International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4124
Sustainability and Pollution Impacts at a Civil Engineering Project in Doha:
Contractor Management Implications
P. James Project Director, Graduate School Bangkok University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Abstract
This is a research paper focused on assessing the Client’s
Engineer(PMC) managers/senior engineer’s perceptions of
sustainability management issues relating to a civil
engineering project in Doha. In order to consider more
implicitly the questions and issues raised, this empirical
groundwork utilised an interpretive perspective. The scope for
this research was the PMC managers/senior engineers of a
single civil engineering project situated in Doha, Qatar. The
population for this study was made up of a number of
individual (26) PMC managers/senior engineer’s located at
one main-site, and a total of 14managers/senior engineers
were determined as the resultant sample frame.
The outcomes consisted of five (5) main themes, namely:
Contractor Management Operating Strategies; Client
Management Strategies; Costs of Contractor Mismanagement
of Pollution; Management Responsibility; Pollution Issues;
and 13 sub-themes raised from an initial question.
The paper gives a clear insight into the practical sustainability
issues surrounding a civil engineering project setting in Doha,
and the implications of contractor management strategies in
relation to environmental management and developments
were illuminated. The paper suggests that developments of
this kind may benefit from a greater awareness and
transparency of implementation of environmental
management standards, whilst delineating the issues of
significant costs and associated concerns, and the effects on
environmental mitigation opportunities through the use of
appropriate management strategies.
Very little research has been conducted in this area in Qatar
and the paper exposes weak aspects of environmental
management in Doha, which is previously unexplored in
today’s demanding civil engineering environment.
Keywords: Environment; Projects; Civil Engineering;
Management, Doha
Introduction Most writers observe that construction activities have a great
effect on the environment in which they are situate (1). An
environmental assessment is carried out on almost every
construction activity today (2), which is done to assure that
the construction activities and practices that are carried out
minimize environmental damage (3). As such, considerable
attention has been given to environmental impacts of
construction sites because of the destructive impacts (4) where
construction appears to be a major focus for polluting agents
(5) as they affect the sustainability capability of the area (6)
and pose a serious risk for contamination (7). This is often
through air, water and land contamination risks. Clients and
operating contractors don’t always pay specific attention to
environmental matters (8) and thus the construction managers
environmental knowledge needs to be enhanced (9) and
actions monitored to help mitigate such impacts (10). Further,
site management of environmental matters requires more than
just a cursory evaluation (11)as the site can quickly suffer
from the effects of pollution and mismanagement (12).It
requires a considered and integrative assessment (13), to
reassure the integrity of the environment (14) and the
sustainability of the ongoing construction activity (15).
Determining Construction Activity Environmental Impacts
in Doha
Development of an environmental management plan is often
the first step towards managing the environmental effects of
construction (16).This assessment process has been utilised
for almost 50 years and has now been accepted world-wide as
the “norm” as part of a larger international programme of
planning and assessment tools (17) underpinning
environmental evaluations of construction projects (18). There
would appear to be a wide variety of ways in which
environmentally impacting activities of construction can be
specified. One way would be through an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) – for example in the UK or EU
(Directive 85/337; 2011/92/EU as amended by EC Directive
97/11/EC) or its equivalent-leading to an Environmental
Statement of proposed construction activity. Its main aim is to
obtain judicial planning approval from the local authorities
overseeing the project – where the project is likely to have a
significant impact (19). However, some writers take a
different view and assess the various environments and their
impacts – such as Ecosystem(9), Natural Resources (5), and
Public Health impacts (7). The assessment framework
determines the quality and environmental orientation of the
project (20). Of importance is that cognizance is taken of the
legal and regulatory framework underpinning the
environmental assessment and to mitigate any raised issues
that arise from developing the environmental statement(21).
Environmental impacts can occur as a result of the use of a
resource or the pollution of a resource (22). An impact could
also be foreseen (and planned for) and thus be avoidable; or
unforeseen or cumulative leading to loss of plants, animals,
soil pollution, dust, soil compaction and/or erosion, water
pollution, air pollution, injuries and health debilitation
(humans and animals) (23). Most causes of impacts relate to
inadequate planning/management and not observing the
requirements of the EMS (24).
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4125
On Going Auditing and Monitoring of Environmental
Impacts
Environmentally responsible practices indicate that most large
projects would engage in an Environmental Management
System (EMS) (25) which is designed to provide the
objectives, methodology and the managerial motivation for
making appropriate ongoing management decisions(24). Thus,
environmental monitoring and consequent action leads to the
informed mitigation of environmental impacts (26).It also
leads to greater understanding of these impacts in terms of the
construction process and become preserved in the legacy
documents of the project (27).Where monitoring is conducted,
it is assumed that the supervising agency have a duty to
prescribe and moderate auditing returns to appropriate
standards (e.g. Legislative requirements–which is different
across countries and areas of operations); standards
requirements-e.g. ISO 14000:2015 (28); management best
practice requirements –e.g. sectorial reference document-Eco
Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) regulation (EC) No
1221/2009; and the donor (bank) exclusive requirements–e.g.
World Bank (29). It is difficult to understand how these could
all work together (e.g. see Shen and Walker, 30)-except that
local/national legislation and operating requirements would
provide specific obligations that must be met-all the others
may be considered voluntary or only operating at that location
for the duration of the construction of that project and are thus
independent and environmental decisions and outcomes result
from applicable analyses (31). These reflect important
frameworks/methodologies such as Life-Cycle Assessment
(LCA) (32)in the design of construction projects;
LEED/BREEAM (UK); Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA) (33); Risk Assessment (34); Economic Valuation (35);
and Multi-Attribute Approaches (36).
Having raised this as a literature gap issue (37; 38), this
creates the context for the research question, What are the Sustainability Issues and Impacts at the Construction Project for the Contractor and how can these be mitigated?
Methodology To investigate the issues generated within anon-site civil
engineering context, a deeper, more involved approach was
considered appropriate that required personal discussions on
such critical and important issues. In order to consider more
implicitly these generated issues, this empirical foundation
exploited an interpretive approach (39; 40). An assessment of
environmental issues targets personal components raised out
of individual experiences and is therefore an area of interest
where qualitative methodology is most appropriate to generate
this type of data.
This was an attempt to understand the perceptions of
managerial experiences at site. The Client’s Engineer (PMC)
managerial staff were considered specialist knowledge agents
and actors (41) as their opinions and experiences influenced
the perception of such engineering practices, and the
development and application of building appropriate site-
based management knowledge.
The research used a semi-structured interview conducted with
the PMC managers/senior engineer’s, who provided an
appropriate element of context and flexibility (42) and this
was further aided by applying an inductive/theory building
approach (43). Given the lack of appropriately focused
research in this area, this methodology is seen as suitable for
creating contextual data for the purpose of forming richer
theory development (44). A pilot study was carried out (4
respondents – not used in main interview/data collection
process) that allowed changes to language and questions that
had more meaning and understanding by the respondents
(following Kim, 45). This led to a more effective and
streamlined question routine and an enhanced communication
approach with respondents (46).
The population frame {26} for this study was made up of
available PMC managers/senior engineer’s who had direct on-
site responsibility for managing at site the
civil/electrical/mechanical engineering programmes and were
situate at identifiable locations, which is considered an
existing frame (47). This delivered an initial means for
appropriate sampling assessment with clear boundaries (48).
Given that not all individuals in this working group were
available for interview or were employed in the pilot study,
the sampling frame was configured as {19}, where all
respondents were included (49), and no respondent was
considered out of scope relative to the research orientation and
requirements (50). Consequently, and in line with a qualitative
approach (51), the respondents were chosen through applying
the approach of a targeted population of interest (52) and this
reflected the criteria of theoretical purpose, relevance and
appropriateness (43). This was considered adequate and
appropriate for this inquiry (53; 51), but it had no bearing on
the research logic (54). Additionally, using Glaser’s (55)
sampling processes, a total of {14}PMC managers/senior
engineers were thus determined as the resultant sample frame-
which could also be considered convenience sampling
according to Harrel and Fors (56); and meets the saturation
requirements of Guest, Bunce and Johnson (53) and thus takes
the sample frame beyond an empirically expected level.
Each interview was audio recorded for future analysis.
Interviews were conducted in English and took approximately
one hour. All interviews were conducted through Skype and
recorded digitally after gaining explicit permission (following
Duranti, 57) and were later transcribed verbatim using NVivo
12(a qualitative software package) using the approach
indicated by Bailey (58). The conduct of the interviews
follows a similar process used by Gray and Wilcox (59) and
James (60), with each individual being asked the same set of
questions – modified through ancillary questioning (probes
and follow-ups) in the same way as Balshem (61). To increase
the reliability of the data, the actual transcription was returned
to each respondent – via e-mail – for comment, correction,
addition or deletion and return, which followed the process of
validated referral (62). Whole-process validity was achieved
as the respondents were considered widely knowledgeable of
the context and content associated with the research
orientation (63). Each interview was initially manually
interrogated and coded using the Acrobat software according
to sub-themes that 'surfaced' from the interview dialogue-
using a form of open-coding derived from Glaser (64), and
Straus and Corbin (65). This treatment was also reinforced
and extended through the use of thematic analysis conducted
using the NVivo 12 (40). Each interview was treated and
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4126
coded independently. In this way, no portion of any interview
dialogue was left uncoded and the overall outcome
represented the shared respondent’s views and perspectives
through an evolving coding-sequence (66). Various themes
were sensed from the use of the software packages, as well as
from the initial manual-coding attempts. This multiple form of
interrogation was an attempt to increase the validity of the
choice of both key themes and sub-themes through a
triangulation process (67). NVivo 12 was further used to
explore these sub-themes by helping to pull together each of
these sub-themes from all the interviews (68). In this way, it
was possible to capture each respondent's comments across
transcripts (69) on each supported sub-theme and place them
together for further consideration and analysis (70).
The structure of the outcome is greatly influenced by the
emergence of the key-themes and sub-themes. The preferred
strategy for the analysis of the primary data was to use the
stated research question, which was used as a guide to
providing the outcome (based on Yin, 71). The research
methodology used was considered a mixed methodology
approach (46) and was determined to create the best possible
narrative of the situation in question. The application of the
overall research methodology produces construct validity
(72)-based upon the realism paradigm; and preferring to use
the terms of credibility and dependability which are accepted
by many qualitative researchers in place of reliability by
applying Guba’s constructs (73) and leading to the Lincoln
and Guba’s (74) notion of “progressive subjectivity”.
Figure 1: Research Outcomes
Illustration of Research Outcomes
The outline of the research outcomes for this study is shown
in Figure 1 above. The framework supported by appropriate
literature, illustrated below in Table 1, consists of five (5)
main themes, and fourteen (13) sub-themes. The outcomes are
stated below where the discussion focuses on the sub-theme
elements within each key theme. The discussion format used
in this paper reflects the respondent’s voice through a
streamlined and articulated approach for reporting. Thus, the
style adopted for reporting and illustrating the data is greatly
influenced by Gonzalez, (75) and also to a greater extent
Daniels et al. (76) and is discussed below, focusing on the
raised research question and the resultant themes. Table 1,
below illustrates the respondent references for each sub-
theme.
Table 1. Research question, themes and references
Table 1 above indicates the minimum responses for each
identified sub-theme.
Table 2. Major themes and respondents
Table 2above indicates the major themes and respondents
Results The results are presented below using the research question as
a pointer and supportive empirical evidence through indicated
extractions as in Gonzalez, (74). Consequently, considering
the research question-What are the Sustainability Issues and Impacts at the Construction Project for the Contractor and how can these be mitigated? The results are stated as five (5)
main themes, and thirteen (13) sub-themes as indicated below,
where each sub-theme theme is placed with each
corresponding main theme.
Main Theme – Contractor Management Operating Strategies
In order to acquire a picture of the status of the environmental
issues at site in relation to this theme, management
approaches to managing environmental problems appeared to
lack appropriate legal, financial or practical implementation.
Further, the focus for such issues is firmly located in the lack
of Client understanding.
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4127
In terms of Environmental Management Spending, this is
typified by one respondent (3) who suggested that, …I think that the Contractor should manage this problem better. They have the money, but they just won’t spend it on the workers living accommodations and facilities…Another respondent
(11) signified that, …There is a simple issue here, negligence. The Contractor doesn’t understand how not managing this is so negative. The Contractor just doesn’t care… Another
respondent (7) indicated that, …I think the Contractor perceives that spending on environmental matters is a waste of money and time. Sad but true…
In terms of Dealing with contaminated water and land, this is
illustrated by one respondent (9) who proposed that, …The PM just does not come here. This is too difficult of a job for them to do anything about now…Another respondent (13)
signified that, …It’s so sad to see. It was very pristine once. Now, it is a waste-ground. Very unforgiveable of the Contractor to let it go to this…Another respondent (2)
denoted that, …They[the Contractor] just don’t seem to want to do anything. They just dump and pollute on top of further pollution. It just isn’t right. I’m really not sure how legal it is, but it can’t go on like this…
In terms of Failure of Contractor to act when pollution is
revealed, this is exemplified by one respondent (4) who
suggested that, …The Contractor just left us here. We’ve had many people hospitalized and then sent home [out of the
country]. It is just not acceptable…Another respondent (8)
signified that, …Our management tends to be focused in the short-term. This is because they are finding it difficult to get their money from the client. And this may reflect their [Contractor] inability to do the construction correctly – but it may also reflect their ignorance of environmental issue management…Another respondent (10) denoted that, …The Contractor has had notices from its own staff about the pollution but has no interest in doing anything about it…
In terms of Contractor does not utilise a due diligence system,
this is illustrated by one respondent (1) who suggested that,
…We see it all the time here. It’s just not important to them because the client is also the “overseeing agency”. It’s that transparent…Another respondent (9) indicated that, …It is very clear that the Contractor follows instructions from the Client by ignoring such environmental problems and against our views and advice. No matter what evidence is put in front of them…Another respondent (13) advised that, …The system the Contractor uses is flawed, as it only allows certain data to be entered into it. The rest is left unreported. Not a good way to build confidence about environmental matters…
In terms of Contractor does not observe environmental policy
or EMS system requirements, this is characterized by one
respondent (7) who suggested that, …Management have the system, it’s just simply operationalizing it. But that costs effort and money. So it won’t happen here…Another respondent
(11) signified that, Because there is no oversight, the Contractor does what he likes. There is no point in reporting any pollution issues – they just get ignored. The Contractor operates with impunity…Another respondent (5) expressed
that, …The policy documents and the EMS are just paper chases. No real teeth is attached to them. All data and reports are just filed. Whoever, certifies the EMS does not mirror the reality of the site. No way…
Main Theme – Client Management Strategies
The project appears to have persistent issues with water
pollution and the Client’s lack of will to act. This predisposes
negative attitudes to industry best-practices and results in a
project oriented to possible failure through an intransient
Client.
In terms of Lack of will of the authorities to prevent water
pollution, this is typified by one respondent (6) who suggested
that, …The authorities don’t want to know. It just sickens you to know that our workers have to sleep and work in this mess-every day…Another respondent (12) denoted that, …It is significant that the client is central to these environmental problems. They just don’t care!..Another respondent (4)
indicated that, …I know of reports – whole reports – sent to the authorities, and yet nothing is done. It is as if the pollution doesn’t exist…Another respondent (10) determined that
…This is a serious issue. I know of a number of middle managers who have now departed, who were harassed by the client directly for reporting pollution issues. It’s serious, because they were trying to do something about this and were penalised…
In terms of Failure of Client to act when told about the issue,
this is characterized by one respondent (3) who suggested
that, …They don’t want to do anything. It just isn’t fair. They only have themselves to blame…Another respondent (9)
signified that, …It is clear that the client does not support best-practices regarding the environment…Another
respondent (7) advised that, …No matter how many reports I make, the client insists the problems are ours for showing them and that we should deal with them. How can you, when you can’t get permission to make the Contractor dig the road-up unless the client agrees…
Main Theme – Costs of Contractor Mismanagement of
Pollution
The Contractor appears to ignore their responsibilities for
managing health and environmental issues at site. There is the
perspective that adherence to ignoring pollution issues may
attract international attention as the monies associated with its
improper management resulting in worker illnesses and
polluted camp and work site are being siphoned off
unreasonably as profit.
In terms of Worker Based Issues, this is demonstrated by one
respondent (6) who suggested that, …We suffer and the management [Contractor] make the profit. There are substantial health issues for us, but we are ignored by everyone. People have died here because of pollution illnesses…Another respondent (11) signified that,
…Contractor management do not have a policy or the will to implement any repairs to the system to prevent any environmental problems. So at site and in the dorm, we have to manage ourselves…Another respondent (5) advocated that,
…Workers are expected to perform duties irrespective of the health and social issues when engaging in work at site. The site is often contaminated by foul smelling water and other materials. It can’t go on like this…
In terms of Site Pollution Cleanup, this is characterized by one
respondent (13) who proposed that, …Management don’t seem to want to deal with the pollution of soils on site. It’s got so bad that they just cover it up with new soil and hope for the
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4128
best. It’s going to take an awful lot of money to clean this site up when we are finished…Another respondent (2) advocated
that, …There’s a whole lot of dust caused by site vehicles. I think it has led to some serious concern by the locals…Another respondent (7) advocated that, …I would think that the Contractor sees the mess here, but because the Client doesn’t support any prevention measures then the cost of making the site clean is “wasted”. So nothing gets done…
Main Theme – Management Responsibility
This aspect appears to be flawed as the Contractor pursues a
management strategy that keeps it firmly in contradiction with
the Engineer’s views on managing appropriately. Further,
there would also appear to be issues raised relating to Client
protection which suggests a corrosive relationship for any
individual requiring financial transparency and environmental
advocation.
In terms of Lack of understanding of need to prevent water
pollution, this is typified by one respondent (7) who suggested
that, …Management [Contractor] don’t realise that it is their duty to seek out and then prevent pollution at site. But not here…Another respondent (4) indicated that, …I know that pollution is a problem here-and so does management[Contractor]. But they don’t take their responsibility seriously or carefully enough. Sad, but that’s how it is here…Another respondent (9) advocated that, …We tell management [Contractor] to do something, but they answer the same way each time. “It’s not our issue”…
In terms of Client Protection, this is epitomized by one
respondent (1) who suggested that, …Management [Contractor] did not conduct any risk assessments. It seems they didn’t know what to do. This pollution has been happening for a long time…Another respondent (6) advocated
that, …The Client is never seen around here. And when they do come, the screens go up. They don’t visit that often. It shows they are not interested…Another respondent (11)
advised that, …In this case, it is management [Contractor]
who go out of their way to make sure that the Client doesn’t see anything on site. It is choreographed wherever they go, they are chaperoned. They do this with the project data too. So management [Contractor] are scared of what the Client will find. So they hide it to protect them…
Main Theme – Pollution Issues
Manu pollution issues appear prevalent at site and the
Contractor does not appear to want to reduce its effects or at
least document/assess the pollution through the application of
appropriate environmental methodologies.
In terms of Variety of Types of Pollution, this is illustrated by
one respondent (8) who suggested that, …We experience a lot of pollution. Human waste, oil leakages, diesel leakages, and the vehicles exhaust [situation] is another indication that management are not serious about preventing pollution….Another respondent (2) advocated that, …There has been so much oil disposal in the water-runoff channel from the garage that you see see clearly successive events…Another respondent (5) advised that, …We see it every day. Most pollution is from human waste and oil leaks. Why can’t management see the problems created by polluting the site…
In terms of Pollution Assessment, this is epitomized by one
respondent (6) who informed that, …No, we never have any specific pollution tests. They are called for in writing, but ignored by the Contractor. The pollution is left in the ground and sometimes gets off-site too. It has never been catalogued, so the amount of pollution is unknown, but you can smell it clearly in the mornings as you walk by…Another respondent
(10) indicated that, …Management don’t seem to want to do such activities because it doesn’t help. It only signals that something is wrong and that they need to do something about it…Another respondent (3) suggested that, …No it’s not normal. Other sites have people employed to conduct environmental audits. But not here. It is very difficult to solve, because no one is monitoring the pollution. No one…
Results
In order to take this inquiry forward, the discussion
concentrates on the raised question to help address the
outcomes. The outcome illustrates the conceptual
development and relationships perceived to correspond to the
features informing sustainability management at site with the
need to illuminate Contractor management practices and to
focus on how these influence their possible strategic intent.
Consequently, the main focus for this discussion are the
characteristics revolving around the main themes-Contractor
Management Operating Strategies; Client Management
Strategies; Costs of Contractor Mismanagement of Pollution;
Management Responsibility; and Pollution Issues, as:
Contractor Management Operating Strategies
The Contractor and the Client appear to misunderstood their
collective responsibility to manage water pollution at site(77)
and this is reported frequently as a concern elsewhere too
(78). Further, the Contractor appears to make managerial
choices that reflect their strategic intent to ignore site and
wider pollution issues (contrary to good practice-see Teo, et
al., 79) as they refuse to acknowledge that there are any
environmental concerns(80)and that explicit attention needs to
be concentrated on its management ethic (81). Consequently,
the Contractor and the Client, need to be motivated to comply
with environmental legislation and codes – both national and
international (see Winter and May, 82). Underpinning this
aspect appears to be the lack of financial resolution and the
Contractor cost orientation (83) relating to address such
environmental issues(84) leading to inefficiency problems and
elevated wastage (85). Contractor management also appears to
have not accepted their duty of care to their workers(86)by
maintaining qualities of “vulnerability” (87) through
providing little or no training or education (88)in managing
the environment at site. This does little to deal with pollution
issues and fails in the development and application of a due
diligence system as evidenced through the inadequate
application of an EMS (89). Adherence to the EMS
requirements could provide a lead into building sustainable
construction (90) by providing tangible value (91), reduced
costs (92) and less waste (93).
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4129
Client Management Strategies
Contractor appears culpable, but so does the environmental
agency as their oversight requires greater engagement of site
activities leading to pollution issues. This may also reflect the
attitude of the Client, who appears to embodied in the same
legal relationship but should be epitomized by resolute
sustainable development practices (94) and transparency of
operations (95; 96).
Costs of Contractor Mismanagement of Pollution
The health of workers appears to be seriously affected by the
raised pollution issues but are consistently ignored by
Contractor management as reinforced by Haan, Barfield and
Hayes (97).Water quality has been cited by the U.N. (98) as
one of the key issues in water management in the 21st Century
and management’s response is therefore deemed inadequate to
protect worker’s health at site and to a wider degree
inadequate to protect local water supplies contrary to SCENR
No. 30, 2002 promulgating the Environmental Protection Law
(2003) and the Construction Dewatering Guidelines Qatar,
2014, 5.2 Construction Environmental Management Plan
(CEMP) and 5.3, Monitoring Plan, p28-29. The costs of
dealing with consistent pollution trails indicate that the costs
of environmental remediation can only increase as the
construction phases end (99). However, since most countries
have an independent overseeing authority for managing
pollution, this may not be a useful practice as the Client and
the overseer are one and the same – hindering the major
principles of transparency (95);independency (100) and
accountability (101). This raises the issue of the efficacy of
arrangements to manage environmental matters at site, lack of
engagement of the major stakeholders (102) and who will
reimburse the cleanup costs after construction has been
concluded (for example, Superfund, 103). Further, there is a
lack of Contractor or Client will to actively estimate the level
and impact of the pollution on site (104), which does little to
help mediate the true cost of the cleanup (105).Additionally,
treatments of the soil include Biological (106); Chemicals
(107); Physical stabilization methods (108) and washing
systems (109) will be costly and time-consuming. It is
expected that construction creates waste and that managing
this waste requires some sort of investment as for example,
upto 25% of construction materials are wasted (110; 111) and
at site this assertion has not been recognized by the Contractor
management, examined nor anticipated in their environmental
management plan.
Management Responsibility A lack of management understanding may also be a result of
insufficient scientific data regarding pollution and its
management (112). Construction creates enhanced
environmental risks, high levels of nonpoint sources (113) and
these need to be managed appropriately (114). Client
protection may be a result of major stakeholder pressure (23)
and related to financing issues (115).
Pollution Issues
The Contractor failed to utilize basic process-based controls-
such as the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control
(IPPC) EC Directive-2008/1/EC. This was necessary to ensure
the working site adhered to and conformed to internationally
respect operational environmental codes (116). It is further
evident from the data, that no water quality monitoring or
water-treatments (physical) was carried out by the Contractor-
either prior to, during or after construction. Contractor
management has the responsibility for overseeing the
pollution issue (Clause 26-Red Book Contract, 117) but
appears to refuse to assess and mediate the problems caused
by the pollution and so does not understand their
responsibility regarding pollution management (see for
example, The Considerate Constructor’s Scheme, 118), in the
UK). This is exasperated further as there does not appear to be
any LEED trained managers at site which would help to
provide more informed green project management practices
(119) and LEED construction efficacies (120).
Mitigating These Identified Issues Contractor site management strategies need to be changed to
offer a more professional undertaking by recognizing the
pollution requirements operating at site and to take such steps
that are necessary to reduce the impact of the construction
activities to acceptable levels (121)-and to continue
monitoring to make sure that such pollution issues are
managed appropriately (19).
The Contractor and the Client engineers may need training in
pollution management (122) and mechanisms to ensure that
they are aware of international best practices(123) thus
securing a consistent management outlook to managing
environmental matters at site.
The costs of pollution management and any environmental
activities necessary to provide a sustainable construction
process need to be fully minimized (124) through appropriate
intra-funding, possible alternative financing and consequent
financial management (125).
Introducing more visible independent, inter-regional
environmental inspections may lead to increased compliance
with appropriate legislation such as the Environmental
Protection Law (2003)-thus increasing oversight transparency
(126).
Training senior engineers in LEED techniques may help with
developing the culture of environmental management (127)
reducing overall environmental costs and help point to what is
important in a sustainable construction environment.
Integrating control of pollution with operationalized
scheduling (23) will ensure a modified construction process
focused on waste reduction (128) and lessening of other
pollution issues created at site. This will redistribute pollution
emission timelines to more manageable levels in line with
planned resources use variations (129).
Conclusions The Contractor, the Client and the environmental overseeing
entity has failed this construction sites requirement for
sustainable development (130), which has also had a negative
effect on worker and local health patterns (13).Building in a
safe working environment has also been negatively impacted
by the strategically negative intent of the Contractor and
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4130
therefore the need to maintain sustainability through
construction processes using environmental benchmarking
tools such as LEED (131) becomes a realistic educational
necessity for Contractor management (132).
Further elucidated problems of contractor management such
as no base-lining of soil pollution levels before construction or
during construction phases (contrary to European
Commission, 133); lack of engagement in an EIA process
(134); and the lack of interest in assessing and dealing with
pollution problems at site (135) must all be mitigated through
a streamlined sustainability process (23; 136) focusing on
generating appropriate environmental data in order to help
diminish environmental impacts of the construction activity
through appropriate strategic decision-making (131).
Consequently, this construction project in Doha, may not be
environmentally defensible in the short-term (137) as
sustainability issues remain at best a work in-progress as
present construction behavior exceeds the “capacity of the
waste system” at site (138). The Contractor management also
appear to fail to integrate environmental, social and economic
issues (139)but this can be moderated through crafting a
decision-centred approach focusing on the institutional
context (140).Additionally, renewable water supplies are
negligible in Doha (141) and therefore it is difficult to
understand the reticence of the Contractor and especially the
Client to deal with site environmental problems.
Further Work This inquiry assessed PMC Manager’s and Engineer’s
perceptions of pollution at a Doha construction project.
However, the research orientation could be extended to
include all engineers for their views of the pollution
management at site and also include Contractor managers and
engineers. Further implications could be drawn from such
work and evaluations made as to how such views could be
assessed, evaluated in terms of crucial legal/environmental
and international requirements and mitigated in the present
structuring and management of the construction project.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding The author received no financial support for the research
and/or authorship of this article.
References
[1] Hendrickson, C. T., and Horvath, A., 2000,
“Resource use and environmental emissions of U.S.
construction sectors, ”.J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,
126(1), pp. 38-44.
[2] Rubin, E.S., and Davidson, C.T., 2001, Introduction
to Engineering and Environment, McGraw-Hill, New
York, US.
[3] Hardy, A., 2007, “Environmental Design of
Buildings, ” Ekistics, 23(136), pp. 181-187.
[4] Bossink, B.A., and Brouwers, H.J., 1996,
“Construction Waste: Quantification and Source
Evaluation, ” Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management, 122(1), pp. 55-60.
[5] Shen L.Y., Lu W.S., Yao H., and Wu D.H., 2005, “A
computer-based scoring method for measuring the
environmental performance of construction activities,
” Automation in Construction, 14(13), pp. 297-309.
[6] Howard, N., 2000, Data for Sustainable
Construction, Center for Sustainable Construction,
CR258/99, BRE, UK.
[7] Li, X., Zhu, Y., and Zhang, Z., 2010, “An LCA-
based environmental impact assessment model for
construction processes, ” Building and Environment,
45(3), pp. 766-775.
[8] Poon C.S., Yu A.T., and Ng L.H., 2001, “On-site
sorting of construction and demolition waste in Hong
Kong, ” Resource, Conservation and Recycling,
32(2), pp. 157-172.
[9] Zolfagharian S., Nourbakhsh M., Irizarry J., Ressang
A., andGheisari M., 2012, “Environmental impacts
assessment on construction sites, ” Construction
Research Congress 2012, ASCE, Purdue University,
West Lafayette, Indiana, May 21-23, pp. 1750-1759.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/9780784412329.176
[10] Pittet, D., andKotak, T., 2009, “Environmental
impact of building technologies, a comparative study
in Kutch District, Gujarat State, India,
”Ecomateriales 4, Paths towards Sustainability
conference, November 2009, Bayamo, Cuba (2009).
[11] Macozoma, D.S., 2002, Construction site waste
management and minimization: international report,
International council for Research and Innovation in
Buildings, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
http://cibworld.xs4all.nl/dl/publications/Pub278/06C
onstruction.pdf
[12] Ijigah E.A., Jimoh R.A., Aruleba B.O., and Ade
A.B., 2013, “An assessment of environmental
impacts of building construction projects, ” Civil and
Environmental Research, 3(1), pp. 93-105.
[13] Chen Z., Li H., and Hong J., 2004, “An integrative
methodology for environmental management in
construction, ” Automation in Construction, 13(5),
pp. 621-628.
[14] Kaur, M., and Arora, S., 2012, “Environment impact
assessment and environment management studies for
an upcoming multiplex-a Case Study, ” IOSR
Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering
(IOSRJMCE), 1(4), pp. 22-30.
[15] Tam, V.W., Tam, C.M., Zeng, S.X., and Chan, K.K.,
2006, “Environmental performance measurement
indicators in construction, ” Building and
environment, 41(2), pp. 164-173.
[16] Schoenberger, H., 2009, “Integrated pollution
prevention and control in large industrial installations
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4131
on the basis of best available techniques – The
Sevilla Process, ” Journal of Cleaner Production,
7(16), pp. 1526-1529.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.06.002
[17] Sadler, B., 1996, Environmental assessment in a
changing world: Evaluating practice to improve
performance, International study on the effectiveness
of environmental assessment, Canadian
Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa, Canada.
[18] Bruch, C., Nakayama, M., Troell, J., Goldman, L.,
andMrema, E.M., 2007, “Assessing The
Assessments: Improving methodologies for impact
assessment in transboundary watercourses,
”International Journal of Water
ResourcesDevelopment, 23(3), pp. 391-410.
[19] Ilnitch, A.Y., Soderstrom, N.S., and Thomas, T.E.,
1998, “Measuring corporate environmental
performance, ”J. Accounting Public Policy, 17, pp.
383-408.
[20] Hanna, K.S., 2009, Environmental Impact
Assessment: Practice and Participation, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, UK.
[21] Fischer, T.B., 2007, Theory and practice of strategic
environmental assessment: Towards a more
systematic approach, Earthscan Publications,
London, UK.
[22] Shen, L.Y. and Tam, W.Y., 2002.“Implementation of
environmental management in the Hong Kong
construction industry, ”International Journal of
Project Management, 20, pp. 535-
543.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(01)00054-
0
[23] Chen, Z., Heng, L., Wong, C., and Love, P., 2002,
“Integrating construction pollution control with
construction schedule: an experimental approach, ”
Environmental Management and Health, 13(2), pp.
142-151.
[24] Morledge, R., and Jackson, F., 2001, “Reducing
environmental pollution caused by construction
plant, ” Environmental Management and Health,
12(2), pp. 191-206.
[25] Ortiz, O., Castells, F., andSonnemann, G., 2009,
Sustainability in the construction industry: A review
of recent developments based on LCA, ”
Construction and Building Materials, 23, pp. 28-39.
[26] Crawley, D., andAho, I., 1999, “Building
environmental assessment methods: applications and
development trends, ” Building Research and
Information, 27(4), pp. 300-308.
[27] Glasson, J., Therivel, R., and Chadwick, A., 2005,
Introduction to environmental impact assessment,
3rd ed., Rutledge, London, UK.
[28] Valdez, H.E., andChini, A.R., 2002, “ISO 14000
standards and the U.S. construction industry,
”Environ. Practice J., 4(4), pp. 210-219.
[29] World Bank, 2002, “Environmental impact
assessment system in Europe and Central Asia
Countries, ”.www.worldbank.org/eca/environment
[30] Shen, Y.J., and Walker, D.H., 2001, “Integrating
OHS, EMS and QM with constructability principles
when construction planning-A design and construct
project case study, ”TQM Magazine, 13(4), pp. 247-
259.
[31] Manorom, K., 2007, “People’s EIA: A mechanism
for grassroots participation in environmental
decision-making, ” Watershed, 12(1), pp. 26-30.
[32] Guinée, J., et al., 2002, Handbook of Life Cycle
Assessment-Operational Guide to ISO Standards,
Kluwer, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48055-7
[33] Brown, A.L., 1997, “The environmental overview in
development project formulation, ”Impact
Assessment, 15(1), pp. 73-88.
[34] Diakaki, C., Grigoroudis, E., and Stabouli, M., 2006,
“A risk assessment approach in selecting
environmental performance indicators, ”
Management of Environmental Quality: An
International Journal, 17(2), pp. 126-139.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14777830610650456
[35] Crookes, D., and de Wit, M., 2002, “Environmental
economic valuation and its application in
environmental assessment: an evaluation of the status
quo with reference to South Africa, ” Impact
Assessment and Project Appraisal, 20(2), pp. 127-
134. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154602781766753
[36] Wu, K.K., and Zhang, L.P., 2014, “Progress in the
Development of Environmental Risk Assessment as
a Tool for the Decision-Making Process, ”Journal of
Service Science and Management, 7, pp. 131-143.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2014.72011
[37] Arksey, H., and O'Malley, L., 2005, “Scoping
studies: Towards a Methodological Framework, ”Int
J Soc Res Methodol. 8, pp. 19-32.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
[38] Househ, M., 2011, “Sharing sensitive personal health
information through Facebook: the unintended
consequences, ”Stud Health Technol Inform, 169,
pp. 616-620.
[39] Hill, C.E., Thompson, B.J., and Williams, E.N.,
1997, “A guide to conducting consensual qualitative
research, ” The Counseling Psychologist, 25(4), pp.
517-572.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000097254001
[40] Walsh, S.P., White, K.M., Young, R.M., 2008,
“Over-Connected? A Qualitative Exploration of the
Relationship between Australian Youth and Their
Mobile Phones, ” Journal of Adolescence, 31(1), pp.
77-92.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.04.004
[41] Benn, N., Buckingham, S., Domingue, J., and
Mancini, C., 2008, Ontological Foundations for
Scholarly Debate Mapping Technology, In 2nd
International Conference on Computational Models
of Argument (COMMA ’08), Toulouse, France.
[42] Cassell, C., andSymon, G., 2004, Essential Guide to
Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research,
Sage Publications, London, UK.
[43] Glaser, B.G., and Strauss, A.L., 1967, The Discovery
of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative
Research, Aldine, Chicago, US.
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4132
[44] Cayla, J., and Eckhardt, G.M., 2007, “Asian Brands
without Borders: Regional Opportunities and
Challenges, ”International Marketing Review, 24(4),
pp. 444-456.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02651330710761017
[45] Kim, Y., 2011, “The Pilot Study in Qualitative
Inquiry: Identifying Issues and Learning Lessons for
Culturally Competent Research, ” Qualitative Social
Work, 10(2), pp. 190-206.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1473325010362001
[46] James, P., and James, T., 2011, Qualitative Research
Methods for Health Services, Megellan UK Press,
London, UK.
[47] Ritchie, J., and Lewis, J., 2003, Qualitative Research
Practice, Sage Publications, London, UK.
[48] Coyne, I.T., 1997, “Sampling in qualitative research:
purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or
clear boundaries?, ” Journal of Advanced Nursing,
26(3), pp. 623-30.
[49] Fink, A.S., 2000, “The Role of the Researcher in the
Qualitative Research Process. A Potential Barrier to
Archiving Qualitative Data, ” Forum: Qualitative
Social Research. 1(3), article 4.
[50] Koerber, A., and McMichael, L., 2008, “Qualitative
Sampling Methods A Primer for Technical
Communicators, ” Journal of Business and Technical
Communication. 22(4), pp. 454-473.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1050651908320362
[51] Bryman, A., 2012, Social Research Methods, (4thEd),
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
[52] Carman, J.M., 1990, “Consumer Perceptions of
Service Quality: An Assessment of the SERVQUAL
Dimensions, ” Journal of Retailing, 66(1), pp. 33-55.
[53] Guest, G., Bunce, A., and Johnson, L., 2006, “How
Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with
Data Saturation and Variability, ” Field Methods,
18(1), pp. 59-
82.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
[54] Crouch, M., and McKenzie, H., 2006, “The logic of
small samples in interview-based qualitative
research, ” Social Science Information, 45(4), pp.
483-499.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0539018406069584
[55] Glaser, B.G., 2004, “Remodeling Grounded Theory,
” The Grounded Theory Review: An international
Journal, 4(1), pp. 1-24.
[56] Harrel, G.D., and Fors, M.F., 1995, “Marketing
services to satisfy internal customers, ” Logistics
Information Management, 8(4), pp. 22-27.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09576059510091887
[57] Duranti, A., 2007, “Transcripts, like Shadows on a
Wall, ” Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(4), pp. 301-
310.
[58] Bailey, K.D., 2008, Methods of Social Research.
(4thEd), The Free Press, NY, US.
[59] Gray, J., and Wilcox, B., 1995, Good Schools, Bad
Schools, Open University Press, UK.
[60] James, P., 2014, “Managerial Challenges Impacting
on Contractor Led Tunnel TBM Design: A Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia Metro Project, ”Engineering
Management Review, 3(2).
[61] Balshem, M., 1991, “Cancer, Control and Causality:
Talking about Cancer in a Working-Class
Community, ” American Ethnologist, 18(1), pp. 152-
172.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/ae.1991.18.1.02a00070
[62] Reeves, T.K., and Harper, D., 1981, Surveys at
Work, McGraw-Hill, London, UK.
[63] Tull, D.S., and Hawkins, D.I., 1990, Marketing
Research: Measurement and Method, Macmillan,
London, UK.
[64] Glaser, B.G., 1992a, Basics of grounded theory
analysis: Emergence vs. Forcing, Mill Valley,
Sociology Press, CA, US.
[65] Strauss, A.L., and Corbin, J., 1990, Basics of
Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory, Procedures
and Techniques, Sage, Newbury Park, Chicago, US.
[66] Buston, K., 1999, “NUD*IST in action: its use and
its usefulness in a study of chronic illness in young
people, ” In Bryman A., and Burgess R.G., (Eds.)
Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data, Sage
Publications, London, UK.
[67] Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Leech, N.L., and Collins, K.M.,
2012, Qualitative Analysis Techniques for the
Review of the Literature, The Qualitative Report, 17,
Article 56, pp. 1-28.
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/onwuegbuzie.pd
f
[68] Harwood, T.G., and Garry, T., 2003, “An Overview
of Content Analysis. The Marketing Review, ” 3(4),
pp. 479-498.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/146934703771910080
[69] Reisman, C.K., 1993, Narrative Analysis, Sage,
London, UK
[70] Ryan, G.W., and Bernard, H.R., 2003, “Techniques
to Identify Themes, ” Field Methods, 15(1), pp. 85-
109. http://dx.doi.org.10.1177/1525822X02239569
[71] Yin, R.K., 1994, Case study research: Design and
methods, (2nd ed.), Sage Publications, Newbury
Park, CA, US.
[72] Healy, M., and Perry, C., 2000, “Comprehensive
criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative
research within the realism paradigm, ” Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal, 3(3), pp.
118-126.
[73] Guba, E.G., 1981, “Criteria for assessing the
trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries, ”
Educational Communication and Technology
Journal, 29, pp. 75-91.
[74] Lincoln, Y.S., and Guba, E.G., 1985, Naturalistic
Inquiry, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, US.
[75] Gonzalez, C., 2008, “Conceptions of, and approaches
to, teaching online: a study of lecturers teaching
postgraduate distance courses, ” Higher Education,
57(3), pp. 299-314.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-
008-9145-1
[76] Daniels, J.A., et al., 2007, “The Successful
Resolution of Armed Hostage/Barricade Events in
Schools: A Qualitative Analysis, ” Psychology in the
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4133
Schools, 44(6), pp. 601-613.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.20250
[77] Aaltonen, K., and Kujala, J., 2010, “A project
lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence
strategies in global projects, ” Scand. J. Manag.,
26(4), pp. 381-397.
[78] Lindsey, G., 1995, “Managing implementation of
environmental programs: the case of erosion and
sediment control, ” Public Productivity and
Management Review, 18, pp. 247-261.
[79] Teo, M.M., Loosemore, M., Masosszeky, M., and
Karim, K., 2000, “Operatives attitudes towards waste
on a construction project, ” Proceedings of the annual
conference – ARCOM, 2, pp. 509-17.
[80] Boonstra A., Boddy, D., and Bell, S., 2008,
“Stakeholder management in IOS projects: analysis
of an attempt to implement an electronic patient file,
” Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 17(2), pp. 100-111.
[81] Mendler, S., and Odell, W., 2000, The HOK
Guidebook to Sustainable Design. Wiley, New York,
US.
[82] Winter, S., and May, P.J., 1999, “Regulatory
enforcement and compliance: examining agro-
environmental policy, ” Journal of Policy Analysis
and Management. 18, pp. 625-651.
[83] Osmani, M., Glass, J., and Price, A.D., 2008,
“Architects' perspectives on construction waste
reduction by design, ” Waste Manag., 28(7), pp.
1147-1158.
[84] Aguado, S., Alvarez, R., and Domingo, R., 2013,
“Model of efficient and sustainable improvements in
a lean production system through processes of
environmental innovation, ” J. Clean. Prod., 47, pp.
141-148.
[85] Barlish, K., and Sullivan, K., 2012, “How to measure
the benefits of BIM — A case study approach,
”Autom. Constr., 24, pp. 149-159.
[86] Brown, E., 2013, “Vulnerability and the basis of
business ethics: From fiduciary duties to
professionalism, ” Journal of Business Ethics, 113,
pp. 489-504.
[87] Adger, W.N., 2006, “Vulnerability, ” Global
Environmental Change, 16, pp. 268-281.
[88] Saunders, J., and Wynn, P., 2004, “Attitudes towards
waste minimisation amongst labour only sub-
contractors, ”Struct. Surv., 22(3), pp. 148-155.
[89] Zhang, Z., Shen, L., Love, P., andTreloar, G., 2000,
“A framework for implementing ISO 14000 in
construction, ” Environmental Management and
Health, 11(2), pp. 139-
149.http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09566160010321541
[90] Plessis, C., 2007, “A strategic framework for
sustainable construction in developing countries,
”Construction Management and Economics, 25, pp.
67-76.
[91] Walker, D.H., 2000, “Client/customer or stakeholder
focus? ISO 14000 EMS as a construction industry
case study, ” The TQM Magazine, 12, pp. 18‐ 25.
[92] Yates, A., 2003, BRE IP13/03 Part 4 Sustainable
Buildings: Benefits for Constructors, BRE Centre for
Sustainable Construction, Watford, England, UK.
[93] Bekr, G.A., 2014, “Study of the Causes and
Magnitude of Wastage of Materials on Construction
Sites in Jordan, ” Journal of Construction
Engineering, Article ID 283298,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/283298
[94] Curwell, S., and Cooper, I., 1998, “The implications
of urban sustainability, ” Building Research and
Information, 26, pp. 17‐ 28.
[95] Walker, D., 2008, “Sustainability: Environmental
management, transparency and competitive
advantage, ”Journal of Retail and Leisure Property,
7, pp. 119-130.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/rlp.2008.4
[96] Formoso, C.T., Dos Santos, A., and Powell, J.A.,
2002, “An Exploratory Study on the Applicability of
Process Transparency in Construction Sites, ” J.
Construct. Res., 03(1), pp.
35.http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/
S1609945102000102
[97] Haan, C.T., Barfield, B.J., and Hayes, J.C., 1994,
Design Hydrology and Sedimentology for Small
Catchments, Academic Press, NY, US.
[98] U.N., 1997, Comprehensive Assessment of the
Freshwater Resources of the World, World
Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
www.un.org/esa/documents/ecosoc/cn17/1997/ecn17
1997-9.htm
[99] Alberini, A., Tonin, S., andTurvani, M., 2007,
“Willingness to pay for contaminated site cleanup
policies: evidence from a conjoint choice study in
Italy, ” Rev. Econ. Polit. 117(5), pp. 737-749.
[100] Wood, C., and Bailey, J., 1994, “Predominance and
independence in environmental impact assessment:
The Western Australia model, ” Environmental
Impact Assessment Review, 14(1), pp. 37-59.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0195-9255(94)90041-8
[101] Therivel, R., andParidario, M.R., 2002, The Practice
of Strategic Environmental Assessment, Earthscan
Publications, Abingdon, UK.
[102] Cundy, A.B., Bardos, R.P., Church, A.,
Puschenreiter, M., Friesl-Hanl, W., Müller, I., Neu,
S., Mench, M., Witters, N., andVangronsveld, J.,
2013, “Developing principles of sustainability and
stakeholder engagement for “gentle” remediation
approaches: The European context, ” J. Environ.
Manage., 129(15), pp. 283-291.
[103] Superfund (2012).Basic Information, Superfund
(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
2012).http://www.epa.gov/superfund/about.htm
[104] Psarros, G., Skjong, R., andVanem, E., 2011, “Risk
acceptance criterion for tanker oil spill risk reduction
measures, ” Mar. Pollut. Bull., 62(1), pp. 116-127.
[105] Goldstein, M., andRitterling, J., 2001, “A Practical
Guide to Estimating Cleanup Costs, ” U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Papers. Paper 30.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usepapapers/30
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4134
[106] Hoeppel, R.E., andHinchee, R.E., 1994, Enhanced
biodegradation for on-site remediation of
contaminated soils and groundwater, In: Hazardous
Waste Site Soil Remediation: Theory and
Application of Innovative Technologies, Wilson, D.
J., and Clarke, A. N., Dekker, M., New York, NY,
US.
[107] Bellandi, R., 1995, Innovative engineering
technologies for hazardous waste remediation, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, US.
[108] Smith, D.L., and Hayward, W.M., 1993,
“Decommissioning of a resource conservation and
recovery act treatment, storage, and disposal facility:
a case study of the interim stabilization of the 216-A-
29 ditch at the Hanford Site, ” Waste Management,
13, pp. 109-116.
[109] Kim, I., 1993, “Mobile soil-washing system,
”Chemical Engineering, 100, pp. 104.
[110] Hamassaki, L.T., andNeto, C.S., 1994, “Technical
and economic aspects of construction/demolition
waste utilization, ” Proceedings of the 1st
Conference of CIB TG16, Tampa, FL, November
6‐ 9, pp. 395‐ 403.
[111] Fishbein, B.K., 1998, Building for the Future:
Strategies to Reduce Construction and Demolition
Waste, INFORM Committee of Environment,
American Institute of Architects, New York, NY,
US.
[112] Kaufman, M.M., 2000, “Erosion control at
construction sites: the science-policy gap, ”
Environmental Management, 26, pp. 89-97.
[113] Myers, C.F., Meek, J., Tuller, S., and Weinberg, A.,
1985, “Nonpoint sources of water pollution, ”
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 40, pp. 14-
18.
[114] Zeng, S.X., Tam, C.M., Deng, Z.M., and Tam, V.W.,
2003, “ISO 14000 and the construction industry:
survey in China, ” J Manage in Eng, 19(3), pp. 107-
115.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-
597X(2003)19:3(107)
[115] Jones, C., Baker, M., Carter, J., Fay, S, Short, M.,
and Wood, C., 2013, Strategic Environmental
Assessment and Land Use Planning: An International
Evaluation, Earthscan Publications, Abingdon, UK.
[116] Huovila, P., and Richter, C., 1997, “Life cycle
building design in 2010, ” Proceedings of the 11th
International Conference on Engineering Design
ICED 97, Tampere, 19-21 August 1997, 2, Tampere
University of Technology, pp. 635-643.
[117] Red Book Contract, 1999, FIDIC Conditions of
Contracts for Construction-The Red Book, Thomas
Telford Publishing, London, UK.
[118] The Considerate Constructor’s Scheme, 2013,
Pollution Control Construction Site
Handbook.www.cardiff.gov.uk/pollution/
[119] Robichaud, L.B., and Anantatmula, V.S., 2011,
“Greening Project Management Practices for
Sustainable Construction, ”Journal of Management
in Engineering, 27(1), pp. 48-57.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/ASCEME.1943-
5479.0000030
[120] Kubba, S., 2012, Handbook of Green Building
Design and Construction, Butterworth-Heinemann,
London, UK.
[121] Winch, G., 2010, Managing construction projects,
2nd Ed., John Wiley and Sons, London, UK.
[122] Tam, C.M., Tam, V.W., andZeng, S.X., 2002,
“Environmental performance evaluation EPE for
construction, ”Build. Res. Inf., 30(5), pp. 349-361.
[123] Uren, S., and Griffiths, E., 2000, Environmental
management in construction, CIRIA, London, UK.
[124] Proverbs, D.G., and Holt, G.D., 2000, “Reducing
construction costs: European best practice supply
chain implications, ” European Journal of Purchasing
and Supply Management, 6(3-4), pp. 149-158.
[125] Huovila, P., andKoskela, L., 1998, “Contribution of
the Principles of Lean Construction to Meet the
Challenges of Sustainable Development, ”
In:Proceedings Proceedings of IGLC-6 6th
Conference of the International Group for Lean
Construction, 13th-15th August, 1998.
www.IGLC.net.
[126] Firestone, J., 2002, “Agency governance and
enforcement: the influence of mission on
environmental decision making, ”Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management, 21, pp. 409-426.
[127] Kibert, C.J., 2013, Sustainable Construction: Green
Building Design and Delivery, 3rd Ed., John Wiley
and Sons, London, UK.
[128] Thomas, H.R., Riley, D.R., andMessner, J.I., 2005,
“Fundamental principles of site material
management, ” Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management, 131(7), pp. 808-815.
[129] Hegazy, T., 1999, “Optimization of resource
allocation and leveling using genetic algorithms,
”ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 125(3), pp. 167‐ 175.
[130] Foxon, T., Makuch, Z., Mata, M., and Pearson, P.,
2004, “Towards a Sustainable Innovation Policy-
Institutional Structures, Stakeholder Participation and
Mixes of Policy Instruments, ” Berlin Conference on
the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental
Change. December 3-4. Berlin: Environmental
Policy Research Centre, FreieUniversität. http://userpage.fuberlin.de/ffu/akumwelt/bc2004/dow
nload/foxon_makuch_mata_pearson_f.pdf.
[131] Zimmerman, A., and Kibert, C.J., 2007, “Informing
LEED's next generation with the natural step, ”
Build. Res. Inf., 35(6), pp. 681-689.
[132] Hay, L., Duffy, A., and Whitfield, R.I., 2014, “The
sustainability cycle and loop: models for a more
unified understanding of sustainability, ” J. Environ.
Manag., 133(c), pp. 232-257.
[133] European Commission, 2001, Guidance on EIA, EIS
review, Environmental Resources Management,
Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
[134] Wood, C., 1995, Environmental impact assessment:
A comparative review, Longman, Harlow, London,
UK.
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
4135
[135] Gangolells, M., Casals, M., Gassó, S., Forcada, N.,
Roca, X., and Fuertes, A., 2011, “Assessing concerns
of interested parties when predicting the significance
of environmental impacts related to the construction
process of residential buildings, ” Building and
Environment, 46(5), pp. 1023-1037.
http://dx.dio.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.11.004
[136] Muhwezi, L., Kiberu, F., Kyakula, M., and
Batambuze, A., 2012, “An assessment of the impact
of construction activities on the environment in
Uganda: A case study of Iganga municipality, ”
Journal of construction Engineering and Project
Management, 2(4), pp. 20-
24.http://dx.dio.org/10.6106/JCEPM.2012.2.4.020
[137] Gangolells, M., Casals, M., Gassó, S., Forcada N.,
Roca, X., and Fuertes, A., 2009, “A methodology for
predicting the severity of environmental impacts
related to the construction process of residential
buildings, Building and Environment, 44(3), pp. 558-
571.
http://dx.dio.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.05.001
[138] Rennings, K., and Wiggering, H., 1997, “Steps
towards indicators of sustainable development:
Linking economic and ecological concepts, ”Ecol
Econ., 20(1), pp. 25-36.
[139] Robinson, J., 2004, “Squaring the circle? Some
thoughts on the idea of sustainable development,
”Ecol Econ., 48(4), pp. 369-384.
[140] Nilsson, M., and Dalkmann, H., 2001, “Decision
Making and Strategic Environmental Assessment, ”
Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and
Management, 3(3), pp. 305-327.
[141] U.N., 2007, National Information, Qatar Country
Statistics.http://data.un.org/