Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Life-cycle sustainability risk management a multi-stakeholder approach: the case of Damascus post-war residential projects

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Post-war Residential Re-construction Projects (PRRP) are widely complex and have significant risks. It is necessary to address sustainability risks in PRRP in order to respond to the war disastrous consequences. Thus, reducing sustainability risks associated with PRRP Life Cycle (LC) phases is of absolute importance for each stakeholder to achieve sustainability within PRRP process and performance. How to effectively get different participants to manage risks in the context of PRRP LC is decisive to the project sustainability objectives. This study aims to identify how sustainability risk factors change during PRRP LC phases and how LC Sustainability Risk Management (LCSRM) is perceived by PRRP primary stakeholders. Data were collected through survey and interviews with different stakeholder groups in Damascus PRRP. The findings revealed the top five risks of: ‘Poor constructability’ (with a score of 0.44 at the construction phase), ‘Delays due to poor contract management’ (with a score of 0.44 at the pre-construction phase), ‘Lack of availability of green materials and equipment’ (with a score of 0.43 at the construction phase), ‘Pollution’ (with a score of 0.4 at the construction phase) and ‘Being fined for failing to meet the project objectives’ (with a score of 0.36 at the construction phase). The majority of risk responses were found to be more effective in the planning, design, pre-construction and construction stages. LCSRM is presented in a participatory manner involving key stakeholders. Practical recommendations for developer, consultants, designers, contractors, project managers and regulators were presented. The study’s LCSRM approach offers stakeholders a novel approach to customize their own list of sustainability risks. The main benefit of LCSRM is in shifting construction management control from input oriented to a more output oriented one in order to respond to unforeseen risks encompassing PRRP performance, which often deviated PRRP sustainability objectives from reality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdin, Y. (2017). The fragility of community security in Damascus and its environs. International Review of the Red Cross, 99(906), 897–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agha, W. N., & Szpytko, J. (2020). The concept of risk analysis of actions taken in the reconstruction of technical infrastructure in the areas after the disaster on the example of Syria. Journal of KONBiN, 50(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alqadri (2019). International fund for Syria Re-construction Resedential Projects (in Arabic). Retrieved from Syria Economic: https://aliqtisadi.com/1424896 (Accessed on 13/5/2019).

  • Amoudi, E. O. (2016). An exploratory study on key risk factors affecting reconstruction projects in Syria. Damascus University Journal, 32(1), 15–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barakat, T. (2014). Activating the role of popular participation and sustainable enablement in local development Tishreen University. Journal for Research and Scientific Studies, 36(5), 63–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhole, G., & Deshmukh, T. (2018). Multi criteria decision making (MCDM) methods and its applications. International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology, 6(5), 899–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CBS. (2018) Central bureau of statistics: The Syria Report: Government Prioritises Spending on Core Constituency. https://www.syria-report.com/news/economy/government-prioritises-spending-core-constituency (Accessed on 2/2/2019).

  • Clerc, V. (2015). Informal settlements in the Syrian conflict: Urban planning as a weapon. Built Environment, 40(1), 34–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, D. F., Walker, P., Grey, S., Raymond, G. (2013). Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk in Large Projects and Complex Procurements. Wiley.

  • Dabag, M. (2015). Quality improvement by reducing rework in construction companies. Tishreen University, Faculty of civil engineering, Construction engineering and management department. PhD thesis. Latakia, Syria.

  • Dahiru, D., Dania, A. A., & Adejoh, A. (2014). An investigation into the prospects of green building practice in Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Development, 7(6), 158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnall, R. (2018). Project management from simple to complex. 2ed . Flat World Knowledge, Inc.

  • El-Sayegh, S. M., Manjikian, S., Ibrahim, A., Abouelyousr, A., & Jabbour, R. (2018). Risk identification and assessment in sustainable construction projects in the UAE. International Journal of Construction Management, 1–10.

  • Erdogan, S. A., Šaparauskas, J., & Turskis, Z. (2019). A multi-criteria decision-making model to choose the best option for sustainable construction management. Sustainability, 11(8), 2239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESCWA, (2016); Syria at war, five years on. https://www.unescwa.org/sites/www.unescwa.org/files/publications/files/syria-war-five-years.pdf (Accessed on 12/10/2019)

  • Guidlines for Green Aechitecture in Syria. (2013). The Guidlines for Green Architecture in Syria. Syrian Engineering Association Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini, S. A., de la Fuente, A., & Pons, O. (2016). Multi-criteria decision-making method for assessing the sustainability of post-disaster temporary housing units technologies: A case study in Bam, 2003. Sustainable Cities and Society, 20, 38–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, B., Shan, M., & Supaat, N. (2017). Green commercial building projects in Singapore: critical risk factors and mitigation measures. Sustainable Cities and Society., 30, 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ismael, D., & Shealy, T. (2018). Sustainable construction risk perceptions in the Kuwaiti construction industry. Sustainability, 10(6), 1854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarkas, A. M., & Haupt, T. C. (2015). Major construction risk factors considered by general contractors in Qatar. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 13(1), 165–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassouha, S. (2020). Transferring experiences of post-war West Germany in social housing to reconstruction strategies after the war in Syria. PhD thesis. University of Stuttgart. Germany

  • Khaddour, L. A. (2021c). Building envelope construction techniques for damascus affordable residential buildings newly implementing building insulation code. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (JEST), (In process).

  • Khaddour, L. A. (2021b). Multi-criteria sustainability risk management for post-war residential re-construction: the case of Damascus. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment (In process).

  • Khaddour, L. A. (2021). Strategic framework of operational energy performance improvement potential for Damascus post-war social housing. Intelligent Buildings International. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508975.2021.1874859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kibert, C. (2016). Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacAskill, K., & Guthrie, P. (2014). Multiple interpretations of resilience in disaster risk management. Procedia Economics and Finance. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00989-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maya, R. (2016). Performance management for syrian construction project. International Journal of Construction Engineering and Management., 5(3), 65–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • PMBOK. (2008). A Guide to the Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK). 4th Edition. Project Management Institute (PMI). Pennsylvania.

  • Qin, X., Mo, Y., & Jing, L. (2016). Risk perceptions of the life-cycle of green buildings in China. Journal of Clean Production, 126, 148–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafindadi, A. D. U., Mikić, M., Kovačić, I., & Cekić, Z. (2014). Global perception of sustainable construction project risks. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, 456–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Si, J., Marjanovic-Halburd, L., Nasiri, F., & Bell, S. (2016). Assessment of building-integrated green technologies: A review and case study on applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method. Sustainable Cities and Society, 27, 106–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thabrew, L., Wiek, A., & Ries, R. (2009). Environmental decision making in multi-stakeholder contexts: Applicability of life cycle thinking in development planning and implementation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(1), 67–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WBG. (2017). The Toll of War: The Economic and Social Consequences of the Conflict in Syria Online: http://www.worldbank.org/ en/country/syria/publication/the-toll-of-warthe-economic-and-social-consequences-of-theconflict-in-syria . (Accessed on 11/09/2017).

  • Wijethilake, C., & Lama, T. (2019). Sustainability core values and sustainability risk management: Moderating effects of top management commitment and stakeholder pressure. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(1), 143–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wind, B., & Ibrahim, B. (2020). The war-time urban development of Damascus: How the geography-and political economy of warfare affects housing patterns. Habitat International., 96, 102–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xia, N., Zou, P. X., Griffin, M. A., Wang, X., & Zhong, R. (2018). Towards integrating construction risk management and stakeholder management: A systematic literature review and future research agendas. International Journal of Project Management, 36(5), 701–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, X., Hwang, B. G., & Gao, Y. (2016). A fuzzy synthetic evaluation approach for risk assessment: A case of Singapore’s green projects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 115, 203–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou, P. X., & Couani, P. (2012). Managing risks in green building supply chain. Architectural Engineering and Design Management., 8(2), 143–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the International University of Science and Technology IUST. Researcher also acknowledges the management of general company of housing and the General Company for Engineering Consultation GCEC for their cooperation in research implementation and facilitation of obtaining data for LCSRM. The author also would like to thank the editor in chief, the associated editor and the reviewers for such detailed review and valuable suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sustainable Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

    Lina Adib Khaddour

  2. Engineering Business Management, The University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

    Lina Adib Khaddour

  3. Construction Management & Sustainable Built Environment, The International University of Science and Technology (IUST), Damascus, Syria

    Lina Adib Khaddour

Authors
  1. Lina Adib Khaddour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lina Adib Khaddour.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khaddour, L.A. Life-cycle sustainability risk management a multi-stakeholder approach: the case of Damascus post-war residential projects. Environ Dev Sustain 24, 12756–12786 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01963-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01963-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation