Infrastructures as socio-eco-technical systems: Five considerations for interdisciplinary dialogue
Infrastructures as socio-eco-technical systems: Five considerations for interdisciplinary dialogue
复制标题
作为社会生态技术系统的基础设施：跨学科对话的五个考虑因素
DOI：
10.1061/(asce)is.1943-555x.0000383
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
C. Redman
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Z. Grabowski;A. Matsler;C. Thiel;L. McPhillips;R. Hum;A. Bradshaw;T. Miller;C. Redman
基础设施在应对 21 世纪可持续发展挑战中发挥着关键作用，这些挑战涉及人口激增、物质和能源需求增加、环境变化以及社会价值观转变。如果不就国家规模和地方规模的基础设施发展轨迹进行强有力的跨学科和跨部门对话，有关基础设施决策的社会和政治争议将继续加剧。除了对物理和社会系统进行大量投资外，基础设施界（包括规划者、工程师、公共工程专家、金融家和可持续发展科学家）还需要阐明 21 世纪的愿景，解决基础设施系统相互关联的技术、社会和环境维度。这样的愿景需要解决工业化世界的现有体系和寻求通过基础设施发展改善人类福祉的国家的新体系。基础设施系统——这里讨论的主要是那些整合建筑环境（Jones et al. 2001；Pulselli et al. 2007）、交通（Greene and Wegener 1997）、发电和配电（Jacobson and Delucchi 2009）、食品生产和加工（联合国粮食及农业组织 2011）、制造业（Jovane et al. 2008）、供水的系统（Gleick 2003；Muller 等人，2015；Palmer 等人，2015）和废物处理（Melosi 2008）——支撑着当代人类社会前所未有的物质财富。这些技术系统与广泛的社会基础设施一起发展，包括机构中的专业知识和专业知识、运营和维护的非正式知识系统，以及设定预算优先事项、政策方向和监管确定性的更广泛的治理和监管政治系统。结合这些政策流程，用户行为和人口变化会影响基础设施服务的需求和维护成本，这两项服务的总体投资需求已确定为 3.6 万亿美元（ASCE 2013），其中到 2027 年需要 2 万亿美元（ASCE 2017）。由于基础设施依赖于环境投入来发挥作用，引导和保护社会免受环境力量的影响，并影响环境系统，因此对技术和适当的人与自然关系的态度为基础设施的长期可持续性设定了目标。他们通过支付基础设施系统的社会意愿以及对特定类型系统的社会意识和愿望来实现这一点。现有基础设施系统及其支持的技术的外部性加剧了不断变化的环境条件，包括气候变化和分散的大气污染物。这些转变的程度在系统不堪重负之前很少明显（Gross 2010；Perrow 1999）。例如，在飓风桑迪的情况下，孤立的系统管理造成了不可预见的漏洞，这些漏洞通过关键基础设施系统传播（Klinenberg 2013，Comes 和 Van de Walle 2014），成为级联故障的一个例子（Rinaldi 等人，2001 年），并影响系统恢复（Sharkey 等人，2015 年）。与此同时，基础设施系统及其所支持的技术和行为成为公共和环境健康风险和成本的来源；目前，每 10 人中有 8 人居住在空气污染严重的城市地区，这主要是由于交通、制造和能源生产造成的（世界卫生组织，2016 年）。当代基础设施实践是如何走到这一步的？发电、信息技术和交通等大型网络系统的现代基础设施是理想的选择（Dueñas-Osorio 等人，2007 年；Haimes 和 Jiang，2001 年；
Infrastructure plays a key role in 21st century sustainability challenges related to burgeoning populations, increasing material and energy demand, environmental change, and shifts in social values. Social and political controversy over infrastructure decision making will continue to intensify without robust interdisciplinary and intersectoral dialogue over national-scale and local-scale infrastructure trajectories. Alongside large investments in physical and social systems, the infrastructure community—including planners, engineers, public works specialists, financiers, and sustainability scientists—needs to articulate a 21st century vision addressing the interrelated technological, social, and environmental dimensions of infrastructure systems. Such a vision needs to address existing systems in the industrialized world and new systems in countries seeking to improve human welfare through infrastructure development. Infrastructure systems—discussed here as primarily those integrating the built environment (Jones et al. 2001; Pulselli et al. 2007), transportation (Greene and Wegener 1997), power generation and distribution (Jacobson and Delucchi 2009), food production and processing (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2011), manufacturing (Jovane et al. 2008), water delivery (Gleick 2003; Muller et al. 2015; Palmer et al. 2015), and waste treatment (Melosi 2008)—underpin the unprecedented material wealth of contemporary human society. These technological systems have developed alongside extensive social infrastructure including specialized knowledge and expertise housed in institutions, informal knowledge systems of operation and maintenance, and a broader system of governance and regulatory politics setting budgetary priorities, policy directions, and regulatory certainty. In combination with these policy processes, user behavior and demographic change influence the demand and maintenance costs for infrastructure services, both of which have an identified overall investment need of $3.6 trillion (ASCE 2013), $2 trillion of which is needed by 2027 (ASCE 2017). Because infrastructure relies on environmental inputs to function, channels and protects society from environmental forces, and impacts environmental systems, attitudes about technology and appropriate human–nature relationships set the goals for long-term infrastructure sustainability. They do so through both a social willingness to pay for infrastructure systems and a social consciousness of and desire for specific types of systems. Shifting environmental conditions, including climatic changes and dispersed atmospheric pollutants, are exacerbated by the externalities of present infrastructure systems and the technologies they support. The extent of these shifts is rarely apparent until systems become overwhelmed (Gross 2010; Perrow 1999). For example, in the case of Hurricane Sandy, siloed system management created unforeseen vulnerabilities propagating through critical infrastructure systems (Klinenberg 2013, Comes and Van de Walle 2014), serving as an example of cascading failure (Rinaldi et al. 2001), as well as affecting system restoration (Sharkey et al. 2015). At the same time, infrastructure systems and the technologies and behaviors they enable serve as sources of risks and costs to public and environmental health; 8 of 10 people now live in urban areas with excessive air pollution primarily due to transport, manufacturing, and energy generation (WHO 2016). How has contemporary infrastructure practice come to this point? The modern infrastructure ideal of large, networked systems such as power generation, information technology, and transport (Dueñas-Osorio et al. 2007; Haimes and Jiang 2001;
影响因子：
14.6
作者：
Martijn Gough
通讯作者：
Martijn Gough