Puffer, S M; Zadeh, A A and Peng, Y (2024) Awareness of the global sand crisis and sand substitutes in the construction industry in the United States and Canada: A stakeholder analysis. International Journal of Construction Management, 24(4), pp. 454-466. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The urgent call to address the global sand crisis has been sounded by the United Nations and environmental organizations, yet it is unclear whether this message has reached key stakeholders who are major consumers of sand and who make decisions about using sand or sustainable sand substitutes. The construction industry is by far the primary consumer of sand. Using a stakeholder framework, this study focuses on stakeholders in the US and Canadian construction industry. A survey completed by 378 respondents found very little familiarity with the sand crisis, sand substitutes in cement, or sand substitutes in building materials. No differences were found for decision makers purchasing sand and non-decision makers. As for roles, no differences were found among academics, architects, engineers, or managers except for familiarity with sand substitutes. Recommendations are offered to increase awareness of the sand crisis and encourage adoption of sustainable sand substitutes, and suggestions for further research are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | concrete; green buildings; sand; sand crisis; stakeholder analysis; sustainability |
| Index terms: | green building, United States, manager, survey, stakeholder analysis, architect, building material, sand, construction industry, Canada, United Nations, engineer, purchasing |
| Subjects: | practitioner, profession, data collection methods, participation process, institutional frameworks, building materials, Geography, design practice, industry analysis, procurement strategy |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Governance, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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