Liu, X; Zhu, T; Xue, Y; Huang, Z and Le, Y (2025) Analyzing the drivers of the low-carbon construction supply chain based on an integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(8), pp. 5132-5159. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – Carbon reduction in the construction supply chain can critically affect the construction industry's transition to an environmentally sustainable one. However, implementing carbon reduction in all parties is restricted because of the poor understanding of the drivers influencing the low-carbon construction supply chain (LCCSC). The purpose of this paper is to systematically identify the drivers of LCCSC, analyze their causality, and prioritize the importance of their management. Design/methodology/approach – A decision-making analysis process was developed using an integrated decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL)–analytical network process (ANP). First, the hierarchical drivers of the LCCSC were identified through a literature review. The DEMATEL method was subsequently applied to analyze the interactions between the drivers, including the direction and strength of impact. Finally, the ANP analysis was used to obtain the drivers' weights; consequently, their priorities were established. Findings – Various factors with complex interactions drive LCCSC. With respect to their influence relationships, incentive policy, regulatory policy, consumers' low-carbon preference, market competition, supply chain performance, and managers' low-carbon awareness have more significant center degrees and are cause drivers. Their strong correlations and influence on other drivers should be noticed. In terms of weights in the driver system, regulatory policy, consumers' low-carbon preference, supply chain performance, and incentive policy are the key drivers of LCCSC and require primary attention. Other drivers, such as supply chain collaboration, employee motivation, and public participation, play a minor driving role with less management priority. Originality/value – Despite some contributing studies with localized perspectives, the systematic analysis of LCCSC drivers is limited, especially considering their intricate interactions. This paper establishes the LCCSC driver system, explores the influence relationships among the drivers, and determines the key drivers. Hence, it contributes to the sustainable construction supply chain domain by enabling decision-makers and practitioners to systematically understand the drivers of LCCSC and gain management implications on priority issues with limited resources.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction supply chain; DEMATEL–ANP; drivers; low carbon |
| Index terms: | interaction, construction industry, supply chain performance, construction supply chain, low carbon, DEMATEL method, carbon reduction, preference, public participation, practitioner, competition, low-carbon construction, methodology, decision-making, collaboration, motivation, literature review, sustainable construction, manager, laboratory |
| Subjects: | behavioral psychology, market analysis, research management, sustainable construction, sustainability assessment, research methods, decision-making and reasoning, psychology, climate science, practitioner, industry analysis, decision analysis, management, participation process, data analysis and analytics, sustainability and energy, construction logistics, supply chain performance |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Supply Chain Management, Sustainability, Risk 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