MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982544927 · doi:10.20900/jsr20190020

On the Role of Construction in Achieving the SDGs

2019· article· en· W2982544927 on OpenAlexafffund
Sherif Goubran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainability Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsReal estateSustainable developmentSustainabilityDimension (graph theory)Order (exchange)Intersection (aeronautics)BusinessReal estate developmentProcess managementArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental planningComputer sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringTransport engineeringFinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction and real estate have been central to the debates on sustainable development. However, the dominant definition of sustainability in construction and real estate remain centred on the environmental dimension. The 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer new opportunities for the building sector to expand its focus. The available literature utilizes the existing green ratings, sustainability assessment tools and standards as the basis for investigating how construction and buildings can contribute to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. However, less focus was placed on exploring the broad intersection between the building sector, on the one hand, and the SDGs and their targets on the other. This paper uses a multi-step methodology to analyze the potential role of construction and real estate in the 2030 Agenda. The paper identifies SDG targets that depend (directly or indirectly) on construction and real estate activities, and reveals that 17% of the SDG targets are directly dependent and 27% of the targets are indirectly dependent on these sectors’ activities. The identified targets are analyzed and are found to be related to all 17 goals—with the largest contributions to SDGs 11, 6, and 7. The results of the analysis are mapped and illustrated in order to provide insights to academics, practitioners and governments. This research contributes to the literature on the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. It also exposes the synergistic possibilities, and the partnerships required, to make use of the potential role of construction and real estate in the implementation of the UN Agenda.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainability ResearchSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207