Implementing Sustainable Construction Principles and Practices by Key Stakeholders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term äóÖsustainable constructionäó» is used to highlight the responsibility of the construction industry in attaining sustainable development (SD). With the increasing necessity for resource efficiency and climate change adaptation, there is a need for construction key stakeholders to implement sustainable principles and practices in construction projects. In the UK context, engaging in such action will facilitate the government target of 80% greenhouse gas reduction by 2050 and also be a potential source of competitive advantage in the future. The aim of this study is to examine how the industry values and promotes sustainable principles and practices in construction projects. A quantitative research method was adopted in order to reach a wider audience in the industry. An online questionnaire survey was used to collect data. The key finding from the survey is that the level of construction industry promotion of sustainable principles and practices is less than it should be. The outcome of the survey suggests that the industry needs to strategise on how to champion and promote the implementation of sustainable principles and practices at a greater level if the industry is to contribute to the global quest for SD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".