4.7 Article

Green, lean, Six Sigma barriers at a glance: A case from the construction sector of Pakistan

期刊

BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 161, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106225

关键词

Sustainability; Construction process; Green construction process (GCP); Lean construction process (LCP); Six sigma construction process (SCP); Barriers; Interpretive structural modelling (ISM); MICMAC analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The construction sector consumes a massive amount of resources, produces a large volume of emissions, and generates large-scale waste. Earlier studies considered green, lean, and Six Sigma (GLS) approaches as being critical in the construction process for the optimum use of resources, cost reduction, quality improvement, and sustainability. Pakistan's construction sector is struggling to implement sustainable and improved construction processes. This work attempts to analyse barriers to the GLS construction process (GLSCP) through a literature review and expert opinion. During brainstorming sessions, a group of experts validated the barriers and developed contextual relationships among them using a questionnaire. An 11-level hierarchal model was developed by implementing interpretive structural modelling (ISM) methodology. The Matriced Impacts Croise's Multiplication Appliqee a UN Classement (MICMAC) technique was applied to delineate these barriers into the categories of 'driving', 'linkage', and 'dependent'. While the findings indicate that all barriers are critical and play a role in hindering the application of GLS in the construction process, the top five critical barriers to GLS are an unstable political environment, lack of government policy, lack of customer involvement and awareness of GLS, lack of funds, and lack of top leadership support for GLS adoption. This work may assist the government, policy-makers, and managers by providing insights into the barriers and in developing strategies for the possible adoption of GLS concepts for sustainable construction and improved quality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据