Several sustainable building rating systems were created worldwide during the last decades due to economic growth and the significance of environmental impact associated with the building industry. Similar infrastructure rating tools have started to be developed and implemented, being highly necessary to promote its development. Even though the existing sustainable infrastructure rating systems are focused on advanced economies, growing environmental concerns are increasing the need for new systems in the Developing World. This research analyses some of the mainstream infrastructure rating frameworks such as Envision (USA), Civil Engineering Environmental Quality (CEEQUAL) assessment (UK) and Infrastructure Sustainability (IS) Rating Tool (Australia) from the perspective of the Triple Bottom Line (economy, environment and society), in order to determine the effectiveness of their application in the context of the least developed countries. The analysis revealed that the three tools are biased towards the environmental dimension and are mainly oriented to developed countries. Consequently, the foundations on which these systems are based need to be further developed and enhanced to be of real relevance in poorer nations by balancing the weight of sustainable pillars, incorporating effective management guidelines and development goals set by United Nations declarations, and considering impacts beyond the single project framework.
- Triple bottom line
- Infrastructure rating frameworks
- Rating systems
- Sustainable infrastructure
- Developing countries