Multiple rating systems have been established to enhance the sustainable design and management of roadway projects. These systems are based on current best practices and demonstrate significant potential for assisting project managers in achieving environmentally sustainable and socially resilient smart transportation assets. HFowever, as it stands there is a significant lack of understanding on these systems, and thus lack of confidence in their implementation. Thus, this study aims to develop an up-to-date critical review on the most prominent rating systems currently in the global market. Specifically, the CEEQUAL, Envision, BE²ST-in-Highways, Greenroads, GreenLITES, Invest and GreenPave systems were selected and analysed in terms of their scopes, structures, common criteria, three-pillar adherence, and asset management effectiveness. The results of this study found: 1) system characteristics can be categorised by system scope (infrastructure, roadway or pavement) and assessment type (self-assessment or third-party, 2) third-party systems assessed the three-pillars of sustainability and the identified macro-categories more homogeneously, and 3) rating systems show strong potential for the social assessment of projects, but their consideration of life-cycle assessment could be more outcome-orientated. Future work should apply the rating systems to project case studies to further identify implementation, contextual and indicator pluralism issues.

已经建立了多种评级系统，以增强道路项目的可持续设计和管理。这些系统基于当前的最佳实践，在协助项目经理实现环境可持续发展和具有社会适应力的智能交通资产方面显示出巨大的潜力。但是，目前看来，对这些系统的理解非常缺乏，因此对它们的实施缺乏信心。因此，本研究旨在针对当前全球市场上最杰出的评级系统进行最新的重要评论。具体来说，是CEEQUAL，Envision和BE ²选择并选择了ST-in-Highway，Greenroads，GreenLITES，Invest和GreenPave系统，并对其范围，结构，通用标准，三柱遵守和资产管理有效性进行了分析。这项研究的结果发现：1）系统特性可以按系统范围（基础设施，道路或人行道）和评估类型（自我评估或第三方）进行分类，2）第三方系统评估了可持续性和可持续性的三大支柱。 3）评级系统显示出对项目进行社会评估的强大潜力，但他们对生命周期评估的考虑可能更注重结果。未来的工作应将评级系统应用于项目案例研究，以进一步确定实施，上下文和指标多元化问题。