Junussova, T. and Nadeem, A. (2026) Modelling sustainable construction material management implementation strategy indicators in developed economies. International Journal of Construction Management, 26(9), pp. 1925-1943. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The construction industry faces persistent challenges in meeting global sustainability targets, with organizations often prioritizing operational efficiency over sustainable materials management, despite materials representing a substantial proportion of project costs. This study investigates Sustainable Construction Materials Management (SCMM) implementation strategies through a systematic literature review and empirical analysis across developed economies. The research methodology identified 24 SCMM implementation strategies through literature analysis and expert validation, collecting data from 153 construction material supply specialists across Australia, the UK, and the US via structured questionnaires. Analysis employed mean score analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). Findings reveal significant concordance between literature-derived insights and practical challenges, particularly highlighting the persistent fragmentation of material supply software systems. EFA identified five clusters: data and operational safety, material recovery, sustainable procurement, Building Information Modelling (BIM)-enabled performance improvement, and preventive strategies. Material recovery with real-time resource monitoring emerged as the predominant implementation strategy, while PLS-SEM demonstrated a significant mediating influence of BIM-enabled performance improvement. The study contributes empirically validated insights into SCMM implementation strategies, advancing both theoretical understanding and practical applications in construction sustainability.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction supply chain management; exploratory factor analysis; structural equation modelling; sustainable construction materials management |
| Index terms: | implementation, material recovery, validation, construction material, project cost, construction supply chain, Australia, sustainable construction, partial least square, efficiency, fragmentation, modelling, sustainable material, systematic literature review, construction industry, research methodology, performance improvement, building information modelling, prioritizing, face, monitoring, structural equation modelling, strategy, materials management, exploratory factor analysis, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | operations management, data collection methods, management, information systems, sustainable construction, psychology, industry analysis, research evaluation and metrics, performance management, performance measurement, research design and methodology, construction logistics, control systems, analytical methods, business, sustainable materials, professional development, economics, contractual arrangements, sustainable design, statistical analysis, building materials, Geography, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Supply Chain Management, Information Management, Digital Applications, Quality Management, Site Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Procurement, Geographical Context, Cost Management, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Construction Materials |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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