Sustainability Life Cycle Design of Bridges in Aggressive Environments Considering Social Impacts

Sustainability Life Cycle Design of Bridges in Aggressive Environments Considering Social Impacts

Ignacio J. Navarro Víctor Yepes José V. Martí

Department of Construction Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de València

Institute of Concrete Science and Technology (ICITECH), Universitat Politècnica de València

Available online: 
| Citation



The establishment of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015 claims for a deep paradigm shift in the way infrastructure structures are conceived. The evaluation of the impacts derived from the con- struction, the service and the end-of-life stages of an infrastructure is consequently in the spotlight of the research community. Being the construction sector as one of the main stressors of the environment, great attention has been recently paid to the structural design from the economic and the environmental point of view. However, sustainability requires to consider the social dimension as well. The evaluation of the social impacts of products is still at a very early stage of development, so the inclusion of social aspects in the design of structures is often overlooked. In this study, a comparison of life cycle assess- ment results is conducted on seven different design alternatives for a bridge in a coastal environment. Two approaches are followed: the first approach considers the economic and the environmental aspects of each design and the second approach includes the several social impacts specifically developed for the assessment of infrastructures. These social impacts account for four stakeholders, namely workers, consumers, local community and society. Results show that the inclusion of social aspects shall lead to different preferred options when compared with conventional, two-dimensional approaches. Here, the design with silica fume added concrete performs 11% better from a sustainability point of view when compared with the best solution resulting from a conventional assessment.


AHP, bridges, corrosion, life cycle assessment, maintenance, multi-criteria decision-making, reliability, social impacts, sustainability, sustainable design


[1] Choi, J., Strategy for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from maintenance and rehabilitation of highway pavement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 209, pp. 88–100, 2019.

[2] Huang, M.,  Zhang,  X.,  Ren,  R.,  Liao,  H.,  Zavadskas,  E.K.  &  Antucheviciene,  J., Energy-saving building program evaluation with an integrated method under linguistic  environment.  Journal  of  Civil  Engineering  and  Management,  26(5),  pp. 447–458, 2020.

[3] Kyriacou, A., Muinelo-Gallo, L. & Roca-Sagalés, O., The efficiency of transport infrastructure investment and the role of government quality: An empirical analysis. Transport Policy, 74, pp. 93–102, 2019.

[4] Payá-Zaforteza, I., Yepes, V., González-Vidosa, F. & Hospitaler, A., On the Weibull cost estimation of building frames designed by simulated annealing. Meccanica, 45(5), pp. 693–704, 2010.

[5] Hasan, M.A., Yan, K., Akiyama, M. & Frangopol, D.M., LCC-based identification of geographical locations suitable for using stainless steel rebars in reinforced concrete girder bridges. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 16(9), pp. 1201–1227, 2020.

[6] Molina-Moreno, F., García-Segura, T., Martí, J.V. & Yepes, V., Optimization of but- tressed earth-retaining walls using hybrid harmony search algorithms. Engineering Structures, 134, pp. 205–216, 2017.

[7] Navarro, I.J., Martí, J.V. & Yepes, V., Reliability-based maintenance optimization of corrosion preventive designs under a life cycle perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 74, pp. 23–34, 2019.

[8] Xin, J., Akitama, M., Frangopol, D.M., Zhang, M., Pei, J. & Zhang, J., Reliability- based life-cycle cost design of asphalt pavement using artificial neural networks. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2020.

[9] Molina-Moreno, F., Martí, J.V. & Yepes, V., Carbon embodied optimization for buttressed earth-retaining walls: implications for low-carbon conceptual designs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 164, pp. 872–884, 2017. jclepro.2017.06.246

[10] Torres-Machi, C., Pellicer, E., Yepes, V. & Chamorro, A., Towards a sustainable optimization of pavement maintenance programs under budgetary  restrictions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 148, pp. 90–102, 2017. jclepro.2017.01.100

[11] García-Segura, T., Yepes, V. & Frangopol, D.M. Multi-objective design of post-tensioned concrete road bridges using artificial neural networks. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 56(1), pp. 139–150, 2017.

[12] Penadés-Plà, V., Martí, J.V.,  García-Segura,  T.  & Yepes,  V.  Life-cycle  assessment: A comparison between two optimal post-tensioned concrete box-girder road bridges. Sustainability, 9(10), p. 1864, 2017.

[13] Navarro, I.J., Yepes, V. & Martí, J.V., Social life cycle assessment of concrete bridge decks exposed to aggressive environments. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 72, pp. 50–63, 2018.

[14] Sierra, L.A., Pellicer, E., & Yepes, V. Method for estimating the social sustainability of infrastructure projects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 65, pp. 41–53, 2017.

[15] Gervásio, H., & da Silva, L.S., Life-cycle social analysis of motorway bridges. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 9(10), pp. 1019–1039, 2013. 10.1080/15732479.2011.654124

[16] Wang, W., On fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level sets. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 33(6), pp. 4067–4076, 2017.

[17] Jia, J., Ibrahim, M., Hadi, M., Orabi, W. & Xiao, Y., Multi-criteria evaluation frame- work in selection of Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) method. Sustainability, 10, p. 4059, 2018.

[18] Pipinato, A., Rebelo, C., Pedrosa, B. & Gervásio, H., Assessment procedure and rehabilitation criteria for riveted road bridges. Structural Engineering International, 30(1), pp. 109–118, 2020.

[19] Navarro, I.J., Penadés-Plà, V., Martínez-Muñoz, D., Rempling, R. & Yepes, V., Life cycle sustainability assessment for multi-criteria decision making in bridge design:     A review. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 26(7), pp. 690–704, 2020.

[20] UNEP/SETAC. Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. United Nations Environment Program. In: Paris SETAC Life Cycle Initiative United Nations Environment Programme, 2009.

[21] Fib. Fib Bulletin 34: Model Code for Service Life Design. Fib, Lausanne, 2006.

[22] Nogueira, C.G., Leonel, E.D. & Coda, H.B., Reliability algorithms applied to reinforced concrete structures durability assessment. Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais, 5(4), pp. 440–450, 2012.

[23] Navarro, I.J., Yepes, V. & Martí, J.V., Role of the social dimension on the sustainability- oriented maintenance optimization of bridges in coastal environments. WIT Transac- tions on The Built Environment, Vol. 196, WIT Press, 2020, ISSN 1743-3509.

[24] Goedkoop, M., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, M., De Schryver, A., Struijs, J. & Van Zelm, R., 2009. ReCiPe 2008, First Edition. (Report I: Characterisation)

[25] UNEP/SETAC. The methodological sheets for subcategories in social life cycle assess- ment (S-LCA). UNEP-SETAC Life-Cycle Initiative, Paris, France, 2013.

[26] Ecoinvent 3.2 database, Accessed on: October 2020.

[27] Navarro, I.J., Yepes, V., Martí, J.V. & González-Vidosa, F., Life cycle impact assess- ment of corrosion preventive designs applied to prestressed concrete bridge decks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, pp. 698–713, 2018. jclepro.2018.06.110

[28] Hwang, C.L., & Yoon, K., Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applica- tions. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.

[29] Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill., 1980.