Advertisement

Sustainable Performance in the Earthworks Sub Sector: Exploring the Machinery Selection Framework in New Zealand

  • Ryan Davenport
  • James Olabode RotimiEmail author
Conference paper
  • 61 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)

Abstract

Sustainability is becoming more engrained in the culture of the New Zealand construction industry. More so when it portends social, environmental and financial benefits to organisations that are already operating under slim margins. This study explores means by which an appropriate machinery selection framework can be implemented in the earthworks sub-sector. Data was gathered through a qualitative analysis of the perspective views of six Project Managers involved in infrastructure delivery. The focus is on financial, environmental and social sustainability issues, and the potential impacts of machinery selection framework. Data obtained were analysed thematically, permitting an insight into key issues, challenges and success criteria for sustainable performance of organisations operating in the earthworks sub sector. The research findings could contribute to improved decision making in machinery use and increased efficiencies, which ultimately enhances organisations’ social, financial and environmental ratings.

Keywords

Earthworks Efficiency Machinery selection framework Sustainability 

References

  1. Alkass S, Harris F (1991) Development of an integrated system for planning earthwork operations in road construction. Constr Manage Econ 9(3):263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Davenport R (2018) A machinery selection framework for New Zealand earthworks industry—to improve efficiency and drive environmental and financial performance. Unpublished master of construction dissertation, Massey University, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  3. Durdyev S, Mbachu J (2011) On-site labour productivity of New Zealand construction industry: key constraints and improvement measures. Australas J Constr Econ Build 11(3):18–33.  https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v11i3.2120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gašparík J, Paulovičová L, Prokopčák L (2013) Multi-criteria optimizing method of earthwork machine group selection implemented into soil processesGoogle Scholar
  5. Gomes CA, Winter MG, Puppala AJ (2016) A review of sustainable approaches in transport infrastructure geotechnics. Transp Geotech 7:21–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2016.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gramling R, Freudenburg WR (1992) Opportunity-threat, development and adaptation: toward a comprehensive framework for social impact assessment. Rural Sociol 2:216Google Scholar
  7. Hadi M (2001) Working with the community; Impacts report for general dissemination. DTI construction industry directorate project report. BRE Environment, Watford. Retrieved: https://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_workplace/pdf/ImpactsOfConstruction.pdf
  8. Heidari B, Marr LC (2015) Real-time emissions from construction equipment compared with model predictions. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 65(2):115–125.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2014.978485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lau E, Kong JJ (2006) Identification of constraints in construction. Projects to improve performance. Paper presented at the CCIM2006 sustainable development through culture and innovation, 26–29 November 2006, Dubai, UAE, Rotterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. Martínez JC (1998) Earthmover-simulation tool for earthwork planning. In: 1998 winter simulation conference. Proceedings (Cat. No. 98CH36274), December, vol 2. IEEE, pp 1263–1271Google Scholar
  11. Phogat MVS, Singh AP (2013) Selection of equipment for construction of a hilly road using multi criteria approach. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 104:282–291.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Shan M, Hwang B, Zhu L (2017) A global review of sustainable construction project financing: policies, practices and research efforts. Sustainability (2347)Google Scholar
  13. Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre (2018) Mass-haul environmental impact minimization. A practical method for greening road procurement. Retrieved: https://sbenrc.com.au/app/uploads/2013/11/1.8_industryreport_final.pdf
  14. Toor S-U-R, Ofori G (2008) Leadership for future construction industry: agenda for authentic leadership. Int J Proj Manage 26:620–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.09.010
  15. Tsai CY, Chang AS (2012) Framework for developing construction sustainability items: the example of highway design. J Cleaner Prod 20(1):127–136.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.08.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tseng M-L, Chiu SF, Tan RR, Siriban-Manalang AB (2013) Sustainable consumption and production for Asia: sustainability through green design and practice. J Cleaner Prod 40:1–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Waris M, Shahir Liew M, Khamidi MF, Idrus A (2014) Criteria for the selection of sustainable onsite construction equipment. Int J Sustain Built Environ 3(1):96–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.06.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hick Bros Infrastructure Ltd.AucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.School of Built EnvironmentMassey UniversityAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations