COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GROUND STRUCTURES
Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Vikrant University, Gwalior
DOI: 10.55041/IJSREM54328
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
DOWNLOAD ARTICLE
REVIEW REPORT
CITE THIS ARTICLE
This study presents a comprehensive cost-benefit evaluation of underground and above-ground structures, emphasizing both direct construction costs and long-term socio-economic impacts. Underground structures, including metro tunnels, basements, and underground parking, typically incur 40–60% higher initial costs due to excavation, complex foundations, groundwater management, and structural reinforcement requirements. However, they offer significant benefits such as land conservation, congestion reduction, environmental integration, and enhanced urban resilience. Above-ground structures, in contrast, are more affordable initially, requiring simpler foundations and faster construction timelines, making them suitable for regions with greater land availability and shorter project deadlines. The methodology adopted a mixed approach, integrating literature reviews, cost modeling, lifecycle cost analysis (LCCA), and comparative case studies of urban transportation projects. Results indicate that underground projects, while nearly 1.5–2 times more expensive per kilometer than elevated alternatives, yield higher passenger capacity, improved safety, and better alignment with compact urban development goals. Elevated structures, though cost-effective, face higher exposure-related maintenance costs over their lifecycle. The findings underscore the importance of context-specific decision-making, where underground construction is optimal for dense metropolitan areas, whereas above-ground solutions are more practical for suburban or rural development. This research establishes a balanced framework to guide engineers, urban planners, and policymakers in selecting the most cost-effective and sustainable infrastructure solution while accounting for long-term economic, environmental, and societal benefits.
Keywords
Article Information
Article Metrics
HOW TO CITE
Copy
Bhadouriya, M. A., Sharma, P. D. M. & M, C. H. (2026). Cost benefit analysis of underground and above ground structures. My Academic Journal, 01(01), 1-9. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.55041/IJSREM54328
Bhadouriya, Mrs., et al.. "Cost benefit analysis of underground and above ground structures." My Academic Journal, vol. 01, no. 01, 2026, pp. 1-9. doi:https://doi.org/10.55041/IJSREM54328.
Bhadouriya, Mrs.,Prof Sharma, and Chandana M. "Cost benefit analysis of underground and above ground structures." My Academic Journal 01, no. 01 (2026): 1-9. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.55041/IJSREM54328.
References
J. Reilly and H. Parker, “Benefits and life-cycle costs of underground projects,” in Underground Space – The 4th Dimension of Metropolises, I. Hrdina, Ed., Taylor & Francis, 2007. doi: 10.1201/NOE0415408073.ch113.
[2] J. Merisalu, T. Söderqvist, Y. Volchko, J. Sundell, and L. Rosén, “Identification of benefits and costs from the reduction of hydrogeological risks in underground construction,” Engineering Geology, vol. 357, p. 108308, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2025.108308.
[3] M. Arabi et al., “Benefits of aggressively co-undergrounding electric and broadband lines outweigh costs,” Cell Reports Sustainability, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 100334, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.crsus.2025.100334.
[4] L. Xu, N. Lin, H. V. Poor, D. Xi, and A. T. D. Perera, “Quantifying cascading power outages during climate extremes considering renewable energy integration,” 2024, arXiv. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2407.01758.
[5] J. Merisalu, T. Söderqvist, Y. Volchko, J. Sundell, and L. Rosén, “Identification of benefits and costs from the reduction of hydrogeological risks in underground construction,” Engineering Geology, vol. 357, p. 108308, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2025.108308.
[6] K. S. Amith, S. G. Kumar, and M. D. Godson, “Experimental Studies on Tunnel-Soil Interaction in Partially Saturated Ground Subjected to Repeated Shaking Events Using 1-g Shaking Table Experiments,” in Proceedings of 17th Symposium on Earthquake Engineering (Vol. 3), vol. 331, M. Shrikhande, P. Agarwal, and P. C. A. Kumar, Eds., in Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol. 331. , Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2023, pp. 367–380. doi: 10.1007/978-981-99-1579-8_29.
[7] J. C. Kho, W. S. Loke, Z. Z. Wong, and M. E. Raghunandan, “Impact of rising temperatures on urban underground infrastructure: A state-of-the-art review,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, vol. 164, p. 106835, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2025.106835.
[8] Y.-K. Qiao, F.-L. Peng, S. Sabri, and A. Rajabifard, “Socio-environmental costs of underground space use for urban sustainability,” Sustainable Cities and Society, vol. 51, p. 101757, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2019.101757.
[9] H. Li, X. Li, and C. K. Soh, “An integrated strategy for sustainable development of the urban underground: From strategic, economic and societal aspects,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, vol. 55, pp. 67–82, May 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2015.12.011.
[10] A. A. Firoozi, A. A. Firoozi, D. O. Oyejobi, S. Avudaiappan, and E. S. Flores, “Emerging trends in sustainable building materials: Technological innovations, enhanced performance, and future directions,” Results in Engineering, vol. 24, p. 103521, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2024.103521.
[11] A. A. Firoozi, A. A. Firoozi, and M. R. Maghami, “Sustainable practices in geotechnical engineering: Forging pathways for resilient infrastructure,” Results in Engineering, vol. 26, p. 105577, June 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2025.105577.
[12] Faculty of Natural and Technical Science, ”Goce Delcev” University, 2000 Stip, Macedonia et al., “COST ANALYSIS IN CONSTRUCTION OF UNDERGROUND MINING STRUCTURES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THEIR REDUCTION,” MGPB, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 1–12, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.17794/rgn.2015.2.1.
[13] V. Maruvanchery, S. Zhe, and T. L. K. Robert, “Early construction cost and time risk assessment and evaluation of large-scale underground cavern construction projects in Singapore,” Underground Space, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 53–70, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.undsp.2018.10.002.
[14] R. Katzenbach, S. Leppla, H. Ramm, M. Seip, and H. Kuttig, “Design and Construction of Deep Foundation Systems and Retaining Structures in Urban Areas in Difficult Soil and Groundwater Conditions,” Procedia Engineering, vol. 57, pp. 540–548, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2013.04.069.
[15] J. Kang, H. Im, and J. S. Park, “The effect of load reduction on underground concrete arch structures in embedded trench installations,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, vol. 98, p. 103240, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2019.103240.
[16] J. Reilly and H. Parker, “Benefits and life-cycle costs of underground projects,” in Underground Space – The 4th Dimension of Metropolises, I. Hrdina, Ed., Taylor & Francis, 2007. doi: 10.1201/NOE0415408073.ch113.
[17] M. Wang and X. Yin, “Construction and maintenance of urban underground infrastructure with digital technologies,” Automation in Construction, vol. 141, p. 104464, Sept. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104464.
[18] A. Shibani et al., “The Effectiveness of using Modern Construction Methods as a Solution to Assist the Social Housing Shortage in the United Kingdom,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Singapore, Singapore: IEOM Society International, Mar. 2021. doi: 10.46254/AN11.20210516.
[19] A. O. Daoud, M. El Hefnawy, and H. Wefki, “Investigation of critical factors affecting cost overruns and delays in Egyptian mega construction projects,” Alexandria Engineering Journal, vol. 83, pp. 326–334, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2023.10.052.
[20] M. Marence, “Geotechnical design of underground structures,” 2003.
[21] W. R. Elrawy, G. S. Abdelhaffez, and H. A. Saleem, “STABILITY ASSESSMENT OF UNDERGROUND OPENINGS USING DIFFERENT ROCK SUPPORT SYSTEMS,” MGPB, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 49–63, 2020, doi: 10.17794/rgn.2020.1.5.
Ethics and Compliance
Indexed In
Similar Articles
Previous Article
