Phung, Q.; Erdogan, B. and Nielsen, Y. (2026) An integrated framework for managing sustainability in construction projects. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, pp. 1-21. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose – In both research and practice, the lack of explicit, actionable project-level sustainability management hinders the translation of high-level strategies into effective project-lifecycle practices. This paper addresses this gap by developing a holistic and process-based management framework for managing sustainability in construction projects. Design/methodology/approach – This study used a qualitative, exploratory design with design science research to develop and validate a sustainability management framework for construction projects. It was built from literature and best practice synthesis, then validated through interviews and quantitative evaluations with 14 industry experts, enabling refinement and ensuring theoretical and practical relevance. Findings – The resulting framework, GEPAS, comprises five interlinked components: A1-Define sustainability goals, A2-Enhance the project team, A3-Plan sustainability, A4-Assess sustainability and A5-Manage stakeholders. Evaluation indicated that GEPAS offers clear, structured and practical guidance for integrating sustainability into construction project management. Practical implications – GEPAS enables project managers and stakeholders to define, implement and monitor sustainability objectives systematically, fostering collaboration, informed decision-making and greater stakeholder empowerment through clear roles, shared ownership and active engagement. Its alignment with established standards allows integration into existing practices with minimal disruption, while helping projects deliver measurable contributions to relevant SDGs. Originality/value – This research is the first to develop and validate a process-based framework that holistically embeds sustainability principles into all stages of the construction project lifecycle, while aligning with existing project management standards. It advances theory by operationalising sustainability as a core project objective and offers practitioners a practical tool to overcome common barriers to sustainable delivery.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | assessment; green building; integration; planning; project management; project teams; stakeholder management; sustainability; sustainable buildings |
| Index terms: | integration, design science research, project management, construction project, interview, ownership, project team, green building, lifecycle, sustainability management, practitioner, strategy, stakeholder management, best practice, construction project management, collaboration, empowerment, methodology, project manager, sustainable building, decision-making |
| Subjects: | practitioner, environmental engineering, design practice, decision analysis, project management theory and practice, data collection methods, participation process, sustainable construction, research methods, economics, project delivery, management, organizational analysis, business, profession, production management |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Human Resources, Sustainability, Design Practice, Research Practice, Project Management, Organizational Design, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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