Sustainability in construction and built environment: A "wicked problem"?

Goel, A (2019) Sustainability in construction and built environment: A "wicked problem"? Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 8(1), pp. 2-15. ISSN 2046-6099

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine various uncertainties underlying the concept of sustainability in construction and built environment (SCBE) and determine if SCBE is a “wicked problem” (WP). Design/methodology/approach: Qualitative text analysis and inductive reasoning are used as research methods in this paper. Text analysis of extant literature is performed to categorise the uncertainties underlying the concept of SCBE. Inductive reasoning, based on these categories of uncertainties and the characteristics of WPs provided in the seminal work of Rittel and Webber (1973), is used to assess SCBE as a probable WP. Findings: Six distinct categories of uncertainties underlying the concept of SCBE are developed: temporal uncertainty, spatial uncertainty, stakeholder uncertainty, societal uncertainty, dimensional uncertainty and assessment uncertainty. The inductive reasoning provides a prima facie evidence that SCBE, underpinned by these uncertainties, is a WP. Originality/value: To the best of author’s knowledge, this is first of its kind analysis that assesses SCBE from a WP perspective by a systematic categorisation of underlying uncertainties. The findings necessitate a new approach for the context-specific conception of sustainability to commensurate with local values. They also provide a sound academic base to challenge the positivist notions generally associated with SCBE, reflected in sustainability assessment and rating systems currently pursued globally as a means of promoting SCBE.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: built environment; inductive reasoning; sustainability; sustainable construction; wicked problem
Index terms: built environment, reasoning, sustainability assessment, sustainable construction, text analysis, methodology, wicked problem, evidence
Subjects: risk assessment, evaluation and assessment methods, analytical methods, sustainable construction, research methods, sustainability assessment, infrastructure and transport systems, cognitive psychology
Topics: Sustainability, Risk Management, Research Practice, Urban Studies
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