Performance evaluation system of urban wastewater treatment plants based on ESG + E

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.2025.02.013

Abstract

Abstract:

This study developed an evaluation system for urban wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) based on Environment, Social, Governance, and Economy (ESG + E), encompassing four dimensions: environmental impact, social responsibility, corporate governance, and economic benefits. Seven detailed criteria and twenty evaluation indicators were developed accordingly. The analytic hierarchy process method and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method were used to create the evaluation model, which was then used to evaluate the overall performance of three urban WWTPs in Shanghai. The results showed that WWTP1 and WWTP3 performed exceptionally well, while WWTP2 performed admirably. Recommendations for WWTP2 include improving resource utilization, diversifying employee training, and strengthening disclosure systems. The evaluation results were consistent with the WWTPs’ actual operational status, demonstrating the accuracy and scientificity of the evaluation system. This study provides a useful reference for the performance evaluation of urban WWTPs.

Key words: urban wastewater treatment plant, environment, social, and governance (ESG), analytic hierarchy process method, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method

CLC Number:

Chenxi YU, Xiangyu ZHANG, Zheng WEI, Jianbo LIN, Yan HE. Performance evaluation system of urban wastewater treatment plants based on ESG + E[J]. J* E* C* N* U* N* S*, 2025, 2025(2): 132-140.

Figures/Tables 6

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Fig.3

References 49

1	住房和城乡建设部, 生态环境部, 国家发展和改革委员会. 城镇污水处理提质增效三年行动方案(2019—2021年) [EB/OL]. (2019-04-29)[2024-12-23]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2019-09/29/content_5434669.htm.
2	YANG Z D, MA S L, DU S Z, et al.. Assessment of upgrading WWTP in Southwest China: Towards a cleaner production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 326, 129381.
3	黎楠杰. 江西某城镇生活污水处理厂提标改造工艺设计方案优化及运行效果研究 [D]. 南昌: 南昌大学, 2021.
4	张子恒. 聊城市某污水处理厂提标改造方案的工艺比选及运行效果研究 [D]. 合肥: 安徽建筑大学, 2022.
5	梁仁礼, 胡勇有, 谢天.. 广东某污水处理厂氧化沟工艺提质增效改造工程设计. 水处理技术, 2024, 50 (2): 153- 156.
6	姚瑞珍, 周国胜, 杨新春, 等.. 基于A ~ 2/O工艺污水处理厂改造与提标工程设计. 水处理技术, 2024, 50 (2): 148- 152.
7	张岳, 葛铜岗, 孙永利, 等.. 基于城镇污水处理全流程环节的碳排放模型研究. 中国给水排水, 2021, 37 (9): 65- 74.
8	张小寒, 孟庆杰, 徐雪, 等.. “双碳” 背景下污水处理厂提标改造所面临的困境及出路. 给水排水, 2023, 59 (S1): 194- 200.
9	ZHU W J, DUAN C C, CHEN B.. Energy efficiency assessment of wastewater treatment plants in China based on multiregional input–output analysis and data envelopment analysis. Applied Energy, 2024, 356, 122462.
10	石肖扬. 西安市污水处理厂减排效果及影响因素分析 [D]. 西安: 长安大学, 2022.
11	YANG J W, CHEN B.. Energy efficiency evaluation of wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) based on data envelopment analysis. Applied Energy, 2021, 289, 116680.
12	JIANG H, HUA M, ZHANG J, et al.. Sustainability efficiency assessment of wastewater treatment plants in China: A data envelopment analysis based on cluster benchmarking. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 244, 118729.
13	GALLEGO-SCHMID A, TARPANI R R Z.. Life cycle assessment of wastewater treatment in developing countries: A review. Water Research, 2019, 153, 63- 79.
14	蒋慧. 城市污水处理厂绩效评估 [D]. 上海: 上海交通大学, 2020.
15	BUONOCORE E, MELLINO S, DE ANGELIS G, et al.. Life cycle assessment indicators of urban wastewater and sewage sludge treatment. Ecological Indicators, 2018, 94, 13- 23.
16	CHEN H X, ZHENG Y N, ZHOU K, et al.. Carbon emission efficiency evaluation of wastewater treatment plants: Evidence from China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2023, 30 (31): 76606- 76616.
17	LOPES T A S, QUEIROZ L M, TORRES E A, et al.. Low complexity wastewater treatment process in developing countries: A LCA approach to evaluate environmental gains. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 720, 137593.
18	LORENZO-TOJA Y, VÁZQUEZ-ROWE I, CHENEL S, et al.. Eco-efficiency analysis of Spanish WWTPs using the LCA + DEA method. Water Research, 2015, 68, 651- 666.
19	邹淑慧. 基于ESG + E的污水处理厂绩效评价体系研究 [D]. 广西桂林: 桂林理工大学, 2020.
20	WU G, HONG J K, TIAN Z H, et al.. Assessing the total factor performance of wastewater treatment in China: A city-level analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 758, 143324.
21	CARDOSO B J, RODRIGUES E, GASPAR A R, et al.. Energy performance factors in wastewater treatment plants: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 322, 129107.
22	岳翔宇, 王国红, 黄昊.. ESG责任履行与企业技术创新提质增效. 工业技术经济, 2024, 43 (3): 54- 64.
23	钱依森, 桑晶, 卢琬莹, 等.. ESG研究进展及其在“双碳” 目标下的新机遇. 中国环境管理, 2023, 15 (1): 36- 47.
24	北京市发展和改革委员会. 北京市促进环境社会治理(ESG)体系高质量发展实施方案(征求意见稿) [EB/OL]. (2024-06-07)[2024-12-25]. https://fgw.beijing.gov.cn/fgwzwgk/zcgk/bwqtwj/202406/t20240614_3712805.htm.
25	上海市商务委员会. 加快提升本市涉外企业环境、社会和治理(ESG)能力三年行动方案(2024-2026年) [EB/OL]. (2024-06-07)[2024-12-25]. https://sww.sh.gov.cn/zwgkgfqtzcwj/20240301/d4259e64a62042689879fb3901c86bef.html.
26	张瑞涵, 周亚虹.. 绿色金融、碳排放强度和企业ESG表现——基于上市企业微观数据的实证研究. 社会科学, 2024, (3): 126- 140.
27	陈伟雄, 郝涵宇.. ESG表现与企业“走出去”: 路径机制与实证考察. 世界经济研究, 2024, (3): 19- 33.
28	TSANG Y P, FAN Y Q, FENG Z P.. Bridging the gap: Building environmental, social and governance capabilities in small and medium logistics companies. Journal of Environmental Management, 2023, 338, 117758.
29	CRESPI F, MIGLIAVACCA M.. The determinants of ESG rating in the financial industry: The same old story or a different tale?. Sustainability, 2020, 12 (16): 6398.
30	刘妍.. 我国商业银行ESG评级实践和发展研究. 征信, 2023, 41 (6): 77- 82.
31	王立晓. 城市轨道交通运营期ESG评价指标体系研究 [D]. 南京: 南京林业大学, 2023.
32	PHAM T N, TRAN P P, LE M H, et al.. The effects of ESG combined score on business performance of enterprises in the transportation industry. Sustainability, 2022, 14 (14): 8354.
33	刘英杰. 企业ESG表现对企业绩效的影响研究——以紫金矿业为例 [D]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 2023.
34	FU C L, YU C Y, GUO M T, et al.. ESG rating and financial risk of mining industry companies. Resources Policy, 2024, 88, 104308.
35	简劼. “双碳” 目标背景下旅游上市企业ESG表现对财务绩效的影响机制研究 [D]. 南昌: 江西财经大学, 2023.
36	BAE J H.. Developing ESG evaluation guidelines for the tourism sector: With a focus on the hotel industry. Sustainability, 2022, 14 (24): 16474.
37	上海市排水管理事务中心. 2022年上海市排水设施年报 [EB/OL]. (2023-08-23)[2024-12-25]. https://swj.sh.gov.cn/cmsres/4d/4dca56f51fcc4cdb98e64f058023d8a0/a0b71a2d1059308c01483da3574589ec.pdf.
38	HE Y, ZHU Y S, CHEN J H, et al. Assessment of land occupation of municipal wastewater treatment plants in China [J]. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, 2018, 4(12): 1988-1996.
39	污水处理厂低碳运行评价技术规范: T/CAEPI 49—2022. [S/OL]. (2022-07-01)[2024-12-25]. http://www.caepi.org.cn/epa/resources/pdfjs/web/viewer.html?file=/epa/platform/file/filemanagecontroller/downloadfilebyid/1654504685461037732352.
40	陈婷婷, 彭玉梅, 高亚琳, 等.. 基于层次分析法的城镇污水处理厂综合效能研究. 给水排水, 2021, 57 (S2): 81- 85.
41	李丽娟. 基于层次分析法的城镇污水处理项目后评价体系研究 [D]. 昆明: 昆明理工大学, 2021.
42	AGARWAL S, SINGH A P.. Performance evaluation of textile wastewater treatment techniques using sustainability index: An integrated fuzzy approach of assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 337, 130384.
43	RÁDULY B, GERNAEY K V, CAPODAGLIO A G, et al.. Artificial neural networks for rapid WWTP performance evaluation: Methodology and case study. Environmental Modelling & Software, 2007, 22 (8): 1208- 1216.
44	JAWAD J, HAWARI A H, JAVAID ZAIDI S.. Artificial neural network modeling of wastewater treatment and desalination using membrane processes: A review. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2021, 419, 129540.
45	LIU Y, ECKERT C M, EARL C.. A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. Expert Systems with Applications, 2020, 161, 113738.
46	香港交易所及结算所有限公司. 环境、社会和治理报告指南 [R]. [S.l.]: [s.n.], 2019.
47	丁晓欣, 侍文, 高静思, 等.. 深圳市委托运营污水处理厂设备管理考核评价体系构建. 中国给水排水, 2021, 37 (20): 28- 33.
48	黄荣敏, 陈建, 叶挺, 等.. 组合型人工湿地在湿地公园中的应用——以芜湖市为例. 给水排水, 2022, 58 (S1): 246- 250.
49	MANCINI G, LOMBARDI L, LUCIANO A, et al.. A reduction in global impacts through a waste-wastewater-energy nexus: A life cycle assessment. Energy, 2024, 289, 130020.

指标	单位	评价标准					污水处理厂
指标	单位	优秀	良好	中等	合格	不合格	WWTP1	WWTP2	WWTP3
C1 (单位水量耗电量)	(kW·h)/m³	0.20	0.25	0.30	0.35	0.40	0.28	0.30	0.35
C2 (污水资源化率)	%	50	40	30	20	10	2	100	1.3
C3 (污泥安全处置率)	%	100	80	60	40	20	100	100	80
C4 (处理后水质达标率)	%	100	99	98	97	96	100	98	100
C5 (废气处理系统或装置)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	9	10	9
C6 (尾水排放合理性)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	9	10	10
C7 (低碳运行水平评价)	定性	100	80	60	40	20	55	56	62
C8 (员工身心健康)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	9	10	8
C9 (员工薪资及福利)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	8	9	8
C10 (个人能力提升)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	8	9	7
C11 (群众满意度)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	10	10	8
C12 (信息公开)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	7	9	9
C13 (安全管理)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	10	9	9
C14 (管理职能完善程度)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	8	8	9
C15 (工艺选择合理性)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	9	10	9
C16 (智能化程度)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	8	8	9
C17 (设施设备维护)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	9	8	9
C18 (单位水量处理费用)	元/m³	0.5	1.0	1.5	2.0	2.5	1.4	1.4	1.5
C19 (单位水量药耗)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	8	7	7
C20 (设备运行维护费)	定性	10	8	6	4	2	8	8	8

目标层	准则层	权重	细化准则层	权重	指标层	权重
A (污水处理厂绩效评价)	A1 (环境影响)	0.402	B1 (能源利用与资源回收)	0.402	C1 (单位水量耗电量)	0.602
			B1 (能源利用与资源回收)	0.402	C2 (污水资源化率)	0.398
			B2 (环境治理)	0.598	C3 (污泥安全处置率)	0.217
					C4 (处理后水质达标率)	0.327
					C5 (废气处理系统或装置)	0.143
					C6 (尾水排放合理性)	0.188
					C7 (低碳运行水平评价)	0.125
	A2 (社会责任)	0.261	B3 (厂内员工)	0.564	C8 (员工身心健康)	0.312
					C9 (员工薪资及福利)	0.491
					C10 (个人能力提升)	0.197
			B4 (周边居民)	0.436	C11 (群众满意度)	1.000
	A3 (公司治理)	0.232	B5 (厂区管理)	0.427	C12 (信息公开)	0.197
					C13 (安全管理)	0.491
					C14 (管理职能完善程度)	0.312
			B6 (工艺运行与维护)	0.573	C15 (工艺选择合理性)	0.446
					C16 (智能化程度)	0.215
					C17 (设施设备维护)	0.339
	A4 (经济效益)	0.105	B7 (污水处理厂成本控制)	1.000	C18 (单位水量处理费用)	0.472
					C19 (单位水量药耗)	0.301
					C20 (设备运行维护费)	0.227

污水处理厂	评价指标	计算结果
污水处理厂	评价指标	优秀	良好	中等	合格	不合格
WWTP1	B1 (能源利用与资源回收)	0	0.241	0.361	0	0.398
	B2 (环境治理)	0.710	0.166	0.031	0.093	0
	B3 (厂内员工)	0.156	0.844	0	0	0
	B4 (周边居民)	1.000	0	0	0	0
	B5 (厂区管理)	0.491	0.411	0.098	0	0
	B6 (工艺运行与维护)	0.393	0.607	0	0	0
	B7 (污水处理厂成本控制)	0	0.622	0.378	0	0
WWTP2	B1 (能源利用与资源回收)	0	0	0	0.602	0.398
	B2 (环境治理)	0.587	0.401	0.012	0	0
	B3 (厂内员工)	0	0.901	0.099	0	0
	B4 (周边居民)	0	1.000	0	0	0
	B5 (厂区管理)	0.500	0.500	0	0	0
	B6 (工艺运行与维护)	0.277	0.723	0	0	0
	B7 (污水处理厂成本控制)	0	0.528	0.472	0	0
WWTP3	B1 (能源利用与资源回收)	0	0	0	0.482	0.518
	B2 (环境治理)	0.548	0	0.352	0.100	0
	B3 (厂内员工)	0.656	0.344	0	0	0
	B4 (周边居民)	1.000	0	0	0	0
	B5 (厂区管理)	0.344	0.656	0	0	0
	B6 (工艺运行与维护)	0.446	0.554	0	0	0
	B7 (污水处理厂成本控制)	0	0.622	0.378	0	0