Embedding circular economy in infrastructure through social strategies: PLS SEM approach

Abdul Razak, R.; Alias, A. R.; A.Rahman, R. and Lee, Y. S. (2026) Embedding circular economy in infrastructure through social strategies: PLS SEM approach. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 24(5), pp. 1215-1234. ISSN 1726-0531

Abstract

Purpose – This study aims to examine the role of governance, integration and policy-oriented social strategies in shaping CE-based infrastructure projects in Malaysia. By identifying, categorizing and validating key social strategies, this study provides empirical support for theoretically derived dimensions, highlighting the essential role of social-organizational in CE implementation. Design/methodology/approach – This study engaged 156 practitioners and experts who are directly involved in CE-related initiatives from various regions throughout Malaysia. Exploratory factor analysis established the core social strategic dimensions, followed by partial least squares – structural equation modelling to examine the hypothesized relationships. Findings – The findings highlight that social sustainability in CE-based infrastructure is not driven by isolated interventions, but by the systemic alignment of transparent governance, inclusive integration and coherent policy frameworks. These three strategic dimensions were found to significantly and positively influence social sustainability in CE-based infrastructure projects (p < 0.01). Governance enhances accountability, transparency and trust; integration facilitates participatory collaboration among public, private and community actors; and policy institutionalizes inclusivity and long-term societal benefits. Originality/value – This study advances CE scholarship by positioning social strategies as a core pillar, rather than a peripheral element, of circular transformation. It provides empirical validation for a holistic framework that embeds governance, stakeholder inclusion and policy coherence into CE-based infrastructure planning. The findings offer practical guidance for policymakers and industry leaders involved in ongoing national initiatives such as the Twelfth Malaysia Plan and the National Circular Economy Roadmap (2021–2040), and contribute to broader international sustainability agendas, particularly the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: circular economy; governance; infrastructure development; integration; policy; social sustainability
Index terms: practitioner, infrastructure project, implementation, United Nations, dimension, coherence, partial least square, integration, circular economy, accountability, transformation, infrastructure planning, Malaysia, validation, strategy, structural equation modelling, transparency, exploratory factor analysis, social sustainability, infrastructure development, methodology, collaboration, sustainable development goal, governance
Subjects: professional development, practitioner, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, statistical analysis, human factors and perception, strategic project management, liability law, health monitoring assessment and metrics, business, management, institutional frameworks, organizational analysis, contractual arrangements, Geography, infrastructure engineering, sustainable design, research methods
Topics: Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Legal Issues, Sustainability, Project Management, Governance, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Information Management, Geographical Context
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