable Development Policies for Minor Deprived Urban Communities : COST Action C27; 2007; Évora, Portugal: COST European Cooperation; 2007.
27. Akinyemi EO, Zuidgeest MHP. Managing transportation infrastructure for sustainable development. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering. 2002; 17(3): 148-161.
2. Philipp R, Ricky B. Cities: investing in energy and resource efficiency. In: United Nations Environment Programme, corp. editors. Towards a green economy: pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication. United Nations Environment Programme; 2011. p. 453-492.
3. UN Population Division. World urbanisation prospects: the 2014 revision. New York: UN, Department of Economic and Social Affairs; 2014.
4. Ugwu OO, Kumaraswamy MM, Wong A, Ng ST. Sustainability appraisal in infrastructure projects (SUSAIP): Part 1. Development of indicators and computational methods. Automation in Construction. 2006; 15(2): 239-51.
5. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987.
6. Chen M-C, Ho T-P, Jan C-G. A System Dynamics model of sustainable urban development: assessing air purification policies at Taipei city. Asian Pacific Planning Review. 2006; 4(1): 29-52.
7. Nathan HSK, Sudhakara Reddy B. A conceptual framework for development of sustainable development indicators. Mumbai: Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research; 2008 Mar. 47 p. Report No.: WP-2008-003.
8. Egilmez G, Tatari O. A dynamic modeling approach to highway sustainability: strategies to reduce overall impact. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2012; 46(7): 1086-96.
9. Mosadeghi R, Warnken J, Tomlinson R, Mirfenderesk H. Comparison of Fuzzy-AHP and AHP in a spatial multi-criteria decision making model for urban land-use planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 2015; 49(0): 54-65.
10. Awasthi A, Chauhan SS, Omrani H. Application of fuzzy TOPSIS in evaluating sustainable transportation systems. Expert Systems with Applications. 2011; 38(10): 12270-12280.
11. Fernández-Sánchez G, Rodríguez-López F. A methodology to identify sustainability indicators in construction project management-Application to infrastructure projects in Spain. Ecological Indicators. 2010; 10(6): 1193-1201.
12. Chiang Mai Province Governor Office. Annual report 2016 [Internet]. 2017 [updated 2017 Feb; cited 2018 Mar 18]. Available from: http://www.chiangmai.go.th/managing/public/D8/8D01Feb2017150134.pdf. Thai.
13. Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1980.
14. Shiau T-A, Liu J-S. Developing an indicator system for local governments to evaluate transport sustainability strategies. Ecological Indicators. 2013; 34(0): 361-371.
15. Zhang Y, Sun Y, Qin J. Sustainable development of coal cities in Heilongjiang province based on AHP method. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology. 2012; 22(1): 133-137.
16. Aly S, Vrana I. Evaluating the knowledge, relevance and experience of expert decision makers utilizing the Fuzzy-AHP. Agricultural Economics – Czech. 2008; 54(11): 529-535.
17. Cheng EWL, Li H. Construction partnering process and associated critical success factors: quantitative investigation. Journal of Management in Engineering. 2002; 18(4): 194-202.
18. Lam K, Zhao X. An application of quality function deployment to improve the quality of teaching. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. 1998; 15(4): 389-413.
19. Wong JKW, Li H. Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in multi-criteria analysis of the selection of intelligent building systems. Building and Environment. 2008; 43(1): 108-125.
20. Ugwu OO, Haupt TC. Key performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustainability—a South African construction industry perspective. Building and Environment. 2007; 42(2): 665-680.
21. Shen LY, Wu YZ, Zhang XL. Key assessment indicators for the sustainability of infrastructure projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 2011; 137(6): 441-451.
22. Sahely HR, Kennedy CA, Adams BJ. Developing sustainability criteria for urban infrastructure systems. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering. 2005; 32(1): 72-85.
23. Yao H, Shen LY, Tan YT, Hao JL. Simulating the impacts of policy scenarios on the sustainability performance of infrastructure projects. Automation in Construction. 2011; 20(8): 1060-1069.
24. Lim SK. Framework and processes for enhancing sustainability deliverables in Australian road infrastructure projects [PhD thesis]. Queensland University of Technology; 2009.
25. Elbarkouky MMG. A Multi-Criteria Prioritization Framework (MCPF) to assess infrastructure sustainability objectives and prioritize damaged infrastructure assets in developing countries. Journal of Sustainable Development. 2012; 5(9): 1-13.
26. Danko CC, Lourenco JM, editors. A discussion on indicators and criteria for sustainable urban infrastructure development. Proceedings of the Workshop Sustainable Development Policies for Minor Deprived Urban Communities : COST Action C27; 2007; Évora, Portugal: COST European Cooperation; 2007.
27. Akinyemi EO, Zuidgeest MHP. Managing transportation infrastructure for sustainable development. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering. 2002; 17(3): 148-161.
