Affiliation:
1. Vilniaus Gedimino technikos universitetas, Vilnius, Lietuva
Abstract
This paper provides an analysis of the most important sustainability indicators for SSCM in construction and gives a detailed overview of what has been scientifically accomplished in the field to date, and identifies areas for further research. The most important sustainability indicators were also grouped and presented in the literature review into the main seven assessment groups of the SSCM construction industry and ranked by experts from Northern Italy and Lithuania in several different ways. Based on the data from the Table 3, it can be inferred that a harmonious work environment among ecological sustainability indicators appeared as the most crucial indicator for respondents. Environmental education was among the most important social indicators. In the legal group, work efficiency emerged as the most significant indicator, while in the physical group, sustainable resource use was crucial. In the political realm, economic and political stability was the most important, and among technological indicators, innovation stood out. Among economic indicators, profit was the most significant sustainability indicator for respondents. A general indicator importance method combined results obtained from expert surveys using various methods. The ranking of sustainability indicators in each group was not included in the calculation of the overall indicator importance, but the results were similar in both cases. The determined importance of indicator values could be adapted for further analysis, specifically for multicriteria evaluation, as per the conceptual model shown in Figure 1. This article provides members of the construction industry with detailed calculations and results of the evaluation of key sustainability indicators related to supply chain groups. This study explores several possible ways to measure the importance of sustainability indicators, which could provide further theoretical insights into SSCM in the construction industry and help develop an accurate sustainability index model.
Publisher
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
Reference56 articles.
1. Ahadzie, D. K., Proverbs, D. G., & Olomolaiye, P. O. (2008). Critical success criteria for mass house building projects in developing countries. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 675-687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.09.006
2. Ahi, P., Searcy, C., & Jaber, M. Y. (2018). A quantitative approach for assessing sustainability performance of corporations. Ecological Economics, 152, 336-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.06.012
3. Ali, B., Sopian, K., Chan, H. Y., Mat, S., & Zaharim, A. (2008). Key success factors in implementing renewable energy programme in Malaysia. WSEAS Transactions of Environment and Development, 4, 1141-1150.
4. Alsanad, S. (2015). Awareness, drivers, actions, and barriers of sustainable construction in Kuwait. Procedia Engineering, 118, 969-983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.538
5. Amiri, M., Hashemi-Tabatabaei, M., Ghahremanloo, M., Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Banaitis, A. (2021). A new fuzzy BWM approach for evaluating and selecting a sustainable supplier in supply chain management. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 28, 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2020.1793424