ESTABLISHING THE SUSTAINABLE ASSET MANAGEMENT MATURITY MODEL (SAMMM) FOR SAUDI METRO SYSTEMS (ISO 55001-ALIGNED) THROUGH RELIABILITY-COST-CARBON SCORECARDS

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.n1.4074

Keywords:

Asset Management, Metro Systems, Sustainability, Maturity Model, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysi, Reliability, Lifecycle Cost

Abstract

In this context, Saudi Arabia metro operators are expected to provide reliable passenger service while keeping lifecycle expenditure under control and concurrently making measurable progress towards national decarbonization targets. This paper presents and elaborates a Sustainable Asset Management Maturity Model (SAMMM) that is tailored for Saudi Arabia metro systems and aligned with the requirements of ISO 55001 for asset management systems. SAMMM goes beyond “conformance” by combining: i) a capability assessment based on ISO clauses, ii) a five-level maturity ladder, and iii) an integrated set of RCC scorecards using MCDA. The proposed approach provides an auditable link between strategic intent, such as the pathways of the Saudi Arabia Green Initiative, and day-to-day asset decisions like maintenance strategies, renewal planning, and procurement. To make the model actionable, the paper defines KPI families, normalization rules, weight elicitation, and governance practices, and a practical implementation roadmap supported by visual management tools such as framework diagram, maturity ladder, and ISO clause radar chart. Riyadh Metro serves here as an illustrative context to demonstrate how SAMMM can structure progress from early-stage data stabilization to predictive maintenance and low-carbon procurement, while concurrently maintaining high reliability.

References

1. Alotaibi, Omar, and Dimitris Potoglou. ‘Introducing Public Transport and Relevant Strategies in Riyadh City, Saudi Arabia: A Stakeholders’ Perspective’. Urban, Planning and Transport Research, vol. 6, no. 1, Jan. 2018, pp. 35–53. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2018.1463867.

2. Bogentoft, Erik, et al. ‘Asset/Liability Management for Pension Funds Using CVaR Constraints’. The Journal of Risk Finance, vol. 3, no. 1, Apr. 2001, pp. 57–71. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1108/eb043483.

3. Boholm, Åsa, and Madeleine Prutzer. ‘Experts’ Understandings of Drinking Water Risk Management in a Climate Change Scenario’. Climate Risk Management, vol. 16, Jan. 2017, pp. 133–44. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2017.01.003.

4. Castella, Jean-Christophe, et al. ‘Combining Top-down and Bottom-up Modelling Approaches of Land Use/Cover Change to Support Public Policies: Application to Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in Northern Vietnam’. Land Use Policy, Integrated Assessment of the Land System: The Future of Land Use, vol. 24, no. 3, July 2007, pp. 531–45. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.09.009.

5. Da Silva, Renan Favarão, and Gilberto Francisco Martha De Souza. ‘Modeling a Maintenance Management Framework for Asset Management Based on ISO 55000 Series Guidelines’. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, vol. 28, no. 4, Oct. 2022, pp. 915–37. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME-08-2020-0082.

6. Daugavietis, Janis Edmunds, et al. ‘A Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods for Sustainability Assessment of District Heating Systems’. Energies, vol. 15, no. 7, Mar. 2022, p. 2411. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.3390/en15072411.

7. De Haes, S., and W. Van Grembergen. ‘IT Governance Structures, Processes and Relational Mechanisms: Achieving IT/Business Alignment in a Major Belgian Financial Group’. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences [Big Island, HI, USA], 2005, pp. 237b–237b. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2005.362.

8. Ghodeswar, Bhimrao, and Janardan Vaidyanathan. ‘Business Process Outsourcing: An Approach to Gain Access to World‐class Capabilities’. Business Process Management Journal, vol. 14, no. 1, Feb. 2008, pp. 23–38. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1108/14637150810849382.

9. González-Prida, Vicente, et al. ‘An Intangible Asset Management Proposal Based on ISO 55001 and ISO 30401 for Knowledge Management’. 15th WCEAM Proceedings, edited by João Onofre Pereira Pinto et al., Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 231–40. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96794-9_21.

10. Haes, Steven De, and Wim Van Grembergen. ‘Analysing the Relationship between IT Governance and Business/IT Alignment Maturity’. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008), 2008, pp. 428–428. IEEE Xplore, https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2008.66.

11. Hanski, Jyri, and Ville Ojanen. ‘Sustainability in Strategic Asset Management Frameworks: A Systematic Literature Review’. International Journal of Strategic Engineering Asset Management, vol. 3, no. 4, 2020, p. 263. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSEAM.2020.111420.

12. Hastings, Nicholas Anthony John. ‘ISO 55000 Series Standards’. Physical Asset Management: With an Introduction to the ISO 55000 Series of Standards, edited by Nicholas Anthony John Hastings, Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 595–621. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62836-9_29.

13. Holtz, Georg, et al. ‘Competences of Local and Regional Urban Governance Actors to Support Low-Carbon Transitions: Development of a Framework and Its Application to a Case-Study’. Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 177, Mar. 2018, pp. 846–56. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.137.

14. Mahmood, Muhammad Nateque, et al. ‘A Comparative Study on Asset Management Capability Maturity Models’. International Journal of Strategic Engineering Asset Management, vol. 2, no. 4, 2015, p. 328. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSEAM.2015.075412.

15. Maletič, Damjan, et al. ‘Understanding Motives for and Barriers to Implementing Asset Management System: An Empirical Study for Engineered Physical Assets’. Production Planning & Control, vol. 34, no. 15, Nov. 2023, pp. 1497–512. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2022.2026672.

16. Oh, Chang Hoon, et al. ‘Doing Right, Investing Right: Socially Responsible Investing and Shareholder Activism in the Financial Sector’. Business Horizons, SPECIAL ISSUE: THE POLITICS OF INTERNATIONAL BANKING & FINANCE, vol. 56, no. 6, Nov. 2013, pp. 703–14. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2013.07.006.

17. Pigosso, Daniela C. A., and Tim C. McAloone. ‘Maturity-Based Approach for the Development of Environmentally Sustainable Product/Service-Systems’. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, SI: PSS Design and Engineering, vol. 15, Nov. 2016, pp. 33–41. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2016.04.003.

18. Randjelovic, Jelena, et al. ‘The Emergence of Green Venture Capital’. Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 12, no. 4, July 2003, pp. 240–53. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.361.

19. Rehak, David, et al. ‘Convergence of Safety and Security within Process Plants’. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, vol. 94, Apr. 2025, p. 105579. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2025.105579.

20. Rongen, Tibor, et al. ‘An Analysis of the Mobility Hub Concept in the Netherlands: Historical Lessons for Its Implementation’. Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 104, Oct. 2022, p. 103419. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103419.

21. Rosa, Isabel Da, and Miguel Mira Da Silva. ‘A Maturity Model for Business Transformation Management’. 2015 IEEE 17th Conference on Business Informatics [Lisbon, Portugal], 2015, pp. 60–67. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2015.30.

22. Ross, Alexander Reid, et al. ‘Understanding Perspectives on Climate Hazards, Water Management, and Adaptive Transformation in an Exurban Community’. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure, vol. 8, no. sup1, Jan. 2023, pp. 48–67. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1080/23789689.2022.2126921.

23. Salet, Willem, et al. ‘Complexity and Uncertainty: Problem or Asset in Decision Making of Mega Infrastructure Projects?’ International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 37, no. 6, Nov. 2013, pp. 1984–2000. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01133.x.

24. Sandborn, Peter. ‘Managing Obsolescence Risk’. Through-Life Engineering Services: Motivation, Theory, and Practice, edited by Louis Redding and Rajkumar Roy, Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 341–57. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12111-6_20.

25. Sather, Mike R., et al. ‘Total Integrated Performance Excellence System (TIPES): A True North Direction for a Clinical Trial Support Center’. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, vol. 9, Mar. 2018, pp. 81–92. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2017.12.005.

26. Siew, Renard Y. J. ‘A Review of Corporate Sustainability Reporting Tools (SRTs)’. Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 164, Dec. 2015, pp. 180–95. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.09.010.

27. Talebizadeh, Mansour, et al. ‘Uncertainty Analysis in Sediment Load Modeling Using ANN and SWAT Model’. Water Resources Management, vol. 24, no. 9, July 2010, pp. 1747–61. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-009-9522-2.

28. Tscheikner-Gratl, Franz, et al. ‘Sewer Asset Management – State of the Art and Research Needs’. Urban Water Journal, vol. 16, no. 9, Oct. 2019, pp. 662–75. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2020.1713382.

29. Türpe, Sven. ‘The Trouble with Security Requirements’. 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2017, pp. 122–33. IEEE Xplore, https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2017.13.

30. Vuorinen, Lauri, and Miia Martinsuo. ‘Value-Oriented Stakeholder Influence on Infrastructure Projects’. International Journal of Project Management, Delivering Value in Projects and Project-Based Business, vol. 37, no. 5, July 2019, pp. 750–66. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.10.003.

31. Zhang, Shuyang, et al. ‘Metro System Disruption Management and Substitute Bus Service: A Systematic Review and Future Directions’. Transport Reviews, vol. 41, no. 2, Mar. 2021, pp. 230–51. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2020.1834468.

Downloads

Published

2026-01-07

How to Cite

Dalvi, A. I. (2026). ESTABLISHING THE SUSTAINABLE ASSET MANAGEMENT MATURITY MODEL (SAMMM) FOR SAUDI METRO SYSTEMS (ISO 55001-ALIGNED) THROUGH RELIABILITY-COST-CARBON SCORECARDS. Veredas Do Direito, 23, e234074. https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.n1.4074

Issue

Vol. 23 (2026): Veredas do Direito, v. 23, 2026

Section

Articles

License

I (we) submit this article which is original and unpublished, of my (our) own authorship, to the evaluation of the Veredas do Direito Journal, and agree that the related copyrights will become exclusive property of the Journal, being prohibited any partial or total copy in any other part or other printed or online communication vehicle dissociated from the Veredas do Direito Journal, without the necessary and prior authorization that should be requested in writing to Editor in Chief. I (we) also declare that there is no conflict of interest between the articles theme, the author (s) and enterprises, institutions or individuals.

I (we) recognize that the Veredas do Direito Journal is licensed under a CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE.

 

Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0