IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v25y2023i3d10.1007_s10668-022-02168-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk management in green building: a review of the current state of research and future directions

Author

Listed:
  • Hung Duy Nguyen

    (University of Padova)

  • Laura Macchion

    (University of Padova)

Abstract

There has been considerable interest in investigating risk factors in Green Building (GB) projects, with increasing debates in recent years. This study aims to investigate tendencies and identify gaps in the GB risk literature, which can define future research guidelines, with an extensive analysis of the latest contributions. A systematic literature review was conducted by analyzing 64 relevant studies from 2006 to 2020. The results revealed that the GB risk topic is somewhat nascent but growing and almost limited to several countries, including Singapore, the USA, Australia, and China. Notably, this research discovered and classified the main themes of GB risk studies: (1) identify risk factors in implementing GB projects, (2) create risk assessment models for GB projects, (3) study according to specific types of GB risks, and (4) investigate risks in green retrofit projects. Also, a comprehensive list of GB risk factors was provided that could be a helpful reference for industry practitioners and future researchers. Furthermore, this research identified gaps in the current literature, such as inconsistency in identifying GB risk factors, lack of investigation of the relationship between GB risks and project outcomes, and lack of exploring in cross-country or developing countries. Finally, this research suggested future research directions to enrich the literature. Thus, this study contributes a valuable platform for both practitioners and researchers to comprehend the development of the GB risk literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Hung Duy Nguyen & Laura Macchion, 2023. "Risk management in green building: a review of the current state of research and future directions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2136-2172, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:25:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02168-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02168-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-022-02168-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-022-02168-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zerkin, Allen J., 2006. "Mainstreaming high performance building in New York City: A comprehensive roadmap for removing the barriers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 137-155.
    2. Guangdong Wu & Guofeng Qiang & Jian Zuo & Xianbo Zhao & Ruidong Chang, 2018. "What are the Key Indicators of Mega Sustainable Construction Projects? —A Stakeholder-Network Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Jarosław Górecki & Manuel Díaz-Madroñero, 2020. "Who Risks and Wins?—Simulated Cost Variance in Sustainable Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-31, April.
    4. Dalya Ismael & Tripp Shealy, 2018. "Sustainable Construction Risk Perceptions in the Kuwaiti Construction Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Berardi, Umberto, 2017. "A cross-country comparison of the building energy consumptions and their trends," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 230-241.
    6. Brian Edwards, 2006. "Benefits of green offices in the UK: analysis from examples built in the 1990s," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 190-204.
    7. Manuel J. Carretero-Ayuso & Carlos E. Rodríguez-Jiménez, 2019. "Calculation of the Risk of Lawsuits over Construction Flaws in Flat Roofs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    8. G.K. Koulinas & O.E. Demesouka & P.K. Marhavilas & A.P. Vavatsikos & D.E. Koulouriotis, 2019. "Risk Assessment Using Fuzzy TOPSIS and PRAT for Sustainable Engineering Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Jasmin Kientzel & Gerjo Kok, 2011. "Environmental Assessment Methodologies for Commercial Buildings: An Elicitation Study of U.S. Building Professionals’ Beliefs on Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(12), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Bon-Gang Hwang & Ming Shan & Helena Phua & Seokho Chi, 2017. "An Exploratory Analysis of Risks in Green Residential Building Construction Projects: The Case of Singapore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, June.
    11. Aven, Terje, 2016. "Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 1-13.
    12. I Putu Artama Wiguna & Stephen Scott, 2006. "Relating risk to project performance in Indonesian building contracts," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(11), pages 1125-1135.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nasanjargal Erdenekhuu & Balázs Kocsi & Domicián Máté, 2022. "A Risk-Based Analysis Approach to Sustainable Construction by Environmental Impacts," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Sadaf Dalirazar & Zahra Sabzi, 2022. "Barriers to sustainable development: Critical social factors influencing the sustainable building development based on Swedish experts' perspectives," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1963-1974, December.
    3. Ming Shan & Yu-Shan Li & Bon-Gang Hwang & Jia-En Chua, 2021. "Productivity Metrics and Its Implementations in Construction Projects: A Case Study of Singapore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, November.
    4. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    5. Peng Wu & Yongze Song & Jun Wang & Xiangyu Wang & Xianbo Zhao & Qinghua He, 2017. "Regional Variations of Credits Obtained by LEED 2009 Certified Green Buildings—A Country Level Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. repec:arp:tjssrr:2019:p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Mussard, Stéphane & Pi Alperin, María Noel, 2021. "Accounting for risk factors on health outcomes: The case of Luxembourg," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(3), pages 1180-1197.
    8. Liang Ma & Yun Le & Hongyang Li & Ruoyu Jin & Poorang Piroozfar & Mingqiang Liu, 2018. "Regional Comparisons of Contemporary Construction Industry Sustainable Concepts in the Chinese Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, October.
    9. Zhou, Xiao & Huang, Zhou & Scheuer, Bronte & Wang, Han & Zhou, Guoqing & Liu, Yu, 2023. "High-resolution estimation of building energy consumption at the city level," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    10. Aitor Barrio & Fernando Burgoa Francisco & Andrea Leoncini & Lars Wietschel & Andrea Thorenz, 2021. "Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of a Novel Bio-Based Multilayer Panel for Construction Applications," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, September.
    11. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    12. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    13. Heiner Ackermann & Erik Diessel & Michael Helmling & Neil Jami & Johanna Münch, 2024. "Computing Optimal Mitigation Plans for Force-Majeure Scenarios in Dynamic Manufacturing Chains," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1-35, June.
    14. Aigner, Philipp & Schlütter, Sebastian, 2023. "Enhancing gradient capital allocation with orthogonal convexity scenarios," ICIR Working Paper Series 47/23, Goethe University Frankfurt, International Center for Insurance Regulation (ICIR).
    15. Mangirdas Morkunas & Gintaras Cernius & Gintare Giriuniene, 2019. "Assessing Business Risks of Natural Gas Trading Companies: Evidence from GET Baltic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-14, July.
    16. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    17. Dr Jason Mwanza & Nothando Tshuma, 2023. "Mitigating Business Risk in Manufacturing SMEs: A nexus between informal and formal business risk management: A case of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(1), pages 1107-1138, January.
    18. Li, Weijun & Sun, Qiqi & Zhang, Jiwang & Zhang, Laibin, 2024. "Quantitative risk assessment of industrial hot work using Adaptive Bow Tie and Petri Nets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    19. Ekaterine Gulua & Natalia Kharadze, 2022. "Employed Students' Development Challenges in Georgia," European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 8, ejis_v8_i.
    20. Don Pagach & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala, 2020. "The Challenges and Opportunities for ERM Post-COVID-19: Agendas for Future Research," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-10, December.
    21. KeumJi Kim & SeongHwan Yoon, 2018. "Assessment of Building Damage Risk by Natural Disasters in South Korea Using Decision Tree Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:25:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02168-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.