Xie, L; Xu, T; Ju, T and Xia, B (2023) Explaining the alienation of megaproject environmental responsibility behavior: A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis study in China. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(7), pp. 2794-2813. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The alienation of megaproject environmental responsibility (MER) behavior is destructive, but its mechanism has not been clearly depicted. Based on fraud triangle theory and the fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) method, this study explored the combined effect of antecedent factors on alienation of MER behavior. Design/methodology/approach: Based on the fraud triangle theory and literature review, eight influencing factors associated with the alienation of MER behavior were first identified. Subsequently, the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis was used in this study to reveal configurations influencing alienation of MER behavior. Findings: The study found nine configurations of MER behavioral alienation antecedent factors, integrated into three types of driving modes, i.e. “economic pressure + learning effect,” “institutional defect + moral rejection,” and “information asymmetry + economic pressure + expectation pressure.” Originality/value: By analyzing the configuration effects of various induced conditions, this study puts forward a comprehensive analysis framework to solve the alienation of MER behavior in the megaprojects and a practical strategy to control alienation of MER behavior.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alienation of megaproject environmental responsibility behavior; fraud triangle theory; qualitative comparative analysis |
| Index terms: | influencing factor, fuzzy set, information asymmetry, fraud, literature review, qualitative comparative analysis, strategy, configuration, methodology, megaproject, China |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, transaction economics, data analysis and analytics, strategic project management, management, research methods, Geography, decision-making and optimization, professional ethics, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here