Sharif, A A (2025) A framework for social sustainability on the building level: A contextual approach. Construction Innovation, 25(3), pp. 710-731. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to build on a contextualised approach for revealing the particularities of social sustainability indicators on the building scale within the particular context of Jordan, focusing on the buildings of the Dahiyat Al Hussein suburb. Design/methodology/approach: This study relied on a review of the relevant previous research as well as global, regional and local rating tools, followed by working with a diversified participant base comprising experts as well as users through Delphi rounds and analytic hierarchy process-based assessments. Findings: This study resulted in several key indicators that were classified into three main categories: environmental friendliness, comfort and convenience and social blend. It resembled a step on the path towards the standardisation of context-specific social sustainability indicators, an effort that would be further supported by future research addressing other development within Jordan. Originality/value: The sustainability debate has, for long, acquired the undivided attention of its key stakeholders. With the continuous rise of global attention, the conceptualisation of sustainability has grown more specialised in both function and scale, and sustainable measures have been developed at the macro and micro levels. With the further spread of the concept, recognition of its contextual differences between various countries became more vivid, where the social dimension attains particular importance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytic hierarchy process; building level; Delphi technique; local context; social sustainability; sustainability indicators |
| Index terms: | Delphi technique, methodology, sustainability indicator, comfort, standardization, social sustainability, Jordan, dimension, key indicator |
| Subjects: | Geography, research methods, sustainability assessment, communities and social development, data collection methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics, project delivery, performance measurement, occupational health and safety management |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Geographical Context, Project Management, Health and Safety, Sustainability, Research Practice, Stakeholder 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