CC BY
7
REVIEW PAPER / НАУЧНАЯ СТАТЬЯ UDC 69:502.131.1
DOI: 10.22227/1997-0935.2023.5.771-784
A review of sustainability applications in the construction industry:
perspectives and challenges
Naji Alaa Jalil Naji, Elsheikh Asser Mohamed
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN); Moscow, Russian Federation
ABSTRACT
Introduction. One of the main causes of annual environmental degradation directly or indirectly is construction. The purpose of this study is to highlight current environmental issues in the construction industry. Besides how the construction sector can contribute to reducing the negative impact on the environment and creating "healthy buildings" that can be sustainable for both residents and our environment.
Materials and methods. An overall literature survey was carried out to get relevant information and provide an overview of the current situation regarding the applications of sustainability in the construction industry. According to the selected theme, an inclusive investigation was conducted using several databases, such as Google Scholar, Scopus, eLIBRARY.RU, and ScienceDirect. Many crucial key words, such as environmental sustainability, social sustainability, economic sustainability, sustainable development, environmental issues, etc. Were used to extract data on the sustainability issues in the construction industry. The primary data was compiled in the form of tables and figures. In most cases, the emphasis was on recent data.
Results. The most common methods for modelling sustainable construction indicators are described below, as well as the sustainable construction materials that have been used recently.
Conclusions. Building information modelling (BIM) appears is the single most commonly used technology today. With ^ ^ the development of computer technology, BIM is increasingly being used in combination with other techniques to achieve o e sustainable building goals. Careful selection of sustainable building materials may be the quickest way for builders to start & 5 integrating sustainable building design concepts. k U
3 K
KEYWORDS: environmental sustainability, social sustainability, economic sustainability, modelling sustainability indicators, G g
building information modelling, sustainability, environmental issues s r
u O 3 y
FOR CITATION: Naji Alaa Jalil Naji, Elsheikh Asser Mohamed. A review of sustainability applications in the construction • . industry: perspectives and challenges. Vestnik MGSU [Monthly Journal on Construction and Architecture]. 2023; 18(5):771-784. ° S DOI: 10.22227/1997-0935.2023.5.771-784 (rus.). h N
Corresponding author: Naji Alaa Jaleel Naji, alaa.alnsray@qu.edu.iq. J 9
u -
Обзор применения устойчивого развития в строительной отрасли: перспективы и проблемы
Наджи Алаа Джалиль Наджи, Эльшейх Ассер Мохамед
о i
(Л
t —
С 41
Российский университет дружбы народов имени Патриса Лумумбы (РУДН); г 3
Q) о
г. Москва, Россия d —
АННОТАЦИЯ i -Г
Введение. Одной из главных причин ежегодного ухудшения состояния окружающей среды прямо или косвенно яв- t П ляется строительство. Цель исследования — освещение актуальных экологических проблем в строительной отрасли, а также рассмотрение возможностей строительства в уменьшении негативного воздействия на окружающую среду и создание «здоровых зданий», которые могут быть устойчивыми как для жильцов, так и для природной среды. Материалы и методы. Проведен обзор литературы для получения информации по текущей ситуации в приме- 1 ° нении принципов устойчивого развития в строительной сфере. Исследование выполнено с помощью баз данных: § S Google Scholar, Scopus, eLIBRARY.ru и ScienceDirect. Использованы ключевые слова: экологическая устойчивость, S 8 социальная устойчивость, экономическая устойчивость, устойчивое развитие, экологические проблемы и так далее Первичные сведения получены в виде таблиц и рисунков.
Результаты. Описаны наиболее распространенные методы моделирования показателей устойчивого строитель- д э ства, а также устойчивые строительные материалы, которые используются в последнее время.
Выводы. Информационное моделирование зданий (BIM) — технология, наиболее часто применяемая на сегодняш- S S ний день. С развитием компьютерных технологий BIM все чаще используется в сочетании с другими методиками для JA Ui достижения целей устойчивого развития в строительстве: переработка и повторное использование отходов, устой- 2 2 чивое производство продукции или применение экологически чистых ресурсов. Тщательный выбор экологичных устойчивых строительных материалов может стать самым быстрым способом для строителей начать интегрировать U U концепции устойчивого дизайна здания.
© А.Дж.Н. Наджи, А.М. Эльшейх, 2023 771
Распространяется на основании Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial (CC BY-NC)
cd cd
Ю DO
" B"
КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: экологическая устойчивость, социальная устойчивость, экономическая устойчивость, моделирование показателей устойчивости, информационное моделирование зданий, устойчивое развитие, экологические проблемы
ДЛЯ ЦИТИРОВАНИЯ: Наджи А.Дж.Н., Эльшейх А.М. A review of sustainability applications in the construction industry: perspectives and challenges // Вестник МГСУ. 2023. Т. 18. Вып. 5. С.771-784. DOI: 10.22227/19970935.2023.5.771-784
Автор, ответственный за переписку: Наджи Алаа Джалиль Наджи, alaa.alnsray@qu.edu.iq.
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
о о
N N О О N РЧ
Ii? 10
¡É <V U 3 > (Л
с и
to eg
. г
во щ
и
ф ф
О ё
о
о о
СО <г ™ §
(Л "
« ü ся
С
£= о
CL ° ^ с ю о
со Ц о Е
СП ^ т- ^
<л
(Л
Z «я
El
Ф ф CO >
In 1987, Gro Harlem Brundtland Commission published a report called "Our Common Future", which aroused the interest both of researchers and decisionmakers. This report terms sustainability as "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" [1].
Sustainable construction aims to create and operate buildings adapted to resource efficiency and environmental design. There are seven principles for sustainable construction, including reducing resource consumption, using recyclable resources, reusing resources, applying life cycle costing, protecting from toxic substances, and focusing on quality [2].
The consumption of natural resources by some is at a rate that will leave little for future generations, and the pollution produced by the high standard of living of the wealthy is on the rise; furthermore, legislation doesn't set functions or limits for people's lives, including their consumption of natural resources and the limits of pollution resulting from their lives; therefore, sustainability development must be based on social value and lifestyle [3].
A sustainable building must have a positive impact on the climate and environment during the design, construction, and operation stages, as well as save resources and improve the quality of life for its users. Saying a building is sustainable is simple and appealing, but what are the actual factors or indicators that make a building sustainable [4]?
In general, the developing countries suffer from a delay in implementing the idea of sustainability in industry construction and are also exposed to the depletion of their natural resources and wealth without planning for their future needs. Sustainable development will be the best solution to environmental problems and the decreasing availability of natural resources [5].
In recent years, the rapid growth of the construction industry has led to irrational consumption of resources and increased environmental pollution. Although a lot of sustainability evaluation indicator systems have been proposed, like the Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Efficiency (CASBEE) and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), these systems use sets of standard indicators and requirements to assess the buildings' sustainability, like energy consumption, raw materials, and waste, but don't monitor the sustainability during implementation projects or project lifecycles after starting operations [6].
An overall literature survey was carried out to get relevant information and provide an overview of the current situation regarding the applications of sustainability in the construction industry. Some of the key challenges facing the construction industry have been highlighted, such as environmental impact and the depletion of natural resources. According to the selected theme, an inclusive investigation was conducted using several databases, such as Google Scholar, Scopus, e library, and ScienceDirect. Many crucial key words, such as environmental sustainability, social sustainabi-lity, economic sustainability, modeling sustainability indicators, building information modeling, sustainable development, environmental issues, etc., were used to extract data on the sustainability issues in the construction industry.
The primary data was obtained in the form of tables and figures. In most cases, the emphasis was on recent data, i.e., the previous 5 years (2018-2022), for compiling data on current applications of sustainability in the construction industry. When current information was unavailable, older data was used in some cases.
The most significant sustainability issues in the construction industry are highlighted, and opportunities and challenges are presented. Subsequently, the possibilities of integration of BIM, lean management, and sustainability have been reviewed and described.
Environmental sustainability
The conservation of biodiversity and the restoration of natural resources are central to environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability prioritizes organism health over financial gain. Meanwhile, social sustainability is stressed through participation and maintaining a social system that embodies human dignity. This is driven by fears about global environmental problems or generally focuses on keeping a human-supported environment [7].
Environmental sustainability is meeting the resource needs and serving the needs of existing and future generations without compromising the validity of the ecosystems that provide them. Environmental sustainability is a series of handcuffs on the four main activities organizing the scale of the human economic subsystem: use of renewable energy, use of non-renewable energy, pollution, and waste reduction. Environmental sustainability addressed a lot of solutions, like using natural capital more effi-
ciently, the recycling policy, the use of renewable resources instead of depletable resources, the redesign of production processes, or recycling generated waste
to minimize the production of toxic materials [8]. Definitions of environmental sustainability are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of environmental sustainability definitions
Authors Definition
N.P. Melville [9] Environmental sustainability is ability enabled organizational practices and processes that improve environmental and economic performance
J. Morelli [10] Environmental sustainability is meeting the resource and services needs of current and future generations without compromising the health of the ecosystems that provide them
R. Goodland [11] Environmental sustainability seeks to improve human welfare by protecting the sources of raw materials used for human needs and ensuring that the sinks for human wastes are not exceeded, in order to prevent harm to humans
M.V. Mishenin [12] Environmental sustainability is the ability of the ecological system to plastically move from the initial from one equilibrium state to another without changing the internal stable ones
B. Moldan et al. [13] Environmental sustainability is maintaining nature's services at a suitable level. Pointing out the indivisible connection between these services and human well-being
We can update the definition of environmental sustainability, as environmental sustainability is about the long-term qualities that are evaluated in the natural environment and that most people want to preserve, like the capabilities that the natural environment must keep, like good living conditions, clean water, fresh air, and
a suitable climate. Furthermore, people's quality of life improves. Today, the environmental issues facing us are fundamentally different from those humanity had to deal with in previous generations. Table 2 presented five hot-topic environmental problems in the construction industry and described them.
Table 2. A summary of five hot environmental issues in the construction industry
Environmental Issues Description
Climate Change In general, climate change is the biggest challenge facing the world currently. Climate change is the result of the increasing emission of toxic gases into the atmosphere, which could lead to an increase in global temperatures for centuries. CO2 emissions in the construction industry are becoming a global concern, and the challenges confronting the building and construction sectors have peaked in recent years. Buildings and construction accounted for 37 % of global final CO2 emissions in 2020 [14]
Energy consumption Renewable energy is one of the sustainable development goals that has a significant impact on the entire human race and ensures access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all. This goal addresses climate change directly by reducing global greenhouse gas emissions
Waste Production Waste production is considered a high-impact factor in sustainable construction. In the construction industry, natural resource consumption is high as well as an important contributor to waste generation. although a high percentage of the waste can be recycled and reused. A large proportion of this waste is discarded; instead, rational resource use and waste reuse have resulted in reduced waste production
Natural capital depletion Renewable nature seeks to address the increasing threat posed by the depletion of natural capital. Because almost all economic activity is related to the use of natural resources, an irrational consumption of natural resources has presented us with a new challenge
Air Pollution Air pollution has become an environmental threat that surrounds the whole world. The rapid growth of industrial development and construction activities may be responsible for air quality deterioration. Construction-linked dust is due to exhaust emissions from construction machinery and transport vehicles; therefore, emissions from construction sites are one of the main reasons responsible for air pollution
e e
(D (D
(A t 3
3 G M C
0 œ
n </>
1 z
y 1
J to
u-
^ I
n o
» 3 o
=¡ (
oi n
CO CO
n
r 6
o o
C o
cd cd
O
l c 3
<D
» DO
■ T
s □
s y
c o
(D *
Ol Ol
M 2
O O
10 10
u w
o (0
N N
o o
N N
in in
¡É <V
U 3 > m
c M
(0 09 . r
00 m
i]
<D <u
O í¿
Zero emissions is an aim that must be followed up without delay to avoid the rising catastrophic costs related to climate change, as well as the necessity for both government financial institutions and the private sector to choose, once and for all, the green economy [15].
The use of renewable energy sources such as direct solar energy, wind and ocean energy, bioenergy, and hydropower will help the world achieve the principles of sustainability, but the renewable energy sector faces a lot of critical issues like difficulties in storage and the lack of predictability of investment in this sphere [16].
Waste management is considered the most imperious and impactful modern environmental crisis due to the unavailability of disposal sites; thereby, reducing waste production is a necessary aim without which no economic pattern can be sustainable. Many approaches and strategies have been used to achieve this goal, like recycling processes [17].
To manage the natural capital depletion challenge, it will call for forward planning and considering the environmental impact. Rational use of natural resources and the trend toward the green economy may help restore natural resources [18].
Pollution of surface water leads to decreased quality. Changes in volume and discharge of surface water have impacted potable water supply, the destruction of aquatic habitats, and, moreover, the loss of amenities and recreation. There is no technique or pattern for managing the sustainability of urban
Table 3. Summary of Definitions: Social Sustainability
water. There are a lot of ways to improve water sus-tainability, like stormwater management, desalination, and water reuse [19].
Integrated management of air pollution is one of the solutions to improving the quality of the air. It includes continuously monitoring the implementation of laws; implementing specific programs to reduce air pollution; encouraging public participation in order to reduce air pollution (citizens and non-governmental organizations); and promoting education and culture [20].
Social sustainability
The main objective of the construction industry is to provide society with a variety of construction projects; thus, improving the social performance of construction projects is critical to achieving social sustainability. It is vital to study and assess the social performance of construction projects, which would help with an adequate decision [21].
Social sustainability is one of the pillars of sustainability. However, the social aspects are taken less into consideration than the economic and environmental [22]. One of the critical issues when measuring sustainability in any field is identifying relevant sustai-nability indicators [23]. Social sustainability indicators deal with the social prosperity of humans and address the cultural perspectives of communities [24]. Social sustainability lacks detailed and appropriate assessment methods with a clear definition; definitions of social sustainability are presented in Table 3.
Authors Definition
X. Xiahou et al. [25] The social sustainability, which is to meet the demands of current and future populations and communities
M. Rostamnezhad et al. [26] Social sustainability is the engagement among employees, local communities, clients, and the supply chain to ensure meeting the needs of current and future populations and communities
J. Morelli [27] It is ensuring the efficient use of natural resources by present and future generations by the protection and development of social conditions which will support meeting human needs and ensuring environmental sustainability
A.N. Nesterov [28] Social sustainability is addressing development challenges not only in the present but also in the future, not only with a focus on current citizens but also on future generations
T. Popovic [29] Social sustainability is a quality of societies. It signifies the nature-society relationships, mediated by work, as well as relationships within the society. Social sustainability is given, if work within a society and the related institutional arrangements
o o
CD <r ™ §
« Ü c
£= O
CL ° • c LT> O
s «
o E
CD ^
O
E!
o <8
CO >
Cities across the world are experiencing accelerated growth, and the associated increase in anthropogenic activities and outcomes places an enormous burden on the environment and leads to poor social sustainabi-
lity. The clear concept and identified relevant indicators enhance decision-making processes for practitioners and provide suitable practical guidelines for different stakeholders to allow social sustainability to be achieved [30].
Economic sustainability
Economic sustainability is ultimately considered the most attractive and communal pillar of sustainabil-ity, as it reflects the long-term viewpoint of an establishment in terms of financial and marketing measures [31]. Economic sustainability is concerned with activities aimed at increasing social cohesion, equalizing opportunities, combating marginalization, and limiting
income disparities and access to employment, education, and healthcare. Therefore, there is an interrelated regulatory relationship between economic growth and social sustainability [32]. Economic sustainability focuses on natural capital, which provides finance inputs into the production process that are both renewable and exhaustible. Definitions of economic sustainability are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Summary of economic sustainability definitions
Authors Definition
M. Guth et al. [32] The economic sustainability (or socio-economic sustainability if we assume that income inequalities are part of social sustainability), can be seen in terms of the income gap between agricultural and non-agricultural sectors
M.M.A.A. Ghaffar et al. [33] Economic sustainability refers to practices that support long-term economic growth without negatively impacting the community's social, environmental, and cultural aspects
R. Stefko et al. [34] Economic sustainability deals with financial performance, utilization of resources in an optimal way, and the profitable long-term functioning of the company
R. Goodland [11] Economic sustainability is maintenance of capital or keeping capital intact and it devolve on consuming interest
W.D.N.S.M. Tennakoon et al. [31] Economic sustainability is the long-term standpoint of an establishment in terms of financial and marketing measures
Across the world, there is growing recognition that the current model of economic growth requires ever-increasing resource use and leads to increased pollutant emissions. Historically, economic theory has concentrated on the efficiency of the use of merchandise and to a much lesser extent on equity distribution, therefore, economic sustainability aims to prevent self-interested, profit-hungry firms from having a harmful impact on the environment [35].
Green economics was suggested as one of the best solutions to reduce the negative impact of economic development on the environment in the 2014 environmental indicator report. Green economy refers to environmental, social, and economic patterns and creations that enable communities to use resources more effectively, such as encouraging overall human welfare while protecting the natural systems that sustain us1.
Some have sought to define the "green economy" as a dynamic process of economic switching towards achieving a zero-emission goal, increasing the efficiency of resource use, and improving the welfare of humans by using techniques and creations that create new
jobs while minimizing harmful environmental impacts in the long term [36].
The green economy focuses on keeping the natural capital as a condition for the development of the economy, while the sustainable development of social and economic systems focuses on stability without maleficence to the natural environment [37].
Figure shows phases of achieving economic sus-tainability that should include increasing economic returns, decreasing energy consumption, minimizing costs, and adding new innovative values.
Both organizations and government institutions are searching for methods to prompt environmental consciousness among stakeholders by making labor practices environmentally friendly. Recently, there has been a focus on adopting innovative environmental and social practices such as green rising innovation, green production, and green marketing. One of the most commonly used terms recently is "green employee behavior", which refers to the conscious effort that requires employees at their workplace to conduct themselves in an environmentally friendly manner [38].
Phase 1 Providing services Creating jobs vacancies Reducing energy consumption
Phase 2 Improving and developing performance Cost reduction and maximizing economic return
Phase 3
Adding new innovative values Long term planning and strategy vision Achieving the overall development process
Phases of achieving economic sustainability [33]
<D (D t О
i H
k К
G) M С
o n
1 о
y i
J CD
El I
n
о s o
=! ( n
q
о
СО СО
§ s a 0
о 6 A
r 6
о о
С О
0 )
Si
s n
л ' Ю DO
■ T
s E
s у с о (D *
01 Ol
M M
о о 10 10 u w
1 Environmental impact of Production — Consumption System in Europe. Environmental Indicator Report. 2014.
o (0
N N
o o
N N
in in
¡É <V
U 3 > m
c M
(0 09 . r
00 m
i]
<D <u
O í¿
o
o o CD <■
Si §
Ü c
£= O
CL ° • c Ln O
S H
o E
CD ^
Building Information Modelling, Lean and Sustainability
In construction projects, the lean management philosophy aimed for timely project completion and identified alternatives during the project cycle life, which resulted in increased profits and safe processes that reduced environmental harm impact [39].
The objectives of environmental sustainability in construction are mainly focused on reducing material waste, conserving water, reducing pollution, using environmentally friendly materials and methods, and encouraging recycling thereby2.
A lot of studies have proposed the connection between building information modeling (BIM), lean management philosophy, and sustainability in a possible integrated theoretical framework to improve performance in the construction sector [40, 41].
Several researchers are investigating the theoretical integration of three factors (BIM, lean management, and sustainability) into the construction process in order to present more efficient and sustainable projects throughout their entire lifecycle [42, 43].
The recent studies and literature review show the necessity for further experimental studies on the promising topic of modelling sustainability indicators in construction projects, as no widely accepted strategy has been discussed to reach sustainability in construction projects by using BIM-lean principles. Thus, one critical trend for further research could be the creation of additional studies on how to model indicators that actually contribute to this pathway [44].
Many studies discuss the integration of sustain-ability with project management and the links between project sustainability management and project success. In this aspect, proposals are summarized about using BIM techniques to model sustainability indicators in construction projects, like the multi-criteria decision model that was created by using the applications of BIM in achieving sustainable buildings; this model measured the impact of project sustainability management to achieve environmental and social sustainability [45].
Sustainable Building Technologies
Due to economic and environmental reasons, the production of sustainable materials has recently gained more attention, in which the use of waste material in the construction sector is a crucial step toward sustainability. The scientists and researchers look out for innovative and sustainable means to reuse/recycle the waste in the construction sphere in order to reduce its negative impact on the environment. In addition, provide alternatives to replace the natural building material [46].
Yearly, around 10 billion tons of concrete are produced worldwide [47]. Such production of concrete is likely to grow to 18 billion tons by 2050 [48]. The concrete industry has a big impact on the environment and is a key consumer of natural resources around the world. Furthermore, the use of recycled materials in civil engineering applications, such as plastic waste material as coarse and fine aggregate alternatives, has recently been investigated [49].
Numerous researchers have checked feasibility of use different recycled materials like plastic waste material, bricks waste, marble wastes, concrete fractions, Glass Waste, and waste Steel slag waste as alternatives for natural building material [50].
RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH
Although sustainable construction has become a real challenge for the future of the construction sector, the gap between construction project management and sustainability is still great. This topic is currently attracting the attention of more researchers [51, 52].
There are few studies debating the modelling of sustainability in the construction industry. However, the use of smart and statistical technologies, like multi-criteria assessment methods to integrate sustain-ability indicators in the construction industry, helps achieve initiatives for sustainable cities [53]. Description of the main methods of multi-criteria assessment in the Table 5.
Table 5. Summary of the main multi-criteria assessment methods
Method Description
Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) Analytic hierarchy technique is a multiple-criteria decision-making method for the analysis of complex issues. It permits the creation of a hierarchical framework, the assessment of relative importance, and the integrated assessment of factors with various criteria to make effective group decisions [54]
Analytic network process (ANP) The ANP technique is a multi-criteria assessment method that is an advanced and generalized form of the AHP technique. The AHP method's main limitation is the assumption that relationships between elements follow a strict hierarchical framework, which ignores the interdependence of decision levels (criteria, sub-criteria, and alternatives). While AHP is weak at addressing many decision-making problems in the real world. ANP is a more powerful technique for modeling many complex decision-making issues as it provides for the evaluation of interactions and dependencies that exist in real life [55]
E!
o <8
CO >
2 Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries: a Discussion Document. CIB & UNEP-IETC, 2002.
End of the Table 5
Monte Carlo Simulation Monte Carlo simulation is a mathematical technique that is used to estimate the possible results of an uncertain event. This technique is a useful method to improve decision-making under uncertain conditions and model complex issues [56]
System Dynamics (SD) The system dynamics technique is complementary serves to analyze complex, dynamic, and nonlinear interactions between variables, and is generally used to simulate an evaluation process [57]
Fuzzy Sets theory Fuzzy logic is a technique for modelling and addressing uncertain information in a form similar to the principle of probability theory by relating numerical values within the range [0,1] with proposed or probable facts [58]
Delphi Method The Delphi method is a technique that uses rounds of questionnaires about certain questions until agreement is reached among the selected experts [59]
The multi-criteria assessment methods are commonly used to evaluate sustainability aspects, especially social sustainability. Generally, a multi-criteria assessment method is included when the problem and the assessment framework are defined. The weights of the criteria that comprise the assessment framework are then determined. After this, the different alternatives are evaluated with respect to each criterion. Finally, the evaluation of the alternatives is weighted against the weight of each criterion [60].
System dynamics employs a set of concepts and tools to aid in the understanding of the structure and interactions within complex systems, making it an effective tool for modelling complex socioeconomic-environmental issues [61].
The hybrid system-dynamic (SD-fuzzy) approach using the DEMATEL technique presents a powerful tool for modelling social sustainability indicators by using the complex interconnected methodology of various impacting factors and decision-making. Furthermore, it can be executed on various kinds of projects to analyze and prioritize the factors affecting the social sustainability performance of the project [62].
The building sector can take up the obligation to contribute to sustainable development by finding more environmentally benign methods of construction and building. Among the directions for solutions is to be found in new material applications, recycling and reuse, sustainable production of products. Description of the main recycled materials in the construction industry in the Table 6.
Table 6. Summary of major recycled materials in the construction industry
Authors Recycled materials Replacements materials Impact
B. Basaran et al. [63] Marble wastes Fine aggregate Positive impact on the concrete compressive strength as 15 % replacement ratio maximum
J. Sivamani [64] Concrete fractions Fine aggregate Positive impact on the concrete compressive strength as 30 % replacement ratio maximum
C.M. Yun et al. [65] Glass Waste Coarse aggregate Positive impact on the concrete compressive strength as 10 % replacement ratio maximum with superplasticizer
Y. Agrawal et al. [66] Dolomite quarry waste Fine aggregate Equivalent impact on the concrete compressive strength as 10 % replacement ratio maximum
N.S. Piro et al. [67] Steel slag waste Coarse aggregate Positive impact on the concrete compressive strength as a partial replacement
D.J. Abdullah et al. [68] Brick waste Coarse aggregate Equivalent impact on the concrete compressive strength as 10 % replacement ratio maximum
M.M. Radhi et al. [69] Plastic waste high-density polyethylene (HDPE) Coarse aggregate Equivalent impact on the concrete compressive strength as 30 % replacement ratio maximum
C. Suksiripattanapong et al. [70] Plastic waste (polyethylene terephthalate) Additions Improvement in the compressive strength
H. Ghanem et al. [71] Wastewater plastic gallons Plastic mesh layers Exhibited ductile behavior and the load carrying capacity
e e
(D (D
(A t 3
3 G S C
0 co n co
1 i
y 1
J to
u-
I
n o
i 3 o
=! ( n
CO CO
n i
r 6
o o
C o
cd cd
O
l c 3
<D
» DO
■ T
s 3
s y
c o
(D *
Ol Ol
M 2
O O
10 10
u w
CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION
The main goal of this review is to highlight the possibilities and main methodological challenges of applying sustainability in the construction sector. There is a rising demand for the harnessing of sustainability to assess the environmental impact of construction projects. Invite those interested in impact assessment processes to draw attention to these issues and make efforts to improve sustainability performance to reduce the harmful impact of the construction industry on the environment. Many conclusions can be summed up as follows:
• multi-criteria assessment methods are widely used to assess aspects of sustainability, especially social sustainability. Typically, the multi-criteria assessment method is used when the problem and the scope of the assessment are defined. Then the weights
of the criteria that make up the evaluation system are determined. After that, different alternatives are evaluated for each criterion. Finally, the evaluation of the alternatives is weighted by the weight of each criterion;
• building information modelling (BIM) appears to be the single most commonly used technology thus far. With the development of computer technology, BIM has constantly been used in combination with other technologies to achieve the sustainability development goals in the construction industry;
• among the directions for solutions is to be found in new material applications, Recycling and reuse sustainable materials as a substitute for natural resources, careful selection of eco-friendly, sustainable building materials may be the critical step for builders to start integrating sustainable design concepts in buildings.
REFERENCES
W (0
N N
o o
N N
lif 10
¡É <V
U 3
> in
E M
to 09
. r
00 Q
<D <u
o É¿
o
o o CD <r
Sí §
22 Ü c
£= O
CL ° • c LO O
S «
o E
CD ^
i*
íl
!» <8 ta >
1. Butlin J. Our common future. By World commission on environment and development. (London, Oxford University Press, 1987, pp. 383 £5.95.). Journal of International Development. 1989; 1(2):284-287. DOI: 10.1002/jid.3380010208
2. Zhong Y., Wu P. Economic sustainability, environmental sustainability and constructability indicators related to concrete- and steel-projects. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2015; 108:748-756. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.095
3. Girya M.A., Girya L.V. Prospects for applying green standards and technologies in housing construction. Engineering Journal of Don. 2018; 3. (rus.).
4. Kangezova M.Kh., Petrosyan R.S., Zheru-gov R.A. Application of methods for assessing the environmental conditions in construction. Science and Business: Ways of Development. 2019; 6(96):54-56. (rus.).
5. Knopfel H. Sustainability in construction projects. Management of Projects and Programs. 2020; (1):22-37. DOI: 10.36627/2075-1214-2020-11-22-37 (rus.).
6. Dossche C., Boel V., De Corte W. Use of life cycle assessments in the construction sector: critical review. Procedia Engineering. 2017; 171:302-311. DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.01.338
7. Hidayat Y.A., Rohman M.A., Utomo C. Social sustainability indicators for school buildings in Surabaya. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2020; 447(1):012033. DOI: 10.1088/17551315/447/1/012033
8. Sutton P. A perspective on environmental sus-tainability. Paper on the Victorian Commissioner for Environmental Sustainability. 2004; 1-32.
9. Melville N.P. Information Systems Innovation for Environmental Sustainability. MIS Quarterly. 2010; 34(1):1-21. DOI: 10.2307/20721412.
10. Morelli J. Environmental sustainability: A definition for environmental professionals. Journal
of Environmental Sustainability. 2011; 1(1):1-10. DOI: 10.14448/jes.01.0002
11. Goodland R. The concept of environmental sustainability. Annual Review of Ecology and Sys-tematics. 1995; 26(1):1-24. DOI: 10.1146/annurev. es.26.110195.000245.
12. Mishenin M.V. Stability of ecological systems of the Arctic zone under the conditions of anthropogenic impact. Interexpo GEO-Siberia. 2022; 2(4):43-53. DOI: 10.33764/2618-981X-2022-2-4-43-53
13. Moldan B., Janousková S., Hák T. How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets. Ecological Indicators. 2012; 17:4-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.033
14. Hamilton I., Rapf O., Kockat D.J., Zu-haib D.S., Abergel T., Oppermann M. et al. Global status report for buildings and construction. United Nations Environmental Programme. 2020.
15. Ermakova E.P. About the draft pan-European code on climate and regulatory issues of "green" financing in the European union. State and Law. 2020; 5:96107. DOI: 10.31857/S013207690009682-2 (rus.).
16. Cirstea S.D., Moldovan-Teselios C., Cirs-tea A., Turcu A.C., Darab C.P. Evaluating renewable energy sustainability by composite index. Sustainability. 2018; 10(3):811. DOI: 10.3390/su10030811
17. Shilkina S.V. Global trends in waste management and analysis of the situation in Russia. Russian Journal of Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2020; 7(1):5. DOI: 10.15862/05ETOR120 (rus.).
18. Okhotnikov I.V. "Green economy" as the basis for effective environmental and economic interaction in the modern world. Economics. 2016; 1(26):47-51. (rus.).
19. Klepov V.I. Ratio of quantity and quality of water resources at managing water economic systems. Environmental Engineering. 2020; 1:94-99. DOI: 10.26897/1997-6011/2020-1-94-100 (rus.).
20. Karelin A.O., Lomtev A.Yu., Volkodaeva M.V., Yeremin G.B. The improvement of approaches to the assessment of effects of the anthropogenic air pollution on the population in order to management the risk for health. Hygiene and Sanitation. 2019; 98(1):82-86. DOI: 10.18821/0016-9900-2019-98-1-82-86 (rus.).
21. Yu W., Cheng S., Ho W., Chang Y. Measuring the Sustainability of Construction Projects throughout Their Lifecycle: A Taiwan Lesson. Sustainability. 2018; 10(5):1523. DOI: 10.3390/su10051523
22. Sierra L.A., Yepes V., Pellicer E. A review of multi-criteria assessment of the social sustainability of infrastructures. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 187:496-513. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.022
23. Fernández-Sánchez G., Rodríguez-López F. A methodology to identify sustainability indicators in construction project management—Application to infrastructure projects in Spain. Ecological Indicators. 2010; 10(6):1193-1201. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.04.009
24. Popovic T., Barbosa-Póvoa A., Kraslawski A., Carvalho A. Quantitative indicators for social sustainability assessment of supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 180:748-768. DOI: 10.1016/j. jclepro.2018.01.142
25. Xiahou X., Tang Y., Yuan J., Chang T., Liu P., Li Q. Evaluating Social Performance of Construction Projects: An Empirical Study. Sustainability. 2018; 10(7):2329. DOI: 10.3390/su10072329
26. Rostamnezhad M., Nasirzadeh F., Khanza-di M., Jarban M.J., Ghayoumian M. Modeling social sustainability in construction projects by integrating system dynamics and fuzzy-DEMATEL method: a case study of highway project. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 2020; 27(7):1595-1618. DOI: 10.1108/ECAM-01-2018-003
27. Yilmaz M., Yildiz S. The importance of occupational health and safety (OHS) and OHS budgeting in terms of social sustainability in construction sector. Journal of Building Material Science. 2021; 2(1). DOI: 10.30564/jbms.v2i1.2591
28. Nesterov A.N. Assessment of the sustainabi-lity of the socio-economic development of the city. Actual Problems of the Humanities and Natural Sciences. 2010; 7:117-122. (rus.).
29. Popovic T. Quantitative indicators of social sustainability applicable in process systems engineering. Lappeenranta, 2019. DOI: 10.13140/ RG.2.2.21807.79525
30. Tseng M.L., Li S.X., Lin C.W.R., Chiu A.S. Validating green building social sustainability indicators in China using the fuzzy delphi method. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering. 2023; 40(1):35-53. DOI: 10.1080/21681015.2022.2070934
31. Tennakoon W.D.N.S.M., Janadari M.P.N. Measuring economic sustainability: Are we doing it right? Sri Lanka Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. 2022; 2(1):21. DOI: 10.4038/sljssh.v2i1.53
32. Guth M., Sm^dzik-Ambrozy K., Czyzewski B., St^pien S. The economic sustainability of farms under common agricultural policy in the European Union countries. Agriculture. 2020; 10(2):34. DOI: 10.3390/agricul-ture10020034
33. Ghaffar M.M.A.A., El Aziz N.A.A. Urban form and economic sustainability in housing projects. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science. 2021; 68(1). DOI: 10.1186/s44147-021-00032-w
34. Stefko R., Vasanicová P., Jencová S., Pa-chura A. Management and economic sustainability of the Slovak industrial companies with medium energy intensity. Energies. 2021; 14(2):267. DOI: 10.3390/ en14020267
35. Van Niekerk A.J. Inclusive economic sustainability: SDGs and global inequality. Sustainability. 2020; 12(13):5427. DOI: 10.3390/su12135427
36. Mikhno I., Koval V., Shvets G., Garma-tiuk O., Tamosiüniené R. Green economy in sustainable development and improvement of resource efficiency. Central European Business Review. 2021; 10(1):99-113. DOI: 10.18267/j.cebr.252
37. Dovlatova G., Dovlatova A., Smakhtina A., Tkachova O., Chistyakov A., Bondarenko O. et al. Modernization of Russian environmental efficiency in the green economy. E3S Web of Conferences. 2021; 244:10045. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202124410045
38. Tahir R., Athar M.R., Afzal A. The impact of greenwashing practices on green employee behaviour: Mediating role of employee value orientation and green psychological climate. Cogent Business & Management. 2020; 7(1):1781996. DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1781996
39. Mao X., Zhang X. Construction Process Reengineering by Integrating Lean Principles and Computer Simulation Techniques. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 2008; 134(5):371-381. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2008)134:5(371)
40. Mellado F., Lou E.C.W. Building information modelling, lean and sustainability: An integration framework to promote performance improvements in the construction industry. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2020; 61:102355. DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102355
41. Tsarev A.I. Implementation of BIM technologies in the construction sector: the European experience. Construction: Science and Education. 2022; 12(3): 125136. DOI: 10.22227/2305-5502.2022.3.8 (rus.).
42. Khodeir L.M., Othman R. Examining the interaction between lean and sustainability principles in the management process of AEC industry. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2018; 9(4):1627-1634. DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2016.12.005
43. Babalola O., Ibem E.O., Ezema I.C. Lean construction: an approach to achieving sustainable built environment in Nigeria. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2019; 1299(1):012007. DOI: 10.1088/17426596/1299/1/012007
e e
<D (D t O
i H
G 1 S C
0 CO n CO
1 C
y 1
J to
u-
I
n o
C 3 O
=¡ (
oi n
q
CO CO
q
n a 0
r 6
o o
C o
CD ) ¡¡
¡ 8 a '
» DO
■ T
s □
s y c o (D *
01 Ol
2 2 O O 2 2 W W
M Ci
N N
o o
N N
10 10
¡É <V
U 3
> in
C M
m os
. r
00 m
il
<D <u
O g
o
o o CD <r
Sí §
22 Ü c
£= O
CL ° • c Ln O
S «
o E
CD ^
i*
í!
!» <8 ta >
44. Stanitsas M., Kirytopoulos K., Leopoulos V. Integrating sustainability indicators into project management: The case of construction industry. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021; 279:123774. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123774
45. Carvalho M.M., Rabechini Jr.R. Can project sustainability management impact project success? An empirical study applying a contingent approach. International Journal of Project Management. 2017; 35(6):1120-1132. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.02.018
46. Lamba P., Kaur D.P., Raj S., Sorout J. Recycling/reuse of plastic waste as construction material for sustainable development : a review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022; 29(57):86156-86179. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-16980-y
47. Meyer C. The greening of the concrete industry. Cement and Concrete Composites. 2009; 31(8):601-605. DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2008.12.010
48. Hache E., Simoën M., Seck G.S., Bonnet C., Jabberi A., Carcanague S. The impact of future power generation on cement demand: An international and regional assessment based on climate scenarios. International Economics. 2020; 163:114-133. DOI: 10.1016/j. inteco.2020.05.002
49. Rafiq A.H., Al-kamaki Y.S.S. The effect of adding waste plastic fibers on the concrete properties and shear strength of rc beams : a review. The Journal of University of Duhok. 2022; 25(2):507-530. DOI: 10.26682/sjuod.2022.25.2.45
50. Da Silva T.R., de Azevedo A.R.G., Cec-chin D., Marvila M.T., Amran M., Fediuk R. et al. Application of plastic wastes in construction materials: A review using the concept of life-cycle assessment in the context of recent research for future perspectives. Materials. 2021; 14(13):3549. DOI: 10.3390/ ma14133549
51. López F.R., Sánchez G.F. Challenges for sustainability assessment by indicators. Leadership and Management in Engineering. 2011; 11(4):321-325. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000142
52. Balalov V.V., Barabanova T.A. The life cycle assessment of smart sustainable cities. Construction: Science and Education. 2022; 12(2):72-101. DOI: 10.22227/2305-5502.2022.2.6 (rus.).
53. Olawumi T.O., Chan D.W. Critical success factors for implementing building information modeling and sustainability practices in construction projects: A Delphi survey. Sustainable Development. 2019; 27(4):587-602. DOI: 10.1002/sd.1925
54. Elshafei G., Katunsky D., Zeleñáková M., Negm A. Opportunities for using analytical hierarchy process in green building optimization. Energies. 2022; 15(12):4490. DOI: 10.3390/en15124490
55. Chen C.H. A Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach Based on ANP-Entropy TOPSIS for Building Materials Supplier Selection. Entropy. 2021; 23(12):1597. DOI: 10.3390/e23121597
56. Gervasio H., da Silva L.S. Life-cycle social analysis of motorway bridges. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 2013; 9(10):1019-1039. DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2011.654124
57. Karami S., Karami E., Buys L., Droge-muller R. System dynamic simulation: A new method in social impact assessment (SIA). Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2017; 62:25-34. DOI: 10.1016/j. eiar.2016.07.009
58. Fayek A.R. Fuzzy hybrid computing in construction engineering and management. Emerald Group Publishing, 2018. DOI: 10.1108/9781787438682
59. Kermanshachi S., Rouhanizadeh B., Dao B. Application of Delphi method in identifying, ranking, and weighting project complexity indicators for construction projects. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction. 2020; 12(1). DOI: 10.1061/(asce)la.1943-4170.0000338
60. Zavadskas E.K., Turskis Z., Volvaciovas R., Kildiene S. Multi-criteria assessment model of technologies. Studies in Informatics and Control. 2013; 22(4). DOI: 10.24846/v22i4y201301
61. Guan D., Gao W., Su W., Li H., Hokao K. Modeling and dynamic assessment of urban economy -resource - environment system with a coupled system dynamics — geographic information system model. Ecological Indicators. 2011; 11(5):1333-1344. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.02.007
62. Mohagheghian E., Hosseini-Nasab H., Abraham A., Fakhrzad M.B. Sustainability Considerations in the Product Design Using System Dynamics and Fuzzy Cognitive Maps. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 2020; 383-394. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-73689-7_37
63. Basaran B., Kalkan I., Aksoylu C., ÖzkiliQ Y.O., Sabri M.M.S. Effects of Waste Powder, Fine and Coarse Marble Aggregates on Concrete Com-pressive Strength. Sustainability. 2022; 14(21):14388. DOI: 10.3390/su142114388
64. Sivamani J. Sustainable Utilization of Dumped Concrete Wastes as Fine Aggregates in Concrete — An Experimental Study. International Journal of Engineering. 2022; 35(9):1795-1802. DOI: 10.5829/ije.2022.35.09c.16
65. Yun C.M., Rahman M.R., Kuok K.K., Chai A.P.S., Ding A.B.S., Bakri M.K.B. Glass Waste as Coarse Aggregate Filler Replacement in Concrete. Waste Materials in Advanced Sustainable Concrete. 2022; 25-44. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-98812-8_2
66. Agrawal Y., Gupta T., Sharma R.K. Strength and durability assessment of concrete containing dolomite quarry waste as fine aggregate. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2022; 24(1):268-286. DOI: 10.1007/s10163-021-01318-0
67. Piro N.S., Mohammed A., Hamad S.M., Kurda R. Electrical Resistivity-Compressive strength
beams containing HDPE plastic waste as coarse aggregate. Cogent Engineering. 2022; 9(1). DOI: 10.1080/23311916.2022.2127470
70. Suksiripattanapong C., Phetprapai T., Singsang W., Phetchuay C., Thumrongvut J., Tabyang W. Utilization of recycled plastic waste in fiber reinforced concrete for eco-friendly footpath and pavement applications. Sustainability. 2022; 14(11):6839. DOI: 10.3390/su14116839
71. Ghanem H., Chahal S., Khatib J., Elkordi A. Flexural Behavior of Concrete Beams Reinforced with Recycled Plastic Mesh. Buildings. 2022; 12(12):2085. DOI: 10.3390/buildings12122085
predictions for normal strength concrete with waste steel slag as a coarse aggregate replacement using various analytical models. Construction and Building Materials. 2022; 327:127008. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuild-mat.2022.127008
68. Abdullah D.J., Abbas Z.K., Abed S.K. Some Properties of Concrete Containing Waste Brick as Partial Replacement of Coarse Aggregate and Addition of Nano Brick Powder. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2022; 961(1):012093. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/961/1/012093
69. Radhi M.M., Khalil W.I., Shafeeq S. Fle-xural behavior of sustainable reinforced concrete
Received December 14, 2022.
Adopted in revised form on April 4, 2023.
Approved for publication on April 19, 2023.
Bionotes: Naji Alaa Jalil Naji — postgraduate student of the Engineering Academy of the Department of Construction; Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN); 6 Miklukho-Maklaya st., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation; ORCID: 0000-0002-9156-6899; 1042215018@pfur.ru;
Elsheikh Asser Mohamed — Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Engineering Academy of the Department of Construction; Peoples' Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN); 6 Miklukho-Maklaya st., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation; elsheykh_am@pfur.ru.
Authors' contribution:
Naji Alaa Jalil Naji — idea, material collection and data processing, writing an article. Elsheikh Asser Mohamed — revision of the text, scientific editing. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
e е
<D (D
t О
iH G Г
S С
СПИСОК ИСТОЧНИКОВ
1. Butlin J. Our common future. By World commission on environment and development. (London, Oxford University Press, 1987, pp. 383 £5.95.) // Journal of International Development. 1989. Vol. 1. Issue 2. Pp. 284-287. DOI: 10.1002/jid.3380010208
2. Zhong Y., Wu P. Economic sustainability, environmental sustainability and constructability indicators related to concrete- and steel-projects // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2015. Vol. 108. Pp. 748-756. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.095
3. ГиряМА., Гиря Л.В. Перспективы применения зеленых стандартов и технологий в жилищном строительстве // Инженерный вестник Дона. 2018. № 3.
4. КангезоваМ.Х., Петросян Р.С., Жеругов Р.А. Применение методов оценки состояния среды жизнедеятельности в строительстве // Наука и бизнес: пути развития. 2019. № 6 (96). С. 54-56.
5. Кнопфель Х. Устойчивость в строительных проектах // Управление проектами и программами. 2020. № 1. С. 22-37. DOI: 10.36627/2075-1214-20201-1-22-37
6. Dossche C, Boel V., De Corte W. Use of life cycle assessments in the construction sector: critical review // Procedia Engineering. 2017. Vol. 171. Pp. 302-311. DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.01.338
7. Hidayat Y.A., Rohman M.A., Utomo C. Social sustainability indicators for school buildings in Surabaya // IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2020. Vol. 447. Issue 1. P. 012033. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/447/1/012033
8. Sutton P. A perspective on environmental sustainability // Paper on the Victorian Commissioner for Environmental Sustainability. 2004.
9. Melville N.P. Information Systems Innovation for Environmental Sustainability // MIS Quarterly. 2010. Vol. 34. Issue 1. Pp. 1-21. DOI: 10.2307/20721412
10. Morelli J. Environmental Sustainability: A Definition for Environmental Professionals // Journal of Environmental Sustainability. 2011. Vol. 1. Issue 1. Pp. 1-10. DOI: 10.14448/jes.01.0002
11. Goodland R. The concept of environmental sustainability // Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 1995. Vol. 26. Issue 1. Pp. 1-24. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.es.26.110195.000245
12. Mishenin M.V. Stability of ecological systems of the Arctic zone under the conditions of anthropogenic impact // Interexpo GEO-Siberia. 2022. Vol. 2. Issue 4. Pp. 43-53. DOI: 10.33764/2618-981X-2022-2-4-43-53
13. Moldan B., Janouskova S., Hak T. How to understand and measure environmental sustainability:
0 со
n со
1 i
y i
J CD
u-
I
n о
i 3 о
=! ( n
q
co co
q
n i
r 6
о о
С о
ф ) [[ ® «
л ' Ю DO ■ T
(Л У
с о <D *
01 Ol
2 2 О О 2 2 W W
O (0
N N
o o
N РЧ
in in
¡É <V
U 3
> 1Л
с и
ta os
. г
00 Щ
i]
<D <u
O í¿
o
o o CD <r
ш s
Sí §
со "
Ü СЯ С
£= o
CL ° ^ с Ю O
s ¡I
o E en ^
со от
i* í!
CD CD
ta >
Indicators and targets // Ecological Indicators. 2012. Vol. 17. Pp. 4-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.033
14. Hamilton I., Rapf O., Kockat D.J., Zu-haib D.S., Abergel T., Oppermann M. et al. Global status report for buildings and construction. United Nations Environmental Programme. 2020.
15. Ермакова Е.П. О проекте общеевропейского закона о климате и проблемах нормативного регулирования «зеленого» финансирования в Европейском Союзе // Государство и право. 2020. № 5. С. 96-107. DOI: 10.31857/S013207690009682-2
16. Cîrstea S.D., Moldovan-Teselios C., Cîrstea A., Turcu A.C., Darab C.P. Evaluating renewable energy sustainability by composite index // Sustainability. 2018. Vol. 10. Issue 3. P. 811. DOI: 10.3390/su10030811
17. Шилкина С.В. Мировые тенденции управления отходами и анализ ситуации в России // Отходы и ресурсы. 2020. Т. 7. № 1. С. 5. DOI: 10.15862/05EœR120
18. Охотников И.В. «Зеленая экономика» как основа эффективного эколого-экономического взаимодействия в современном мире // Экономика. 2016. № 1 (26). С. 47-51.
19. Клёпов В.И. Соотношение количества и качества водных ресурсов при управлении водохозяйственными системами // Природообустройство. 2020. № 1. С. 94-99. DOI: 10.26897/1997-6011/2020-1-94-100
20. КарелинА.О., ЛомтевА.Ю., ВолкодаеваМ.В., Еремин Г.Б. Совершенствование подходов к оценке воздействия антропогенного загрязнения атмосферного воздуха на население в целях управления рисками для здоровья // Гигиена и санитария. 2019. Т. 98. № 1. С. 82-86. DOI: 10.18821/0016-9900-201998-1-82-86
21. Yu W., Cheng S., Ho W., Chang Y. Measuring the sustainability of construction projects throughout their lifecycle: A Taiwan lesson // Sustainability. 2018. Vol. 10. Issue 5. P. 1523. DOI: 10.3390/su10051523
22. Sierra L.A., Yepes V., Pellicer E. A review of multi-criteria assessment of the social sustainability of infrastructures // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018. Vol. 187. Pp. 496-513. DOI: 10.1016/j. jclepro.2018.03.022
23. Fernández-Sánchez G., Rodríguez-López F. A methodology to identify sustainability indicators in construction project management — Application to infrastructure projects in Spain // Ecological Indicators. 2010. Vol. 10. Issue 6. Pp. 1193-1201. DOI: 10.1016/j. ecolind.2010.04.009
24. Popovic T., Barbosa-Póvoa A., Kraslaw-ski A., Carvalho A. Quantitative indicators for social sustainability assessment of supply chains // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018. Vol. 180. Pp. 748-768. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.142
25. Xiahou X., Tang Y., Yuan J., Chang T., Liu P., Li Q. Evaluating Social Performance of Construction
Projects: An Empirical Study // Sustainability. 2018. Vol. 10. Issue 7. P. 2329. DOI: 10.3390/su10072329
26. Rostamnezhad M., Nasirzadeh F., Khan-zadi M., Jarban M.J., Ghayoumian M. Modeling social sustainability in construction projects by integrating system dynamics and fuzzy-DEMATEL method: a case study of highway project // Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 2020. Vol. 27. Issue 7. Pp. 1595-1618. DOI: 10.1108/ECAM-01-2018-003
27. Yilmaz M., Yildiz S. The importance of occupational health and safety (OHS) and OHS budgeting in terms of social sustainability in construction sector // Journal of Building Material Science. 2021. Vol. 2. Issue 1. DOI: 10.30564/jbms. v2i1.2591
28. Нестеров А.Н. Оценка устойчивости социально-экономического развития города // Актуальные проблемы гуманитарных и естественных наук. 2010. № 7. С. 117-122.
29. Popovic T. Quantitative indicators of social sustainability applicable in process systems engineering. Lappeenranta, 2019. DOI: 10.13140/ RG.2.2.21807.79525
30. Tseng M.L., Li S.X., Lin C.W.R., Chiu A.S. Validating green building social sustainability indicators in China using the fuzzy delphi method // Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering. 2023. Vol. 40. Issue 1. Pp. 35-53. DOI: 10.1080/21681015.2022.2070934
31. Tennakoon W.D.N.S.M., Janadari M.P.N. Measuring economic sustainability: Are we doing it right? // Sri Lanka Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. 2022. Vol. 2. Issue 1. P. 21. DOI: 10.4038/ sljssh.v2i1.53
32. Guth M., Smçdzik-Ambrozy K., Czyzewski B., Stçpien S. The economic sustainability of farms under common agricultural policy in the European Union countries // Agriculture. 2020. Vol. 10. Issue 2. P. 34. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture10020034
33. Ghaffar M.M.A.A., El Aziz N.A.A. Urban form and economic sustainability in housing projects // Journal of Engineering and Applied Science. 2021. Vol. 68. Issue 1. DOI: 10.1186/s44147-021-00032-w
34. Stefka R., VasanicováP., Jencová S., Pachura A. Management and economic sustainability of the Slovak industrial companies with medium energy intensity // Energies. 2021. Vol. 14. Issue 2. P. 267. DOI: 10.3390/ en14020267
35. Van Niekerk A.J. Inclusive economic sustainability: SDGs and global inequality // Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12. Issue 13. P. 5427. DOI: 10.3390/su12135427
36. Mikhno I., Koval V., Shvets G., Garma-tiuk O., TamosiunienèR. Green economy in sustainable development and improvement of resource efficiency // Central European Business Review. 2021. Vol. 10. Issue 1. Pp. 99-113. DOI: 10.18267/j.cebr.252
37. Dovlatova G., Dovlatova A., Smakh-tina A., Tkachova O., Chistyakov A., Bondarenko O. et al. Modernization of Russian environmental efficiency in the green economy // E3S Web of Conferences. 2021. Vol. 244. P. 10045. DOI: 10.1051/ e3sconf/202124410045
38. Tahir R., Athar M.R., Afzal A. The impact of greenwashing practices on green employee behaviour: Mediating role of employee value orientation and green psychological climate // Cogent Business & Management. 2020. Vol. 7. Issue 1. P. 1781996. DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2020.1781996
39. Mao X., Zhang X. Construction process reengineering by integrating lean principles and computer simulation techniques // Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 2008. No. 134 (5). Pp. 371-381. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2008)134:5(371)
40. Mellado F., Lou E.C.W. Building information modelling, lean and sustainability: An integration framework to promote performance improvements in the construction industry // Sustainable Cities and Society. 2020. Vol. 61. P. 102355. DOI: 10.1016/j. scs.2020.102355
41. Царев А.И. Европейский опыт внедрения BIM-технологий в строительном секторе // Строительство: наука и образование. 2022. № 12 (3). С. 125-136. DOI: 10.22227/2305-5502.2022.3.8
42. Khodeir L.M., Othman R. Examining the interaction between lean and sustainability principles in the management process of AEC industry // Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2018. Vol. 9. Issue 4. Pp. 16271634. DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2016.12.005
43. Babalola O., Ibem E.O., Ezema I.C. Lean construction: an approach to achieving sustainable built environment in Nigeria // Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2019. Vol. 1299. Issue 1. P. 012007. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1299/1/012007
44. Stanitsas M., Kirytopoulos K., Leopoulos V. Integrating sustainability indicators into project management: The case of construction industry // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021. Vol. 279. P. 123774. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123774
45. Carvalho M.M., Rabechini Jr.R. Can project sustainability management impact project success? An empirical study applying a contingent approach // International Journal of Project Management. 2017. Vol. 35. Issue 6. Pp. 1120-1132. DOI: 10.1016/j. ijproman.2017.02.018
46. Lamba P., Kaur D.P., Raj S., Sorout J. Recycling/reuse of plastic waste as construction material for sustainable development: a review // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022. Vol. 29. Issue 57. Pp. 86156-86179. DOI: 10.1007/ s11356-021-16980-y
47. Meyer C. The greening of the concrete industry // Cement and Concrete Composites. 2009.
Vol. 31. Issue 8. Pp. 601-605. DOI: 10.1016/j. cemconcomp.2008.12.010
48. Hache E., Simoën M., Seek G.S., Bonnet C., Jabberi A., Carcanague S. The impact of future power generation on cement demand: An international and regional assessment based on climate scenarios // International Economics. 2020. Vol. 163. Pp. 114-133. DOI: 10.1016/j.inteco.2020.05.002
49. Rafiq A.H., Al-kamaki Y.S.S. The effect of adding waste plastic fibers on the concrete properties and shear strength of rc beams: a review // The Journal of University of Duhok. 2022. Vol. 25. Issue 2. Pp. 507-530. DOI: 10.26682/sjuod.2022.25.2.45
50. Da Silva T.R., de Azevedo A.R.G., Cecchin D., MarvilaM.T., AmranM., FediukR. et al. Application of plastic wastes in construction materials: A review using the concept of life-cycle assessment in the context of recent research for future perspectives // Materials. 2021. Vol. 14. Issue 13. P. 3549. DOI: 10.3390/ma14133549
51. López F.R., Sánchez G.F. Challenges for sustainability assessment by indicators // Leadership and Management in Engineering. 2011. Vol. 11. Issue 4. Pp. 321-325. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000142
52. Балалов В.В., Барабанова Т.А. Оценка жизненного цикла интеллектуальных устойчивых городов // Строительство: наука и образование. 2022. Т. 12. № 2. С. 72-101. DOI: 10.22227/23055502.2022.2.6
53. Olawumi T.O., Chan D.W. Critical success factors for implementing building information modeling and sustainability practices in construction projects: A Delphi survey // Sustainable Development. 2019. Vol. 27. Issue 4. Pp. 587-602. DOI: 10.1002/sd.1925
54. Elshafei G., Katunsky D., Zeleñáková M., Negm A. Opportunities for using analytical hierarchy process in green building optimization // Energies. 2022. Vol. 15. Issue 12. P. 4490. DOI: 10.3390/ en15124490
55. Chen C.H. A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach based on anp-entropy topsis for building materials supplier selection // Entropy. 2021. Vol. 23. Issue 12. P. 1597. DOI: 10.3390/e23121597
56. Gervásio H., da Silva L.S. Life-cycle social analysis of motorway bridges // Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 2013. Vol. 9. Issue 10. Pp. 1019-1039. DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2011.654124
57. Karami S., Karami E., Buys L., Drogemuller R. System dynamic simulation: A new method in social impact assessment (SIA) // Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2017. Vol. 62. Pp. 25-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2016.07.009
58. Fayek A.R. Fuzzy hybrid computing in construction engineering and management. Emerald Group Publishing, 2018. DOI: 10.1108/9781787438682
59. Kermanshachi S., Rouhanizadeh B., Dao B. Application of Delphi method in identifying, ranking, and
e е
<D (D
t О
iï G Г
S С
0 со
n СО
1 с
y 1
J со
u-
^ I
n о
C 3 о
=¡ ( n
Q
СО
со
о
n
Г 6 о о
С о
CD ) [[
® «
л ' Ю DO ■ E
s У с о (D X OI OI
M 2 О О 10 10 u w
W (0 N N
о о
tv N
in in
¡г <D
U 3 > 1Л С И 2
U 09 . r
00 g>
Л
<D <U
О ё
о
о о CD <r
Si §
CO "
41 Л
СЯ с
£= о
CL ° ^ с Ю О
s ¡1
о E со ^
CO CO
weighting project complexity indicators for construction projects // Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction. 2020. Vol. 12. Issue 1. DOI: 10.1061/(asce)la.1943-4170.0000338
60. Zavadskas E.K., Turskis Z., Volvaciovas R., Kildiene S. Multi-criteria assessment model of technologies // Studies in Informatics and Control. 2013. Vol. 22. Issue 4. DOI: 10.24846/v22i4y201301
61. Guan D., Gao W., Su W., Li H., Hokao K. Modeling and dynamic assessment of urban economy -resource - environment system with a coupled system dynamics — geographic information system model // Ecological Indicators. 2011. Vol. 11. Issue 5. Pp. 13331344. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.02.007
62. Mohagheghian E., Hosseini-Nasab H., Abraham A., Fakhrzad M.B. Sustainability considerations in the product design using system dynamics and fuzzy cognitive maps // Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 2020. Pp. 383-394. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-73689-7_37
63. Basaran B., Kalkan I., Aksoylu C., Ozkiltg Y.O., Sabri M.M.S. Effects of Waste Powder, Fine and Coarse Marble Aggregates on Concrete Compressive Strength // Sustainability. 2022. Vol. 14. Issue 21. P. 14388. DOI: 10.3390/su142114388
64. Sivamani J. Sustainable utilization of dumped concrete wastes as fine aggregates in concrete — an experimental study // International Journal of Engineering. 2022. Vol. 35. Issue 9. Pp. 1795-1802. DOI: 10.5829/ije.2022.35.09c.16
65. Yun C.M., RahmanM.R., KuokK.K., Chai A.P.S., Ding A.B.S., Bakri M.K.B. Glass waste as coarse aggregate filler replacement in concrete // Waste Materials in Advanced Sustainable Concrete. 2022. Pp. 25-44. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-98812-8_2
Поступила в редакцию 14 декабря 2022 г. Принята в доработанном виде 4 апреля 2023 г. Одобрена для публикации 19 апреля 2023 г.
Об авторах: Наджи Алаа Джалиль Наджи — аспирант Инженерной академии департамента строительства; Российский университет дружбы народов имени Патриса Лумумбы (РУДН); 117198, г. Москва, ул. Миклухо-Маклая, д. 6; ORCID: 0000-0002-9156-6899; 1042215018@pfur.ru;
Эльшейх Ассер Мохамед — кандидат технических наук, доцент Инженерной академии департамента строительства; Российский университет дружбы народов имени Патриса Лумумбы (РУДН); 117198, r. Москва, ул. Миклухо-Маклая, д. 6; elsheykh_am@pfur.ru.
Вклад авторов:
Наджи А.Дж. — идея, сбор материала и обработка данных, написание статьи. Эльшейх А.М. — доработка текста, научное редактирование. Авторы заявляют об отсутствии конфликта интересов.
66. Agrawal Y., Gupta T., Sharma R.K. Strength and durability assessment of concrete containing dolomite quarry waste as fine aggregate // Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2022. Vol. 24. Issue 1. Pp. 268-286. DOI: 10.1007/s10163-021-01318-0
67. Piro N.S., Mohammed A., Hamad S.M., Kurda R. Electrical resistivity-compressive strength predictions for normal strength concrete with waste steel slag as a coarse aggregate replacement using various analytical models // Construction and Building Materials. 2022. Vol. 327. P. 127008. DOI: 10.1016/j. conbuildmat.2022.127008
68. Abdullah D.J., Abbas Z.K., Abed S.K. Some properties of concrete containing waste brick as partial replacement of coarse aggregate and addition of nano brick powder // IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2022. Vol. 961. Issue 1. P. 012093. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/961/1/012093
69. Radhi M.M., Khalil W.I., Shafeeq S. Flexural behavior of sustainable reinforced concrete beams containing HDPE plastic waste as coarse aggregate // Cogent Engineering. 2022. Vol. 9. Issue 1. DOI: 10.1080/23311916.2022.2127470
70. Suksiripattanapong C., Phetprapai T., Singsang W., Phetchuay C., Thumrongvut J., Tabyang W. Utilization of recycled plastic waste in fiber reinforced concrete for eco-friendly footpath and pavement applications // Sustainability. 2022. Vol. 14. Issue 11. P. 6839. DOI: 10.3390/ su14116839
71. Ghanem H., Chahal S., Khatib J., Elkordi A. Flexural behavior of concrete beams reinforced with recycled plastic mesh // Buildings. 2022. Vol. 12. Issue 12. P. 2085. DOI: 10.3390/buildings12122085
С W
il u >
