Akomea-Frimpong, I; Jin, X; Osei Kyei, R; Tetteh, P A; Tumpa, R J; Ofori, J N A and Pariafsai, F (2024) A review of circular economy models and success factors on public-private partnership infrastructure development. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 14(1), pp. 109-126. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: The application of circular economy (CE) has received wide coverage in the built environment, including public-private partnership (PPP) infrastructure projects, in recent times. However, current studies and practical implementation of CE are largely associated with construction demolition, waste and recycling management. Few studies exist on circular models and success factors of public infrastructures developed within the PPP contracts. Thus, the main objective of this article is to identify the models and key success factors associated with CE implementation in PPP infrastructure projects. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken in this study using forty-two (42) peer-reviewed journal articles from Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and PubMed. Findings: The results show that environmental factors, sustainable economic growth, effective stakeholder management, sufficient funding, utilization of low-carbon materials, effective supply chain and procurement strategies facilitate the implementation of CE in PPP infrastructure projects. Key CE business models are centered around the extension of project life cycle value, circular inputs and recycling and reuse of projects. Research limitations/implications: Although the study presents relevant findings and gaps for further investigations, it has a limited sample size of 42 papers, which is expected to increase as CE gain more prominence in PPP infrastructure management in future. Practical implications: The findings are relevant for decision-making by PPP practitioners to attain the social, economic and environmental benefits of transitioning to circular infrastructure management. Originality/value: This study contributes to articulating the key models and measures toward sustainable CE in public infrastructure development.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | circular business models; circular economy; critical success factors; literature review; PPP infrastructures; sustainability |
| Index terms: | life cycle value, implementation, economic growth, systematic literature review, stakeholder management, science, environmental factor, critical success factor, public infrastructure, circular economy, recycling, built environment, infrastructure management, journal, partnership, practitioner, decision-making, investigation, infrastructure development, sample size, literature review, procurement strategy, methodology, infrastructure project, business model, success factor, funding |
| Subjects: | specialized education, health monitoring assessment and metrics, research methods, data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, value management, data collection methods, economic development, practitioner, control systems, participation process, business, economic analysis, partnership management, sustainable design, infrastructure and transport systems, waste management, contractual arrangements, environmental science, decision analysis, research dissemination and communication, infrastructure engineering, research evaluation and metrics |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Risk Management, Urban Studies, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Health and Safety, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Research Practice, Project Management, Education, Cost Management |
| 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