Assessment of social sustainability in construction projects using social network analysis

123Citations
Citations of this article
316Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to propose a framework that puts the stakeholders at the forefront of achieving sustainability in the social context. This research, thus, argues that the social sustainability outcomes in construction are best achieved by taking into account the satisfactions of the stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach - Based on sustainability and equity theories, a dynamic assessment model has been developed to evaluate the contributions of projects in a social context. Multiple stakeholders and their differing interests associated with the construction projects have been integrated using social network analysis. The mapping of the relationships between the project stakeholders, with respect to their relative stakes and seven social core functions, have been integrated in the assessment model. Findings - The findings of this research suggest that the degree of satisfying the needs of diverse stakeholders is highly significant in achieving social sustainability performance of projects. Using a case study from Saudi Arabia, the applicability and significance of the assessment model has been demonstrated. The application of the model provides the opportunity to identify any problems and to enhance the overall performance of projects in the social context. Research limitations/implications - The functionality and efficacy of the model need to be further tested outside the Saudi Arabian region. Originality/value - The research is original in the sense that for the first time, a novel approach has been developed, putting the stakeholders at the forefront of achieving sustainability outcomes in construction projects.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Almahmoud, E., & Doloi, H. K. (2015). Assessment of social sustainability in construction projects using social network analysis. Facilities, 33(3–4), 152–176. https://doi.org/10.1108/F-05-2013-0042

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free