Mapping WASH Sustainability Frameworks to Legitimacy Theory
Mapping WASH Sustainability Frameworks to Legitimacy Theory
复制标题
将 WASH 可持续性框架映射到合法性理论
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Kaminsky
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Kaminsky
近年来，在建筑文献中越来越多地关注可持续性。本文通过将合法性理论映射到旨在定义水、环境卫生和个人卫生（WASH）项目可持续性的现有框架中，为这项工作做出了贡献。合法性已被证明会影响组织的连续性，这与本文对基础设施的社会可持续性的定义相似;即，随着时间的推移，它将继续被最终用户使用和维护。过去的工作已经建立了一套指标，用于评估的可持续性，本文介绍了一些突出的和广泛应用的可持续性框架，在WASH。具体而言，这里审查的框架来自或基于联合国水机制，世界卫生组织，水为人民，工程师无国界-美国，加拿大国际开发署，美国环境保护署，美国和平队和IRC三S计划的出版物。然后，将该分析的组成部分映射到合法性理论的结构。将这些框架与以前的结果进行比较，以了解在可持续性框架中是否存在已知对促进可持续基础设施至关重要的合法性组成部分。这将使从业人员能够使用经验证明的研究结果来微调可持续发展框架。1.明年将是实现千年发展目标的2015年最后期限。联合国发布的这些目标涉及从减少极端贫困到向全球人口提供清洁饮用水等发展问题（UN 2013）。虽然已经取得了很大进展（世卫组织，2012年），但现在看来，有些目标-如卫生设施覆盖率-将不可避免地无法实现（世卫组织/儿基会联合监测计划，2010年）。随着2015年的临近，发展社区正在决定MGD之后会发生什么。显然，对那些尚未实现的目标放弃希望是不可接受的，即使那些将实现的目标也不能说是完成的工作。例如，饮用水目标是将无法持续获得经改善的饮用水源的人数减少一半。令人高兴的是，世界正在朝着实现这一目标迈进。然而，这仍然使近7亿人无法获得清洁饮用水，并忽视了服务分配方面的区域、性别和社会经济差异（世卫组织/儿基会联合监测计划，2010年）。此外，我们必须认识到，我们的指标主要衡量的是人们获得访问权，而没有花费足够的努力来衡量这些系统的可持续性。换句话说，这些估计数不包括肯定数量可观的失修系统。此外，即使是那些继续供水的系统也往往不是514 Construction Research Congress 2014 © ASCE 2014
In recent years there has been increasing attention to sustainability in the construction literature. This paper contributes to this work by mapping legitimacy theory to existing frameworks intended to define the sustainability of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) projects. Legitimacy has been shown to impact organizational continuity, which is similar to this paper’s definition of the social sustainability of infrastructure; namely, that it continues to be used and maintained by end users over time. Past work has built sets of indicators that are used to assess the sustainability of This paper describes some prominent and widely applied frameworks for sustainability in WASH. Specifically, the frameworks reviewed here are from or are based on publications from UN-Water, the World Health Organization, Water for People, Engineers Without Borders-USA, the Canadian International Development Agency, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the US Peace Corps, and the IRC Triple-S program. The components from this analysis are then mapped to the constructs of legitimacy theory. The frameworks are compared to previous results to see if the components of legitimacy known to be important in promoting sustainable infrastructure are present in sustainability frameworks. This will allow practitioners to fine tune sustainability frameworks using empirically proven research results. INTRODUCTION Next year, the 2015 deadline for the Millennium Development Goals (MGD) will have passed. These goals, published by the United Nations, treat development issues from reducing extreme poverty to supplying clean drinking water to the global population (UN 2013). While great progress has been made (WHO 2012), it now seems inevitable that some of the targets—such as sanitation coverage—will not be met (WHO/UNICEF JMP 2010). As 2015 looms the development community is deciding what will come after the MGD. Clearly, abandoning hope on those goals that remain unmet is unacceptable, and even those goals that will be met cannot be said to be completed work. For example, the drinking water goal was to halve the number of people living without sustainable access to improved drinking water sources. Joyously, the world is on track to meet that goal. However, this still leaves almost 700 million people without access to clean drinking water and neglects regional, gendered, and socioeconomic disparities in terms of distribution of services (WHO/UNICEF JMP 2010). In addition, we must recognize that our metrics have primarily measured people gaining access without sufficient effort being spent to measure the sustainability of those systems. In other words, these estimates do not include the certainly significant number of systems that have fallen into disrepair. Additionally, even those systems that have continued to provide water are often not 514 Construction Research Congress 2014 ©ASCE 2014