Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cleaner Engineering and Technology

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/cleaner-engineering-and-technology

Sustainable building processes’ challenges and strategies: The relative

important index approach
Joshua Ayarkwa a, De-Graft Joe Opoku b, Prince Antwi-Afari c, *, Rita Yi Man Li d
a
Department of Construction Technology and Management, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana
b
Centre for Smart Modern Construction, School of Built Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith Campus, Australia
c
Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong, SAR, China
d
Department of Economics and Finance/Sustainable Real Estate Research Center, Hong Kong Shue Yan University, Hong Kong, SAR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Sustainability has been increasingly advocated by the global construction industry due to the need to minimise
Construction projects the industry’s adverse impacts. An important area when focusing on sustainability is the issue of project man­
Project management teams agement teams since they are involved from the project’s inception to its completion. Many studies have
Project success
investigated and advocated a wide range of sustainability practices within the construction industry. However,
Sustainable building processes
Developing countries
little attention has been geared towards construction project management teams when addressing the issues of
sustainability. This study aims to provide an empirical analysis of the challenges and mitigating strategies for
enhancing project management teams’ readiness in the adoption of sustainable building processes. It does so by
undertaking an extensive critical review of literature resulting in the identification of sixteen challenges and
sixteen mitigation strategies and conducted a cross-sectional survey among 200 Ghanaian construction industry
professionals. Data obtained from the survey was analysed using descriptive statistics and relative importance
index rankings. The study revealed that inadequate training and education, unfamiliarity with green technolo­
gies, and higher initial costs of green construction practices and materials are the key challenges that hinder
project management teams’ implementation of sustainable building processes. The study further revealed the
significant mitigation strategies such as educating stakeholders on the future benefits of green buildings,
engaging personnel with green building background, and setting sustainable priorities and goals early in the
feasibility study. The value of this paper is to help project management teams to understand these challenges and
strategize to turn them into opportunities for the construction industry.

1. Introduction its benefits (Kibert, 2016). Globally, an approximate number of 171

countries have now set up their environmental management systems
Sustainability has become a catchy word for both researchers and and frameworks through ISO 14000 to solve environmental issues
industry practitioners. Ferro et al. (2017) indicated that sustainability resulting from greenhouse gas emissions (Tam et al., 2019). With the
involves environmental, economic and social issues that transcends global population expected to increase to almost 9.8 billion by 2050
organisational boundaries, and it is significantly relevant to the orga­ (United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs, UNDESA,
nisation’s operations. Review of several sustainability literature high­ 2017), there is a high probability that there would be a surge in the
lights the fact that more attention has been geared towards the demand for energy, raw materials, and other resources.
environmental aspect since it serves as the foundation for the other as­ However, understanding the sustainable building processes in the
pects of sustainability (Obringer and Nateghi, 2021). A key area when construction industry is at its infant stage of research which requires
considering environmental sustainability is sustainable construction. further exploration and study (SBCI, 2009). For instance, the concept of
Sustainable construction is an approach widely sought by govern­ sustainable building process is a new notion in developing countries
ments, environmentalists and other stakeholder groups who recognise such as Ghana and is hardly practised by the construction firms in the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J. Ayarkwa), [email protected] (D.-G. Joe Opoku), [email protected] (P. Antwi-Afari),
[email protected] (R.Y.M. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2022.100455
Received 11 April 2021; Received in revised form 9 February 2022; Accepted 18 February 2022
Available online 23 February 2022
2666-7908/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

country (Darko et al., 2018). Samari et al. (2013) opined that despite the techniques more challenging and stressful. Client and major stake­
creation of an eco-community national framework by the Ghana Green holders often abhor innovative methods of construction, which is a
Building Council, the adoption of sustainable building processes and its major barrier in the achievement of sustainable construction (Tokbolat
development is still largely unexplored in the Ghanaian construction et al., 2020; AlSanad 2015). Though Djokoto et al. (2014) reported in
industry (GCI). their study that the construction industry has a desire for sustainable
To improve the adoption of sustainable building processes, Hwang construction. The study also stressed on the inability of contractors to
and Tan (2012) were of the view that project management teams could implement sustainable practices. Asamoah and Decardi-Nelson (2014)
enhance and promote sustainable building processes since they are and Pham et al. (2020) opined that the construction industry in most
recognised as key actors in the construction industry who ensure that developing countries is reluctant to exceed the requirements of the
project objectives are met and delivered successfully. Also, project client, making the industry very sophisticated to operate. Most clients
management teams could adopt basic sustainability goals throughout will only endorse a sustainable construction practice if it falls within the
the building processes (Roe, 2012; Hills et al., 2008). The basic goals of conventional construction procedures (Iqbal et al., 2021).
sustainability for the construction industry as postulated by Kubba Opoku et al. (2019b) and Ampadu-Asiamah and Ampadu-Asiamah
(2010) consists of reducing energy consumption, safeguarding the (2013) emphasised that construction professionals also lack adequate
ecosystem, enhancing the health of occupiers, and improving produc­ training on sustainable construction principles. Djokoto et al. (2014)
tivity. The project management team can incorporate these objectives identified ten key challenges to sustainable construction namely: low
into their roles during the planning, designing and construction phases client demand for sustainable construction practices, inadequate sus­
of building projects to ensure that these basic sustainable goals are met. tainable development strategies, high cost of sustainable practices,
Several studies have been conducted to improve the understanding public ignorance of the essence of sustainable practices, lack of support
and need to explore the benefits of sustainable building processes for the from the government, lack of cooperation, high risk of investment, lack
construction industry of developing countries. For example, under­ of appropriate building regulations, high initial cost of investment and a
standing green certification and its implementation in the GCI (Agye­ lack of appropriate tools for measuring sustainable construction.
kum et al., 2019); appreciating the key drivers of environmental The adoption of sustainable construction by the construction in­
sustainability in construction (Opoku et al., 2019a), and adopting green dustry could reduce the environmental impact of a built asset
building technologies in buildings (Darko et al., 2018). Studies have also throughout its whole lifecycle and lead to the attainment of sustainable
been conducted to broaden the knowledge base of the construction in­ national development (Hossain et al., 2020; Opoku and Ahmed, 2014).
dustry on sustainable practices such as considering the barriers of Extant studies indicates that the built environment significantly affects
environmental sustainability (Opoku et al., 2019b); implementing green the living standards of the people and therefore makes the industry a key
certification process in buildings (Ampratwum et al., 2019) and un­ determiner of sustainable national development (Antwi-Afari et al.,
derstanding how organisations could perform in sustainable-led con­ 2021; Yu et al., 2021).
struction projects (Mensah et al., 2014). However, irrespective of the
existing studies, the empirical evidence of understanding project man­ 2.2. Project management teams
agement teams’ readiness in enhancing sustainable building processes
could improve the adoption and implementation of the concept in Kendall (2016) opined that most successes of construction projects
developing countries’ construction industry. are made possible at faster rates when project management teams exist
Therefore, this study provides an empirical analysis of the challenges in the construction project. Project management is the process of con­
and mitigating strategies for enhancing project management teams’ trolling the achievement of the objectives (specific objectives) of a
readiness in the adoption of sustainable building processes in the GCI. project (Association for Project Management, 2019). Kerzner (2014)
The study aims to achieve its objective by addressing (i) the challenges emphasised that project management is the field of initiating, planning,
encountered by project management teams in managing sustainable executing, controlling, and finalising the work of a team to achieve
building processes; (ii) examining the strategies to be adopted for specific goals and the project success criteria.
solving the challenging factors of sustainable building processes. According to Wu and Low (2010), technical-related issues such as
This study contributes to the knowledge of sustainable building ensuring energy efficiency, quality of construction and using less
processes by first expanding the literature base on the challenges con­ harmful materials in the building process have gained more attention in
fronting project management teams in adopting sustainable building the sustainable building process. Nonetheless, non-technical related is­
processes (section 2) and identifying the mitigating strategies for over­ sues such as human behavioural attributes are mostly overlooked by
coming the challenges in the sustainable building process. The meth­ project management teams during implementation of total quality
odology adopted for the study and tools used for analysis are elaborated management in construction processes and sustainable building
in section 3 of this paper which explains the questionnaires in details processes.
and elucidates on the participants responses in the survey. The results However, to achieve the goals of green construction, the project
and discussions are presented in section 4 while the conclusions from the management team needs to plan and achieve several criteria such as the
study are shown in section 5. attaining sustainable development throughout the project life cycle;
realising client and other stakeholders’ satisfaction without compro­
2. Literature review mising sustainable practices which should be the key underlying goal;
including measures to accomplish the aims of green building such as
2.1. Sustainability good record keeping and sourcing the right materials throughout the
project life cycle (Wu and Low, 2010).
Sustainability concept suggests a positioning between merging Shi et al. (2012) asserted that during sustainable construction the
future and present needs and assisting with the different issues that project management team should focus on activities quite different from
radiate from long term and short-term management of structures, or­ their usual practice (e.g., technologies) and other normal processes such
ganisations and resources (Kubba, 2010). Opoku et al. (2019a), in as management of stakeholders and structuring of the organisation. To
defining sustainable construction, emphasised that it is an infrastructure ensure the success of sustainable building projects, all members of the
project or development that meets the desires of the present without project management teams must perform their duties accordingly. For
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. instance, the civil engineer must facilitate sustainable project planning
Construction in most developing countries such as Ghana relies which could result in obtaining better sustainable outcomes for the
heavily on traditional methods, which makes the use of advanced project (Guix et al., 2019; Beheiry et al., 2006). Also, to hasten decision

2
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

making at the planning stage when selecting the requisite construction done because of lack of understanding (Agyekum et al., 2019). There is
materials and technologies in relation to achieving the sustainability also inadequate public education concerning the advantages of sus­
goals, contractors and suppliers need to identify the environmental tainable construction because of the paucity in sustainability studies,
consequences of construction works, equipment and materials through a specifically on issues concerning indoor environmental condition, pro­
feasibility study (He et al., 2019; Shen et al., 2010). The key role of the ductiveness, and health of occupants (Darko, 2019). Opoku et al.
project management team in a sustainable building process is to focus on (2019b) postulated that this lack of awareness is a major challenge
sustainable construction objectives, organisational relationship between associated with sustainable building processes.
parties, technical detail design, and the systematic process and proced­
ures for the sustainable management of the project (Silvius and de Graaf, 2.3.6. Lack of sustainable product information
2019; Shi et al., 2012). Lack of sustainable product information concerning sustainable
materials and sustainable construction process which needs to be un­
2.3. Project management teams’ challenges in sustainable building derstood in sustainable buildings constitute a challenge for project
processes management teams (Schöggl et al., 2017; Häkkinen and Belloni, 2011).
Builders are continually compelled to interact with specialists who have
An extensive review of the literature was conducted and the potential such knowledge. Other identified challenges are risks due to the
project management teams’ challenges in sustainable building processes different contract forms of project delivery (Koolwijk et al., 2018),
were identified. Some of the key challenges identified form the extant communication and the interests of project team members and more
review are higher costs of sustainable building processes and materials; time needed to enforce sustainable building processes on construction
construction process technicalities; long bureaucratic processes; unfa­ sites.
miliarity with sustainable technology; inadequate awareness; and lack
of sustainable product information. 2.4. Strategies to manage the challenges of sustainable building processes

2.3.1. Higher costs of sustainable building processes and materials Wu and Low (2010) stated that several challenges exist when con­
The estimated cost for sustainable building ranges from 1% to 25% struction is ongoing; the longer time it takes to construct, and the
more than conventional building (Dwaikat and Ali, 2016; Wang et al., increased activities involved could have a significant effect on the
2010). The higher cost is a result of the complexity of the design layout environment. However, several strategies could be put in place to
coupled with modelling and green practices (Wu et al., 2019). The use of manage these challenges. Hwang and Tan (2010) affirmed that adopting
sustainable building materials cost 3–4% more than using traditional sustainable construction practices and green building methods could
building materials (Zhang et al., 2011a,b). The exorbitant expenses of mitigate these challenges. Nevertheless, project management teams face
sustainable building affect the project management team since they will several challenges in adopting sustainable building processes. For
be accountable for dealing with and handing over their initiatives within example, safety management has monetary expenditure implications (Li
a pre-set budget. et al., 2019a, 2019b), which will increase the cost of sustainability.
Arditi (2009) outlined several strategies that could help individuals to
2.3.2. Construction process technicalities appreciate sustainable construction and building processes.
The processes involved in the construction of sustainable buildings
could be overly complex as they may be associated with complicated 3. Research methodology
technologies and construction procedures (Wu et al., 2019). When the
complexities in the construction processes are not communicated early, An extensive literature review was conducted to identify the poten­
the overall performance of the project management team could be tial challenges and strategies to mitigate the challenges of sustainable
compromised. Notwithstanding, to achieve the stipulated objectives of a building processes. The literature review provided a theoretical basis to
project, project management teams must implement project manage­ underpin the study and laid the foundation for developing the survey
ment systems effectively (Robichaud and Anantatmula, 2011). questionnaire. In addition, the study adopted a quantitative approach to
achieve the research objectives.
2.3.3. Long bureaucratic processes The variables obtained from the literature review were strategically
Graeber (2015) reported that the bureaucratic process for accepting embedded into closed-ended questionnaires. The structured question­
the use of new and modern technologies in construction projects could naire was organised in two parts. Part one considered the respondent
increase the project completion time. Zhang et al. (2011a,b) also out­ profile while part two delved into the challenges and the mitigating
lined the lengthy approval processes which management must go strategies to overcome the challenges faced by project management
through to seek acceptance of the construction processes for their pro­ teams in implementing sustainable budling processes. A five-point Likert
jects. This lengthy approval poses many challenges, especially to the scale ranging from ‘Strongly Disagree = 1 to Strongly Agree = 5 was
management of the project. employed on the variables in Part Two of the questionnaire. The five-
point Likert scale was used in this study since it has an advantage of
2.3.4. Unfamiliarity with sustainable technology providing results that are unambiguous and easy to interpret (Eka­
Silvius et al. (2012) explained that project management teams nayake and Ofori, 2004).
appear to have very little knowledge about sustainable construction Before the questionnaires were administered, a two-step piloting
materials and processes. Darko et al. (2018) emphasised that unfamil­ procedure was used to access its appropriateness for the intended pur­
iarity with sustainable technologies adversely affects the overall project pose. First, an international expert in sustainable building processes
outcome and performance. Project management teams should ensure with 10 years working experience was employed to consider the con­
that actual performance does not deviate from planned performance struction and wording of the questionnaire to ensure that it was free of
(Barbosa et al., 2021). ambiguous expressions and that right terms were used. Second, in the
piloting process, interviews were conducted with 15 industry players
2.3.5. Inadequate awareness (Architects, Engineers, Quantity Surveyors, and Project Managers)
The conventional notion of how a building must be constructed ex­ within the construction industry who had experience in sustainable
ists, but many builders do not want to engage in sustainable construction building processes within the Ghanaian context. These professionals also
because of the perceived risks (Kibert, 2016). Environmental auditing had to check the suitability of the questions asked and figure out if to the
adoption which is a beneficial sustainable building practice is mostly not best of their knowledge any challenges and strategies have been

3
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

omitted. The professionals gave some encouraging feedbacks which ranged from 0 to 1.
resulted in the merging of some of the challenges and strategies.
Following these feedbacks, the two-part questionnaire was finalized and 4. Results and discussions
sent out. Similar piloting had been used in other sustainable building-
related studies (Chan et al., 2017; Zhao et al., 2015). A total of 200 professionals from building construction and consul­
The population of the study included professionals (i.e., Building tancy firms in Ghana were involved in the study. Adopting descriptive
Consultants and Contractors) in Ghana. Respondents within the Building statistics on the demographic section of the questionnaires it was
Contractors category were selected from Class D1 building contractors. revealed that 31.0% of the respondents were Quantity Surveyors, 25.0%
Also, respondents within the Consultants group were selected from the were Architects, 23.0% were Project Engineers, and 21.0% were Project
Ghana Institute of Architects (GIA), Ghana Institute of Surveyors (GhIS), Managers. Majority of the respondents were master’s degree holders
and the Institution of Engineering and Technology Ghana (IETG). The (62.5%) and bachelor’s degree holders (24.5%) respectively. In addi­
selection of respondents was dependent on the respondents’ possession tion, more than half of the respondents had over 10 years of working
of adequate knowledge and expertise in sustainable construction. experience. This information shows that the respondents were knowl­
There were difficulties in obtaining the exact number of D1 building edgeable enough to provide meaningful information required for the
contractors in Ghana, so the non-probability sampling techniques were study.
used. The non-probability sampling technique could be used to arrive at
a representative sample (Antwi-Afari et al., 2018; Zhao et al., 2015; 4.1. Data normality test
Patton, 2001). Wilkins (2011) opined that non-probability sampling
techniques could be used when it is not possible to use a random sam­ Prior to the analysis, the Cronbach’s Alpha Test was conducted to
pling method to select respondents from the population, but rather the check the internal consistency of the scale used for the rating of the
willingness of the respondents to participate in the study. Purposive and various challenges and strategies. A score of 0.70 and above shows the
snowball sampling techniques were used in this study to arrive at an scale being used for the rating is internally consistent (Bonett and
effective and valid overall sample size. Several studies such as Owu­ Wright, 2014). The result of this test was 0.853 which means there was
su-Manu et al. (2018); Mao et al. (2015); Zhang et al., 2011a,b have also reliability with the Likert scale used to rate the challenges and strategies.
used these techniques in construction engineering and management As many statistical tests require a normal distribution of the data (Kim,
related studies. Based on the sampling techniques, a total of 50 ques­ 2015), the Shapiro-Wilk test was used first to test the data normality
tionnaires were administered to D1 building contractors. (Ferretti et al., 2017; Hsu et al., 2000). The null hypothesis of the
Within the Ghana Institute of Architects, 760 members were iden­ Shapiro-Wilk test is that ‘the data were normally distributed’. The
tified to be of good standing based on the list available. Out of this common alpha value, which tested normality (i.e., 0.05), was used in
number 130 were identified through the purposive and snowball sam­ conducting the Shapiro-Wilk test. If the p-value produced by the test is
pling techniques to be working with various consultancy firms and with lower than the selected alpha value, then the null hypothesis should be
knowledge concerning sustainable construction. All the 130 respondents rejected, and we may conclude that the data are not normally distributed
were invited to partake in the survey. (see Table 1).
The Ghana Institute of Surveyors include members with different In this study, all the p-values produced by the Shapiro-Wilk test were
backgrounds such as valuation and estate surveying division, land lower than .05 (Tables 2 and 3), indicating that the data collected are not
surveying division, and quantity surveying division. Based on required normally distributed. This is an expected result since data collected from
information, professionals within the quantity surveying division were samples that are not very large are usually not normally distributed
selected and sampled for the study. The records of the Ghana Institute of (Hwang et al., 2017; Shan et al., 2017). The non-normal distribution of
Surveyors indicate that 387 quantity surveyors are working with various the data influenced the selection of statistical tests for analysing the
consultancy firms and are in good standing with the institution. data.
Adopting purposive and snowball sampling techniques, 120 respondents
were identified to meet the criteria and were invited for the survey. 4.2. Inter-group comparison
The Institution of Engineering and Technology Ghana is a profes­
sional body made up of professional members with all engineering Since the respondents were drawn from different professional
backgrounds. For the purposes of this study, those members (i.e., civil, backgrounds (i.e., Architects, Engineers, Quantity Surveyors, and Proj­
and building) who fell within the boundaries of this study were ect Managers), it was important to check the significant differences
considered. Within the institution, 52 construction professionals, 15 between them by conducting an inter-group comparison (Shan et al.,
civil engineering professionals, and 16 building engineering pro­ 2017).
fessionals are registered with various consultancy firms and are in good To conduct an inter-group comparison, two dissimilar statistical
standing. Using purposive and snowball sampling techniques, 30 of
these members (i.e., civil and building) who were in good standing
Table 1
based on the list available were invited to partake in the survey. Challenges and Strategies in sustainable construction and building processes.
A total of 330 questionnaires were administered (280 to building
Challenges Strategies
consultants and 50 to D1 building contractors) and 200 questionnaires
with valid responses were returned, corresponding to a response rate of Environmental • Implementation of environmental improvement system
60.61%. This response rate was possible because of the personal iden­ impact • Implementation of effective waste management systems
• Ensuring energy efficiency at the various workplaces
tification of these professionals. Cost-saving • The adoption of the right construction techniques that
The questionnaire data were analysed using IBM SPSS v22. The five- could help avoid unnecessary cost
point Likert scale was transformed into relative importance indices (RII) Health and safety • Implementing healthy and safety management systems
using the relative index ranking technique priorities to rank the chal­ Physical resources • The adoption of effective storage management systems.
The use of just-in-time scheduling
lenges and strategies as perceived by the respondents in the study
•
Training and • Regular conferences for instructing inexperienced
(Gambo and Gomez, 2015). RII was calculated based on the following education constructing practices and targets for all website online
∑
equation: RII = W/A x N, where W is the weighting given to each workforces
factor by respondents ranging from (1–5), N is the total number of re­ • Education and training periods for subcontractor’s
∑ development
spondents, is the total frequency in the sample and A is the highest
weight (5 in this case). From the equation above, the RII values obtained Source: Arditi (2009)

4
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

Table 2 Table 3
Challenges faced by Project Management Teams in sustainable building Mitigating strategies for enhancing project management teams’ readiness in
processes. sustainable building processes.
Challenges Total SD RII Rank p- p- Mitigating Strategies Total SD RII Rank p- p-
value value value valve

Inadequate training and 200 0.882 0.856 1 .000a .647b Educating stakeholders on 200 0.899 0.872 1 .000a .399b
education the future benefits of
Unfamiliarity with green 200 0.667 0.822 2 .000a .474b green buildings
technologies Engaging personnel with 200 1.072 0.844 2 .000a .469b
Higher initial costs of green 200 1.013 0.789 3 .000a .175b green building
construction practices background
and materials Setting sustainable 200 1.079 0.817 3 .000a .496b
Slow tendering and 200 1.194 0.789 4 .000a .312b priorities and goals early
procurement processes in feasibility study
Unaddressed health and 200 1.330 0.789 5 .000a .828b Establishing basic 200 1.014 0.800 4 .000a .626b
safety issues communication
Inappropriate policies and 200 0.937 0.783 6 .000a procedures
instruments for steering Careful choice of building 200 0.999 0.794 5 .000a .731b
sustainable development methods
More time required 200 1.326 0.778 7 .000a .364b Conducting planning and 200 0.950 0.778 6 .000a .242b
implementing strategy meetings
sustainable building Implementing health and 200 1.142 0.761 7 .000a .768b
process on site safety management
Lack of awareness 200 1.199 0.772 8 .000a .272b system
Lack of communication 200 1.130 0.750 9 .000a .216b Interest free lending 200 0.920 0.761 8 .001a .249b
among project team Conduct toll-box meeting 200 1.150 0.756 9 .000a .221b
members regularly
Long process phases and 200 1.095 0.733 10 .000a .539b Regular meetings 200 0.906 0.750 10 .000a .158b
scheduling of tasks Government to provide 200 1.531 0.744 11 .000a .467b
Risk due to different 200 1.204 0.717 11 .001a .764b incentives
contract forms of project Conducting charrette to 200 0.980 0.739 12 .000a .190b
delivery establishing basic
Lengthy approval process 200 1.230 0.711 12 .002a .604b communication
for new green Public and market demand 200 0.920 0.739 13 .000a .261b
technologies and for green buildings
recycled materials Insistence from client 200 1.132 0.689 14 .001a .664b
Technical difficulty during 200 0.845 0.694 13 .000a .695b Subsidy from government 200 1.178 0.678 15 .001a .389b
the construction process Bonuses provided for staff 200 1.222 0.672 16 .002a .111b
Demand and the role of 200 1.334 0.672 14 .000a .120b
clients Source: Field data.
Difficulty in obtaining the 200 1.261 0.661 15 .002a .327b Note: SD = Standard deviation. a The Shapiro-Wilk test result is significant at the
required material significance level of 0.05 (p-value < .05). b The Kruskal-Wallis H test result is
resources significant at the significance level of 0.05 (p-value < .05).
Lack of sustainable product 200 1.085 0.656 16 .006a .415b
information
4.3.1. Inadequate training and education
Note: SD = Standard deviation. a The Shapiro-Wilk test result is significant at the The implementation of every practice in the built environment is
significance level of 0.05 (p-value < .05). b The Kruskal-Wallis H test result is dependent on the amount of information available to the responsible
significant at the significance level of 0.05 (p-value < .05). parties as a result of training and education. Sustainability in the GCI is a
Source: Field data
relatively new phenomenon and most practitioners have not acquired
the requisite knowledge and training to equip them with the skills
techniques could be employed, namely, analysis of variance (ANOVA) needed for its implementation. Based on this there is the need to educate
and Kruskal-Wallis H test. ANOVA is a commonly applied parametric these professionals about sustainable building processes. This is feasible
test for checking differences between mean scores from three or more if the professionals adhere to the recommendations presented by Chan
groups; it has an assumption that the population from which the sample et al. (2018) regarding the need to develop a comprehensive national
was drawn is normally distributed (Pallant, 2013). As a non-parametric sustainability database to professionals with accurate and updated in­
alternative to ANOVA, the Kruskal-Wallis H test, on the contrary, does formation regarding sustainable building processes. Robichaud et al.
not have any stringent requirements; it also does not make any (2011) asserted that the implementation of sustainable building pro­
assumption about the underlying distribution of the population (Pallant, cesses is dependent on the amount of training and education that con­
2013; Field, 2013). Therefore, owing to the non-normal distribution of struction professionals obtain. The implementation of the requisite
the data, the Kruskal-Wallis H test was chosen over ANOVA for the training and education could help project management teams to select
inter-group comparison in this study (Tables 2 and 3). proper designs and construction materials which would ensure sus­
tainability and circularity of materials at end-of-life (Sauvé et al., 2016).
In a similar study, Samari et al. (2013) was of the view that the lack of
4.3. Project management teams’ challenges in sustainable building
professional knowledge and training act as a barrier to the imple­
processes
mentation of sustainable building processes in developing countries.
Project management teams in most developing country appears to have
In Table 2, the variables were ranked based on their RII values.
little understanding of sustainable building processes (Silvius et al.,
Where two or more variables have the same RII values, the variable with
2012).
the least standard deviation was ranked higher (Ahadzie, 2007). From
the analysis, lack of training and education was ranked first with an RII
4.3.2. Unfamiliarity with green building technologies
of 0.856. Unfamiliarity with green building technology was ranked
Zhang et al. (2011) opined that a project management team is
second with an RII of 0.822 while the higher cost of green construction
required to perform according to the requirement of the project
practices and materials ranked third with an RII of 0.789.

5
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

owner/client. However, when project management teams are unfamiliar indicated that there is lack of information regarding the full benefits that
with the technologies used for attaining green building, performance sustainable practices can offer especially in developing countries and
outcome could be affected. The modern technologies used in attaining this hinders their willingness to invest in such practices. The experts
sustainability are complex and requires project management teams to be ranked this variable high because it could envisage that owners under­
abreast with them to ensure their implementation (Wu et al., 2019). The standing of sustainable building process could have rebound effects in
inability of project management teams to understand how these new influencing the designs they agree on by project management teams
technologies and tools such as Building Information Modelling, artificial during the early stages of the project. Wu et al. (2019) opined that
intelligence, internet of things, and virtual reality operate can hinder the training and educating stakeholders would reduce the challenge of
project management teams’ ability to achieve sustainable building project management teams in convincing stakeholders to undertake
performance (Silvius et al., 2012). The existence of little knowledge in green and sustainable building processes.
operating the requisite tools and technologies to ensure sustainable
building is a major challenge which needs to be addressed to enhance 4.4.2. Engaging personnel with green building background
project management teams’ readiness in sustainable building processes The complexities and cost implications of sustainable building pro­
(Darko et al., 2018). Shi et al. (2013) also indicated that industry as­ cess requires that experts with backgrounds in green building are con­
sociations could share relevant sustainable project information and its sulted from the beginning of the construction project (Wu et al., 2019).
benefits among its members to boost their desire to implement these Nduka and Sotumbo (2014) highlighted that investing sustainable
practices. buildings present benefits to the buyers and consumers, and also present
opportunities to other stakeholders in the industry. The experts of the
4.3.3. Higher initial costs of green construction practices and materials survey also agreed that project management teams would have less
Sustainability is a concept that requires a long-term view to appre­ challenges when they are working with a team of experts who under­
ciate its cost benefits where considerations must be given to the initial stand sustainable building processes and have a green building back­
cost and the ongoing costs of the project. In the long term, the cost ground. Such a team of experts could bring their nonpareil skills on the
benefits of sustainable construction can be realised, but the initial cap­ job and enhance the reduction of rework and waste and give incredible
ital outlay in constructing a sustainable building is high regardless of the recommendations when it comes to material choice, energy usage and
substantial building processes adopted (Wu et al., 2019). Dwaikat and ensuring efficiency of operations during construction (Hwang et al.,
Ali (2016) and Dobson et al. (2013) argued that there exists a lag in the 2016).
extent to which sustainable practices are implemented by the project
management teams to enhance the sustainable performance of build­ 4.4.3. Setting sustainable priorities and goals early in feasibility study
ings. This lag was attributed to the view held by clients and other To ensure sustainability of construction projects, implementing the
stakeholders on the initial cost of green construction. Most stakeholders key sustainable principles from the feasibility stage of projects cannot be
do not appreciate the need to spend high amount of money on sustain­ overemphasised (Darko, 2019). This is because at this stage there is little
able building processes when traditional methods of construction in or no cost implications when changes are made to the construction
comparative nature are costing less (Hwang and Tan, 2012). It therefore drawings or the choice of materials and even the processes and concepts
becomes a challenge to the project management team to convince clients to adopt for the building (Wu et al., 2019). Project management teams
and stakeholders of the ensuing benefits of adopting sustainable build­ could also benefit from set sustainability goals which could enhance
ing processes. The higher initial cost of green construction practices then their decisions and initiatives in presenting and handing over projects
becomes a key barrier to implementing sustainable building processes within pre-set budgets (Zhang et al., 2011a,b).
and a challenge to the project management teams which influences their
readiness to engage in sustainable building processes in the first place 4.5. A model for enhancing project management teams’ readiness in
(Zhang et al., 2011a,b). This corroborates with a study by Chan et al. sustainable building processes
(2017) in which one of the key challenges to the implementation of
sustainable building processes in developing countries was identified as To elaborate the findings of the study, the study presents the key
the concern of cost of green construction. findings in a conceptual model (Fig. 1). The conceptual model shows the
main challenges of project management teams along four key compo­
4.4. Mitigating strategies for enhancing project management teams’ nents viz competency, technological maturity, cost, time and safety, and
readiness in sustainable building processes documentation. These four key components encompass all the chal­
lenges which are faced by project management teams in implementing
Ahadzie (2007) was of the view that variables with indices greater sustainable building processes in the GCI. The four key components are
than 0.700 should be considered as keen and having tremendous impact the aggregative names adopted for classifying the challenges faced
on the measured dimension. Therefore, inferring from Table 3, it could during sustainable building processes (Darko, 2019; Djokoto et al.,
be deduced that educating owners on the future benefit of green 2014). To ensure sustainable building processes, the study also identi­
building was ranked first by the experts of the survey with an RII of fied 16 mitigation strategies which when followed could help eliminate
0.872. Engaging personnel with green building background was also most of the challenges and lead towards the implementation of sus­
ranked second with an RII of 0.844 while setting sustainable priorities tainable building processes in construction industry of developing
and goals early in feasibility study was ranked third by the respondents countries by project management teams. These mitigating strategies are
with an RII of 0.817. Inspecting Table 3 further, all the variables from critical in leading project management teams towards a sustainable
4th to 13th had indices greater than 0.700, showing their importance as building process.
key strategies to overcome the challenges faced by project management
teams in sustainable building processes in the GCI context. 5. Conclusions

4.4.1. Educating stakeholders on the future benefits of green buildings This study examines the challenges and mitigating strategies for
To mitigate the challenges faced by project management teams in enhancing project management teams’ readiness in adopting sustainable
implementing sustainable building processes in the GCI, it was identified building processes. The study highlights the challenges facing project
that educating stakeholders on the future benefits of green buildings management teams in sustainable building processes in developing
could enhance the implementation of the concept irrespective of the countries to comprise of inadequate training and education, unfamil­
high initial cost (Opoku et al., 2019a). Simpeh and Smallwood (2015) iarity with green technologies, and higher costs for green construction

6
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

Fig. 1. Conceptual model for enhancing project management teams’ readiness in sustainable building processes.

practice and materials. Also, the study expatiated that educating sustainable building process from concepts such as teams’ competencies
stakeholders on the future benefits of green buildings; engaging and technological maturity, which could have enhanced the challenges
personnel with green building background and setting sustainable pri­ and mitigation strategies to produce a much-streamlined findings. Also,
orities and goals early in feasibility study as key strategies to mitigate not purposefully considering the study from these concepts means that
the challenges faced by project management teams in sustainable some key variables might have not been explicated in detailed and this
building processes. should be considered when interpreting the findings.
The findings of this study hold significant practical implications since Therefore, future study could be done by considering the challenges
identifying that most project team members are unfamiliar with sus­ and mitigating strategies for improving project management teams’
tainable building processes and also have inadequate training, educating readiness from key concepts such as teams’ competence, documenta­
construction professionals will aid in the successful implementation of tion, and technological maturity and adopting a mixed method approach
sustainable practices within the construction industry. The study also to increase the robustness of the findings and implications to other
provides stakeholders in the construction industry a guided approach on developing countries.
how to mitigate the challenges in adopting sustainable building prac­
tices through the adoption of the proposed strategies. Stakeholders
which this study affects include clients, contractors, designers, govern­ Declaration of competing interest
ment officials and users. For clients and government officials, strategies
such as educating on the future benefits of green buildings will prepare The authors have no conflicts to declare.
them to appreciate this novel concept and propose their usage in
building projects. While for contractors and designers, the need to References
establish basic communication procedures, setting sustainability prior­
ities in the feasibility study and ensuring that professionals with back­ Agyekum, K., Adinyira, E., Baiden, B., Ampratwum, G., Duah, D., 2019. Barriers to the
adoption of green certification of buildings: a thematic analysis of verbatim
ground in green building are engaged for construction could boost the comments from built environment professionals. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 17 (5), 1035.
implementation of the concept in developing countries construction Ahadzie, D. K. (2007). A model for predicting the performance of project managers in
industry. mass house building projects in Ghana.
AlSanad, S., 2015. Awareness, drivers, actions, and barriers to sustainable construction
For theory, the present study is unique, since it adopted quantitative in Kuwait. Procedia Eng. 118 (1), 969–983.
analysis which enhances the reproducibility of the findings with mini­ Ampadu-Asiamah, A.D., Ampadu-Asiamah, O.K., 2013. Management of government
mal subjective judgement. The study also solicited the expertise of 200 funded construction projects in Ghana: stakeholders’ perspective of causes of delays
in construction of public buildings. Develop. Countr. Stud. 3 (12), 149–156.
construction professionals who have keen knowledge in sustainable Ampratwum, G., Agyekum, K., Adinyira, E., Duah, D., 2019. A framework for the
building process. The findings from the analysis could be said to be a implementation of green certification of buildings in Ghana. International Journal of
good representation of understanding the challenges and measures to Construction Management 1–15.
Antwi-Afari, P., Owusu-Manu, D.G., Pärn, E.A., Edwards, D.J., 2018. Exploratory
mitigate the challenges facing project management teams in sustainable
investigation of challenges and expectations of innovative quantity surveyors and
building processes in Ghana. Although several studies have been done quantity surveying firms in Ghana. International Journal of Technology 9 (7),
around sustainability in the construction industry, the novelty of this 1480–1489.
Antwi-Afari, P., Owusu-Manu, D.G., Simons, B., Debrah, C., Ghansah, F.A., 2021.
study lies in its ability to draw a relationship between project manage­
Sustainability guidelines to attaining smart sustainable cities in developing
ment teams’ readiness and sustainable building processes in the countries: a Ghanaian context. Sustainable Futures 3, 100044.
perspective of the construction industry of developing countries. Arditi, D., 2009. Ongkasuwan, D. And committee on management practices in
Although the results provide a comprehensive understanding of the construction (MPIC) of the ASCE construction Institute duties and responsibilities of
construction managers: perceptions of parties involved in construction. J. Construct.
challenges that project management teams face and the strategies to Eng. Manag. 135 (12), 1370–1374.
mitigate those challenges, the factors identified and ranked in the study Association for Project Management, 2019. Project management. available at: https
are not exhaustive to encompass all key issues in this domain relating to ://www.apm.org.uk/resources/what-is-project-management. (Accessed September
2019). accessed.
the developing countries’ context. The understanding of the study Asamoah, R.O., Decardi-Nelson, I., 2014. Promoting trust and confidence in the
context is paramount, and this must be taken into consideration when construction industry in Ghana through the development and enforcement of ethics.
interpreting the results from the study. Also, the study did not strate­ Information and knowledge 3 (4), 63–68.
Barbosa, A.P.F.P.L., Salerno, M.S., de Souza Nascimento, P.T., Albala, A., Maranzato, F.
gically consider the readiness of the project management teams in P., Tamoschus, D., 2021. Configurations of project management practices to enhance

7
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

the performance of open innovation R&D projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 39 (2), Li, R.Y.M., Tang, B., Chau, K.W., 2019b. Sustainable construction safety knowledge
128–138. sharing: a partial least square-structural equation modelling and a feedforward
Beheiry, S.M., Chong, W.K., Haas, C.T., 2006. Examining the business impact of owner neural network approach. Sustainability 11 (20), 5831.
commitment to sustainability. J. Construct. Eng. Manag. 132 (4), 384–392. Mao, C., Shen, Q., Pan, W., Ye, K., 2015. Major barriers to off-site construction: the
Bonett, D.G., Wright, T.A., 2014. Cronbach’s Alpha reliability: interval estimation, developer’s perspective in China. J. Manag. Eng. 31 (3) https://doi.org/10.1061/
hypothesis testing, and sample size planning. Journal of Organisational Behaviour (ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000246.
36 (1), 3–15. Mensah, S., Ayarkwa, J., Nani, G., 2014. Towards enabling construction organizations’
Chan, A.P., Darko, A., Ameyaw, E.E., Owusu-Manu, D.G., 2017. Barriers affecting the adaptation to environmentally sustainable construction in developing countries.
adoption of green building technologies. J. Manag. Eng. 33 (3), 4016057. American Strategy in The War on Terror: An African Perspective 1 (8), 84.
Chan, A.P.C., Darko, A., Olanipekun, A.O., Ameyaw, E.E., 2018. Critical barriers to green Nduka, D.O., Sotumbo, A.S., 2014. Stakeholders perceptions on the awareness of green
building technologies in developing countries: the case of Ghana. J. Clean. Prod. building rating systems and accruable benefits in construction projects in Nigeria.
172, 1067–1079, 2018. J. Sustain. Dev. Afr. 16 (7), 118–130.
Darko, A., 2019. Adoption of Green Building Technologies in Ghana: Development of a Obringer, R., Nateghi, R., 2021. What makes a city ‘smart’in the Anthropocene? A critical
Model of Green Building Technologies and Issues Influencing Their Adoption, Doctor review of smart cities under climate change. Sustain. Cities Soc. 75, 103278.
of Philosophy Thesis. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong available Opoku, A., Ahmed, V., 2014. Embracing sustainability practices in UK construction
at: http://ira.lib.polyu.edu.hk/handle/10397/80543. (Accessed 31 July 2021). organizations: challenges facing intra-organizational leadership. Built. Environ. Proj.
accessed. Asset. Manag. 4 (1), 90–107.
Darko, A., Chan, A.P.C., Yang, Y., Shan, M., He, B.J., Gou, Z., 2018. Influences of Opoku, D.G.J., Agyekum, K., Ayarkwa, J., 2019a. Drivers of environmental sustainability
barriers, drivers, and promotion strategies on green building technologies adoption of construction projects: a thematic analysis of verbatim comments from built
in developing countries: the Ghanaian case. J. Clean. Prod. 200, 687–703. environment consultants. International Journal of Construction Management 1–9.
Djokoto, S.D., Dadzie, J., Ohemeng-Ababio, E., 2014. Barriers to sustainable construction https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1678865.
in the Ghanaian construction industry: consultants perspectives. J. Sustain. Dev. 7 Opoku, D.G.J., Ayarkwa, J., Agyekum, K., 2019b. Barriers to environmental
(1), 134. sustainability of construction projects. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment 8
Dobson, D.W., Sourani, A., Sertyesilisik, B., Tunstall, A., 2013. Sustainable construction: (4), 292–306. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-08-2018-0040.
analysis of its costs and benefits. Am. J. Civ. Eng. Architect. 1 (2), 32–38. Owusu-Manu, D.G., Antwi-Afari, M.F., Edwards, D.J., 2018. Expanding understanding on
Dwaikat, L.N., Ali, K.N., 2016. Green buildings cost premium: a review of empirical attributes of innovation champions: firms and individual perspectives of professional
evidence. Energy Build. 110 (1), 396–403. quantity surveying firms. Am. J. Civ. Eng. 6 (6), 178–184.
Ekanayake, L.L., Ofori, G., 2004. Building waste assessment score: design-based tool. Pallant, J., 2013. SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using
Build. Environ. 39 (7), 851–861. SPSS. McGraw-Hill Education, UK.
Ferretti, G., Keiblinger, K.M., Zimmermann, M., Di Giuseppe, D., Faccini, B., Patton, M.Q., 2001. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Components. Sage, Thousand
Colombani, N., Mastrocicco, M., 2017. High resolution short-term investigation of Oaks, CA.
soil CO2, N2O, NOx and NH3 emissions after different chabazite zeolite Pham, H., Kim, S.Y., Luu, T.V., 2020. Managerial perceptions on barriers to sustainable
amendments. Appl. Soil Ecol. 119, 138–144. construction in developing countries: vietnam case. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 22 (4),
Ferro, C., Padin, C., Svensson, G., Varela, J.C.S., Wagner, B., Høgevold, N.M., 2017. 2979–3003.
Validating a framework of stakeholders in connection to business sustainability Robichaud, L.B., Anantatmula, V.S., 2011. Greening project management practices for
efforts in supply chains. J. Bus. Ind. Market. sustainable construction. J. Manag. Eng. 27 (1), 48–57.
Field, A., 2013. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, fourth ed. Sage, London, Roe, E., 2012. Taking Complexity Seriously: Policy Analysis, Triangulation and
UK. Sustainable Development. Springer Science & Business Media.
Gambo, M.M., Gomez, C.P., 2015. Project characteristics for design and build Samari, M., Ghodrati, N., Esmaeilifar, R., Olfat, P., Shafiei, M.W.M., 2013. The
procurement in Malaysian construction industry. J. Eng. Technol. 6 (1), 144–154. investigation of the barriers in developing green building in Malaysia. Mod. Appl.
Graeber, D., 2015. The Utopia of Rules: on Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Sci. 7 (2), 1–12.
Bureaucracy. Melville House. Sauvé, S., Bernard, S., Sloan, P., 2016. Environmental sciences, sustainable development
Guix, M., Font, X., Bonilla-Priego, M.J., 2019. Materiality: stakeholder accountability and circular economy: alternative concepts for trans-disciplinary research.
choices in hotels’ sustainability reports. Int. J. Contemp. Hospit. Manag. 31 (6), Environmental Development 17, 48–56.
2321–2338. SBCI, U., 2009. Sustainable Buildings & Climate Initiative. Buildings And Climate Change:
Häkkinen, T., Belloni, K., 2011. Barriers and drivers for sustainable building. Build. Res. Summary for Decision Makers.
Inf. 39 (3), 239–255. Schöggl, J.P., Baumgartner, R.J., Hofer, D., 2017. Improving sustainability performance
He, Q., Chen, X., Wang, G., Zhu, J., Yang, D., Liu, X., Li, Y., 2019. Managing social in early phases of product design: a checklist for sustainable product development
responsibility for sustainability in megaprojects: an innovation transitions tested in the automotive industry. J. Clean. Prod. 140, 1602–1617.
perspective on success. J. Clean. Prod. 241, 118395. Shan, M., Hwang, B.G., Wong, K.S.N., 2017. A preliminary investigation of underground
Hills, M.J., Fox, P.W., Skitmore, M., Hon, C.K., Fong, P.S.W., 2008. The role of project residential buildings: advantages, disadvantages, and critical risks. Tunn. Undergr.
managers in construction industry development. AACE Int. Trans. DE141. Space Technol. 70, 19–29.
Hossain, M.U., Ng, S.T., Antwi-Afari, P., Amor, B., 2020. Circular economy and the Shen, L.Y., Tam, V.W., Tam, L., Ji, Y.B., 2010. Project feasibility study: the key to
construction industry: existing trends, challenges and prospective framework for successful implementation of sustainable and socially responsible construction
sustainable construction. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 130, 109948. management practice. J. Clean. Prod. 18 (3), 254–259.
Hsu, A.T., Ho, L., Ho, S., Hedman, T., 2000. Immediate response of glenohumeral Shi, Q., Zuo, J., Zillante, G., 2012. Exploring the management of sustainable construction
abduction range of motion to a caudally directed translational mobilization: a fresh at the programme level: a Chinese case study. Construct. Manag. Econ. 30 (6),
cadaver simulation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 81 (11), 1511–1516. 425–440.
Hwang, B.G., Tan, J.S., 2010. Sustainable project management for green construction: Shi, Q., Zuo, J., Huang, R., Huang, J., Pullen, S., 2013. Identifying the critical factors for
challenges, impact and solutions. World Construction Conference–Global Challenges green construction-an empirical study in Ghana. Habitat Int. 40, 1–8, 2013.
in Construction Industry, Colombo, June 28, 171–179, 30. Simpeh, E., Smallwood, J., 2015. Factors influencing the growth of green building in the
Hwang, B.G., Tan, J.S., 2012. Green building project management: obstacles and South African construction industry. In: Proceeding of Smart and Sustainable Built
solutions for sustainable development. Sustain. Dev. 20 (5), 335–349. Environment Conference. Pretoria, 9–11 December.
Hwang, B.G., Shan, M., Xie, S., Chi, S., 2017. Investigating residents’ perceptions of Silvius, A.G., de Graaf, M., 2019. Exploring the project manager’s intention to address
green retrofit program in mature residential estates: the case of Singapore. Habitat sustainability in the project board. J. Clean. Prod. 208, 226–1240.
Int. 63, 103–112, 2017. Silvius, G., Schipper, R.O.N., Van Den Brink, J., Planko, J., 2012. Sustainability in Project
Hwang, B.G., Zhu, L., Ming, J.T.T., 2016. Factors affecting productivity in green building Management. Gower Publishing, Ltd.
construction projects: the case of Singapore. J. Manag. Eng. 33 (3) https://doi.org/ Tam, V.W.Y., Le, K.N., Tran, C.N.N., Illankoon, I.M.C.S., 2019. A review on international
10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000499. ecological legislation on energy consumption: greenhouse gas emission
Iqbal, M., Ma, J., Ahmad, N., Hussain, K., Usmani, M.S., Ahmad, M., 2021. Sustainable management. International Journal of Construction Management. https://doi.org/
Construction through Energy Management Practices in Developing Economies: an 10.1080/15623599.2019.1576259.
Analysis of Barriers in the Construction Sector. Environmental Science and Pollution Tokbolat, S., Karaca, F., Durdyev, S., Calay, R.K., 2020. Construction professionals’
Research, pp. 1–31. perspectives on drivers and barriers of sustainable construction. Environ. Dev.
Kendall, J., 2016. 4 Keys to Effective Construction Project Management. Sustain. 22 (5), 4361–4378.
Kerzner, H., 2014. Project recovery: Case studies and techniques for overcoming project United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs, UNDESA, 2017. The world
failure. John Wiley & Sons. population prospects: the 2017 revision. Available at: https://www.un.org/develop
Kibert, C.J., 2016. Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery. John ment/desa/en/news/population/world-population-prospects-2017.html. (Accessed
Wiley & Sons. 20 July 2020). accessed.
Kim, T.K., 2015. T test as a parametric statistic. Kor. J. Anesthesiol. 68 (6), 540–546. Wang, N., Chang, Y.C., Nunn, C., 2010. Lifecycle assessment for sustainable design
Koolwijk, J.S.J., van Oel, C.J., Wamelink, J.W.F., Vrijhoef, R., 2018. Collaboration and options of a commercial building in Shanghai. Build. Environ. 45 (6), 1415–1421.
integration in project-based supply chains in the construction industry. J. Manag. Wilkins, J.R., 2011. Construction workers’ perceptions of health and safety training
Eng. 34 (3), 4018001. programmes. Construct. Manag. Econ. 29 (10), 1017–1026.
Kubba, S., 2010. Green Construction Project Management and Cost Oversight. Wu, P., Low, S.P., 2010. Project management and green buildings: lessons from the
Butterworth-Heinemann. rating systems. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 136 (2), 64–70.
Li, R.Y.M., Chau, K.W., Zeng, F.F.J., 2019a. Ranking of risks for the existing and new Wu, Z., Jiang, M., Cai, Y., Wang, H., Li, S., 2019. What hinders the development of green
building works. Sustainability 11 (10), 2863. building? An investigation of China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 16 (17), 3140.

8
J. Ayarkwa et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 7 (2022) 100455

Yu, J., Yang, C., Zhang, S., Zhai, D., Wang, A., Li, J., 2021. The effect of the built Zhang, X., Shen, L., Wu, Y., 2011b. Green strategy for gaining competitive advantage in
environment on older men’ s and women’ s leisure-time physical activity in the mid- housing development: a China study. J. Clean. Prod. 19 (2), 157–167.
scale city of jinhua, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 18 (3), 1039. Zhao, X., Hwang, B.G., Pheng Low, S., Wu, P., 2015. Reducing hindrances to enterprise
Zhang, X., Platten, A., Shen, L., 2011a. Green property development practice in China: risk management implementation in construction firms. J. Construct. Eng. Manag.
costs and barriers. Build. Environ. 46 (11), 2153–2160. 141 (3), 04014083.