Hendrickson, C and Horvath, A (2000) Resource use and environmental emissions of U.S. Construction sectors. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(1), pp. 38-44. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Reducing the environmental effects of construction is a continuing professional and social concern to promote sustainable development. In this paper, we estimate the major commodity and service inputs, resource requirements, and environmental emissions and wastes for four major U.S. construction sectors as defined by the Department of Commerce: (1) highway, bridge, and other horizontal construction [0.6% of the 1992 U.S. gross domestic product (GDP)]; (2) industrial facilities and commercial and office buildings (1.5% of GDP); (3) residential one-unit buildings (1.9% of GDP); and (4) other construction (towers, water, sewer and irrigation systems, railroads, etc.) (2.4% of GDP). Our estimates include the entire supply chain of material, energy, and service suppliers for these sectors with the use of a detailed 1992 input-output model of the U.S. economy and publicly available environmental data. We find that in general, the four major U.S. construction sectors appear to use fewer resources and have lower rates of environmental emissions and wastes than their share of the GDP might suggest.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | construction sector, irrigation systems, sustainable development, sewer, estimate, environmental effect, commerce, office building, gross domestic product |
| Subjects: | environmental engineering, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, asset management, health safety and environment, financial and cost management, economic analysis, environmental impact, construction type |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Construction Technology, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| 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