Social sustainability in public-work procurement

[ES] La contratacion pública ha sido destacada como el elemento clave para impulsar las tres principales dimensiones de la sostenibilidad (económica, ambiental y social) en la industria de la construcción. Sin embargo, a pesar de los esfuerzos llevados a cabo por las administraciones públicas a nivel internacional, en la actualidad, existen importantes limitaciones que están obstaculizando la implementación efectiva y eficiente de la sostenibilidad social en la contratación de obra pública. Las limitaciones más importantes son: la falta de conocimiento sobre cómo implementarla en el sector de la construcción; la escasez de definiciones claras, consistentes y prácticas sobre qué es la sostenibilidad social para esta industria; y, la necesidad de determinar los criterios sociales a tener en cuenta, así como el mejor método para evaluarlos y medirlos. En base a esto, la literatura científica destaca la necesidad de estudiar cómo la sostenibilidad social podría implementarse de manera más efectiva en la industria de la construcción a través de la contratación pública, y alega la necesidad de desarrollar una metodología que ayude a las administraciones públicas en la implantación de dichos criterios, al mismo tiempo que se garantiza su evaluación objetiva. A la vista de estos antecedentes, el presente trabajo propone dos preguntas de investigación. Por un lado, esta investigación busca caracterizar la situación actual respecto a la inclusión de la sostenibilidad social en la contratación de obra pública a nivel internacional. Para ello, se analizan 451 licitaciones procedentes de diez países con el objeto de estudiar el uso de estrategias de contratación y estrategias de licitación a nivel internacional, identificar los principales criterios de sostenibilidad social, estudiar cómo se definen estos criterios según la etapa de la licitación y determinar las variables que influyen en la implementación de dichos criterios en la contratación de obra pública. Por otro lado, esta investigación analiza cómo debería mejorarse la integración de los criterios de sostenibilidad social en la contratación pública respecto al escenario actual. Por tanto, se establecen los indicadores que deberían utilizarse para evaluar la sostenibilidad social en la contratación pública de obras de ingeniería civil; y se desarrolla una metodología que favorezca la correcta implementación de dichos criterios a nivel internacional, especificando dónde deberían ser incluidos según la estrategia de licitación. Este estudio define un alcance específico para cada pregunta de investigación. En lo que respecta a la caracterización de la sostenibilidad social en la contratación de obra pública, se busca un alcance internacional que cubra cada etapa del ciclo de vida de la infraestructura. En dicho estudio se analizan licitaciones relativas a proyectos tanto de edificación como de ingeniería civil. Por otra parte, a la hora de desarrollar la metodología para integrar los criterios sociales en la contratación de obra pública, el alcance se limita únicamente a la etapa de construcción de proyectos de ingeniería civil. El estudio de la caracterización del escenario actual concluyó que existe una falta de comprensión sobre cómo hacer que los indicadores sociales sean cuantificables; se necesitan mayores esfuerzos para aumentar el número de categorías sociales en las estrategias de licitación; y, existe una fuerte dependencia del contexto nacional en la inclusión de criterios sociales en la contratación pública. En base a estos resultados, se abordó el desarrollo de una metodología holística en la que se destaca que para garantizar una efectiva implementación de los criterios de sostenibilidad social se deben diferenciar tres grupos: 1) derechos fundamentales; 2) responsabilidad social corporativa; y, 3) compromiso social en el proyecto. Se definió un enfoque metodológico para cada uno de ellos[CA] La contractació pública ha sigut destacada com l'element clau per a impulsar les tres principals dimensions de la sostenibilitat (econòmica, ambiental i social) en la indústria de la construcció. No obstant, a pesar dels esforços duts a terme per les administracions públiques a nivell internacional, en l'actualitat, hi ha importants limitacions que estan obstaculitzant la implementació efectiva i eficient de la sostenibilitat social en la contractació d'obra pública. Les limitacions més importants són: la falta de coneixement sobre com implementar-la en el sector de la construcció; l'escassetat de definicions clares, consistents i pràctiques sobre què és la sostenibilitat social per a esta indústria; i, la necessitat de determinar els criteris socials a tindre en compte, així com el millor mètode per a avaluar-los i mesurar-los. Basant-se en açò, la literatura científica destaca la necessitat d'estudiar com la sostenibilitat social podria implementar-se de manera més efectiva en la indústria de la construcció a través de la contractació pública, i al·lega la necessitat de desenrotllar una metodologia que ajude a les administracions públiques en la implantació d'estos criteris, alhora que es garantix la seua avaluació objectiva. A la vista d'estos antecedents, el present treball proposa dos preguntes d'investigació. D'una banda, esta investigació busca caracteritzar la situació actual respecte a la inclusió de la sostenibilitat social en la contractació d'obra pública a nivell internacional. Per a això, s'analitzen 451 licitacions procedents de deu països amb l'objecte d'estudiar l'ús d'estratègies de contractació i estratègies de licitació a nivell internacional, identificar els principals criteris de sostenibilitat social, estudiar com es definixen estos criteris segons l'etapa de la licitació i determinar les variables que influïxen en la implementació d'estos criteris en la contractació d'obra pública. D'altra banda, esta investigació analitza com hauria de millorar-se la integració dels criteris de sostenibilitat social en la contractació pública respecte a l'escenari actual. Per tant, s'establixen els indicadors que haurien d'utilitzar-se per a avaluar la sostenibilitat social en la contractació pública d'obres d'enginyeria civil; i es desenrotlla una metodologia que afavorisca la correcta implementació dels criteris a nivell internacional, especificant on haurien de ser inclosos segons l'estratègia de licitació. Este estudi definix un abast específic per a cada pregunta d'investigació. Pel que fa a la caracterització de la sostenibilitat social en la contractació d'obra pública, es busca un abast internacional que cobrisca cada etapa del cicle de vida de la infraestructura. En el estudi s'analitzen licitacions relatives a projectes tant d'edificació com d'enginyeria civil. D'altra banda, a l'hora de desenrotllar la metodologia per a integrar els criteris socials en la contractació d'obra pública, l'abast es limita únicament a l'etapa de construcció de projectes d'enginyeria civil. L'estudi de la caracterització de l'escenari actual va concloure que hi ha una falta de comprensió sobre com fer que els indicadors socials siguen quantificables; es necessiten majors esforços per a augmentar el nombre de categories socials en les estratègies de licitació; i, hi ha una forta dependència del context nacional en la inclusió de criteris socials en la contractació pública. Basant-se en estos resultats, es va abordar el desenrotllament d'una metodologia holística per a incloure els criteris socials en la contractació pública d'obres d'enginyeria civil. Este treball va destacar que per a garantir una efectiva implementació dels criteris de sostenibilitat social, s'han de diferenciar tres grups: 1) drets fonamentals; 2) responsabilitat social corporativa; i, 3) compromís social en el projecte. Es va definir un enfocament metodològic per a cada un d'[EN] Public procurement has been claimed as the key element to drive the integration of the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, environmental, and social) in the construction industry. However, important drawbacks are hindering the effective and efficient implementation of social sustainability in public-works procurement. Currently, a lack of knowledge exists about how social sustainability is considered in the construction industry. There is also a lack of consistent, clear, and practical definitions about what is social sustainability in the construction industry, what factors should be used to define it, and how social sustainability in this industry should be measured and assessed. Based on this, scientific literature highlights the need to study how social sustainability could be implemented more effectively in the construction industry through public procurement, claiming the need for developing a methodology to assist agencies in the effective inclusion and objective assessment of social criteria in public-works procurement. According to these needs, two research questions are defined. On the one hand, this research seeks to characterize the current scenario regarding the inclusion of social sustainability within public-works procurement at the international level. To that end, the analysis of 451 tendering documents from ten countries is performed in order to: determine how public-works procurement procedures and project delivery methods are considered at the international level; identify the main social sustainability criteria; study how these criteria are defined depending on the stage of the tendering procedure; and, identify the variables that influence the implementation of social sustainability criteria in public-works procurement. On the other hand, this research analyzes how the integration of social sustainability criteria in public-works procurement should be improved to overcome the current scenario. The indicators that should be used to assess the social sustainability criteria in public procurement of civil engineering construction projects are established; and a methodology is developed to improve and strengthen the correct implementation of the social criteria in public-works procurement at the international level, specifying where the social criteria should be included depending on the procurement procedure. This study has established a specific scope for each research question. To characterize the inclusion of social sustainability criteria in public-works procurement, the scope has been defined considering an international approach; and every stage of the infrastructure life cycle of building and civil engineering projects covered. To integrate the social criteria in public-works procurement, the methodology focused only on the construction stage of civil engineering projects. The characterization of the current scenario concluded that there is a lack of understanding regarding how to quantify social indicators; more significant efforts are needed to increase the number of social categories in procurement procedures; and, a strong dependence of the national context on the inclusion of social criteria in public procurement exists, emphasizing the consideration of location-dependent aspects in the development of methodologies to assess social sustainability in public procurement. Based on this, the development of a holistic methodology to include social criteria in public procurement of civil engineering construction projects was addressed. This work highlighted that, in order to guarantee their effective implementation, three groups of social criteria should be differentiated: 1) human rights; 2) corporate social responsibility; and, 3) social commitment in the project. A methodological approach was established for each of these groups.Gracias a la Generalitat Valenciana y el Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad por ayudar económicamente en el desarrollo de la presente investigación a través de los proyectos “Contratación eficiente de infraestructuras considerando la sostenibilidad social y medioambiental (CONSOST)” y “Diseño y mantenimiento óptimo robusto y basado en fiabilidad de puentes e infraestructuras viarias de alta eficiencia social y medioambiental bajo presupuestos restrictivos (DIMALIFE)”.Montalbán Domingo, ML. (2019). Social sustainability in public-work procurement [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/131204TESI

Competitive Advantages and Barriers in International Construction: An Origin-Host Market Approach

[EN] The growing importance of international construction activity forces companies to find out what competitive advantages to provide and barriers to overcome to achieve success, considering the particular characteristics of their origin and destination countries. Seventy six articles regarding success in the international construction market in the period 2008-2017 are reviewed to identify the barriers and the competitive advantages that most affect the international success of contractors. The Chi-Square (chi(2)) statistical test is used to verify the influence of the origin and destination countries on these variables. The literature identifies the provision of trained human resources as the most important competitive advantage and cultural differences and political risks as the main barriers. The Chi-Square (chi(2)) test indicates a dependency relationship between the origin country and the competitive advantage "managerial ability" to achieve international success, and between the external barriers "link between countries", "political environment" and "economic environment" with the target market. Results of this paper provide valuable information for any construction company seeking international success.Lozano-Torró, A.; García-Segura, T.; Montalbán-Domingo, L.; Pellicer, E. (2020). Competitive Advantages and Barriers in International Construction: An Origin-Host Market Approach. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management. 26(5):475-489. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2020.12180475489265Abdelghany, Y., & Ezeldin, A. S. (2010). Classification of Risks for International Construction Joint Ventures (ICJV) Projects. Construction Research Congress 2010. doi:10.1061/41109(373)126Abdul-Aziz, A.-R., Nor Azmi, H.-A. C. M., Law, Y.-H., & Pengiran, D. N. (2013). Internationalization of Construction-Related Consultants: Impact of Age and Size. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 139(2), 148-155. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000135Ahmed, R., & Azmi bin Mohamad, N. (2016). Exploring the Relationship Between Multi-Dimensional Top Management Support and Project Success: An International Study. Engineering Management Journal, 28(1), 54-67. doi:10.1080/10429247.2015.1136525Ajmal, M. M. (2015). Cultural Effects on Trust Building in International Projects’ Stakeholders. International Journal of Information Technology Project Management, 6(3), 41-57. doi:10.4018/ijitpm.2015070103AKGUL, B. K., OZORHON, B., DIKMEN, I., & BIRGONUL, M. T. (2016). Social network analysis of construction companies operating in international markets: case of Turkish contractors. JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 23(3), 327-337. doi:10.3846/13923730.2015.1073617Alashwal, A. M., Fareed, N. F., & Al-obaidi Karam Mustafa. (2017). Determining Success Criteria and Success Factors for International Construction Projects for Malaysian Contractors. Construction Economics and Building, 17(2), 62-80. doi:10.5130/ajceb.v17i2.5319Awil, A. U., & Abdul-Aziz, A. R. (2005, July). The role of government in the internationalization of Malaysian housing developers. In Queensland University of Technology Research Week International Conference (pp. 4–8), Brisbane, Australia.Bannò, M., & Redondi, R. (2014). Air connectivity and foreign direct investments: economic effects of the introduction of new routes. European Transport Research Review, 6(4), 355-363. doi:10.1007/s12544-014-0136-2BARKEMA, H. G., BELL, J. H. J., & PENNINGS, J. M. (1996). FOREIGN ENTRY, CULTURAL BARRIERS, AND LEARNING. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 151-166. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199602)17:23.0.co;2-zBelassi, W., & Tukel, O. I. (1996). A new framework for determining critical success/failure factors in projects. International Journal of Project Management, 14(3), 141-151. doi:10.1016/0263-7863(95)00064-xBrewer, P. (2001). International market selection: developing a model from Australian case studies. International Business Review, 10(2), 155-174. doi:10.1016/s0969-5931(00)00049-4Burnard, P. (1991). A method of analysing interview transcripts in qualitative research. Nurse Education Today, 11(6), 461-466. doi:10.1016/0260-6917(91)90009-yCarnevalli, J. A., & Miguel, P. C. (2008). Review, analysis and classification of the literature on QFD—Types of research, difficulties and benefits. International Journal of Production Economics, 114(2), 737-754. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.03.006Carpintero, S. (2011). THE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES OF THE SPANISH COMPANIES IN THE INTERNATIONAL TOLL ROAD INDUSTRY / ISPANIJOS ĮMONIŲ KONKURENCINIS PRANAŠUMAS TARPTAUTINIAME MOKAMŲJŲ KELIŲ SEKTORIUJE. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 17(4), 483-493. doi:10.3846/13923730.2011.625632Chen, C. (2008). Entry mode selection for international construction markets: the influence of host country related factors. Construction Management and Economics, 26(3), 303-314. doi:10.1080/01446190701882382Otsuki, T., Chen, M. X., & Wilson, J. S. (2006). Do Standards Matter For Export Success ? Policy Research Working Papers. doi:10.1596/1813-9450-3809Chen, C., & Orr, R. J. (2009). Chinese Contractors in Africa: Home Government Support, Coordination Mechanisms, and Market Entry Strategies. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(11), 1201-1210. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000082Chen, C., Wang, Q., Martek, I., & Li, H. (2016). International Market Selection Model for Large Chinese Contractors. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(10), 04016044. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001122Chew, D. A. S., Yan, S., & Cheah, C. Y. J. (2008). Core capability and competitive strategy for construction SMEs in China. Chinese Management Studies, 2(3), 203-214. doi:10.1108/17506140810895898Chua, D. K. H., Wang, Y., & Tan, W. T. (2003). Impacts of Obstacles in East Asian Cross-Border Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(2), 131-141. doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2003)129:2(131)Tang, X., Zheng, H., Wang, Y., Chen, W., Guo, J., Zhou, Y., & Li, X. (2016). Effect of fresh aluminum hydroxide gels on algae removal from micro-polluted water by polyaluminum chloride coagulant. Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 63, 195-201. doi:10.1016/j.jtice.2016.03.001DeSarbo, W. S., Anthony Di Benedetto, C., Michael Song, & Sinha, I. (2004). Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework: uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(1), 47-74. doi:10.1002/smj.431Dey, I. (2003). Qualitative Data Analysis. doi:10.4324/9780203412497Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M., Jato-Espino, D., Alsulami, B., & Castro-Fresno, D. (2016). Evaluation of existing sustainable infrastructure rating systems for their application in developing countries. Ecological Indicators, 71, 491-502. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.07.033Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M., Jato-Espino, D., & Castro-Fresno, D. (2017). Methodology for the development of a new Sustainable Infrastructure Rating System for Developing Countries (SIRSDEC). Environmental Science & Policy, 69, 65-72. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.010Downe‐Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Health Care for Women International, 13(3), 313-321. doi:10.1080/07399339209516006Du, L., Tang, W., Liu, C., Wang, S., Wang, T., Shen, W., … Zhou, Y. (2016). Enhancing engineer–procure–construct project performance by partnering in international markets: Perspective from Chinese construction companies. International Journal of Project Management, 34(1), 30-43. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.09.003Dunning, J. H. (2000). The eclectic paradigm as an envelope for economic and business theories of MNE activity. International Business Review, 9(2), 163-190. doi:10.1016/s0969-5931(99)00035-9Duvholt, J. E., Follinglo, K. A., Lædre, O., & Lohne, J. (2016). International Competition on the Norwegian Infrastructure Market. Energy Procedia, 96, 855-867. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.147Engineering News Record (ENR). (2017). The top 250 international contractors.Ercan, T., & Koksal, A. (2015). Competitive Strategic Performance Benchmarking (CSPB) model for international construction companies. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 20(5), 1657-1668. doi:10.1007/s12205-015-0733-1Erramilli, M. K., Agarwal, S., & Kim, S.-S. (1997). Are Firm-Specific Advantages Location-Specific Too? Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4), 735-757. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490117Essl, I., & Mauerhofer, V. (2018). Opportunities for mutual implementation of nature conservation and climate change policies: A multilevel case study based on local stakeholder perceptions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 898-907. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.210Fang, D., Li, M., Fong, P. S., & Shen, L. (2004). Risks in Chinese Construction Market—Contractors’ Perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(6), 853-861. doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2004)130:6(853)Faridi, A. S., & El‐Sayegh, S. M. (2006). Significant factors causing delay in the UAE construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 24(11), 1167-1176. doi:10.1080/01446190600827033Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statisticsGhemawat, P. (2004). Distance still matters: The hard reality of global expansion. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2001/09/distance-still-matters-the-hard-reality-of-globalexpansionGundes, S., & Aydogan, G. (2016). Bibliometric analysis of research in international construction. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 43(4), 304-311. doi:10.1139/cjce-2015-0127Gunhan, S., & Arditi, D. (2005). Factors Affecting International Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(3), 273-282. doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2005)131:3(273)Han, S. H., Park, S. H., Kim, D. Y., Kim, H., & Kang, Y. W. (2007). Causes of Bad Profit in Overseas Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(12), 932-943. doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2007)133:12(932)Hong, Y., Chan, D. W. M., Chan, A. P. C., & Yeung, J. F. Y. (2012). Critical Analysis of Partnering Research Trend in Construction Journals. Journal of Management in Engineering, 28(2), 82-95. doi:10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000084Ika, L. A., & Donnelly, J. (2017). Success conditions for international development capacity building projects. International Journal of Project Management, 35(1), 44-63. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.10.005Jang, W., Lee, J. K., Lee, J., & Han, S. H. (2015). Naïve Bayesian Classifier for Selecting Good/Bad Projects during the Early Stage of International Construction Bidding Decisions. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, 1-12. doi:10.1155/2015/830781Javernick-Will, A. (2013). Local Embeddedness and Knowledge Management Strategies for Project-Based Multi-National Firms. Engineering Management Journal, 25(3), 16-26. doi:10.1080/10429247.2013.11431979Jewell, C. A. (2010). Exporting construction professional services in a global service economy. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.687.4922&rep=rep1&type=pdfJung, W., Han, S. H., Park, H., & Kim, D. Y. (2010). Empirical Assessment of Internationalization Strategies for Small and Medium Construction Companies. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(12), 1306-1316. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000237Jung, W., Han, S. H., Koo, B., & Jang, W. (2012). Which Strategies Are More Effective for International Contractors during Boom and Recession Periods? Journal of Management in Engineering, 28(3), 281-290. doi:10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000087Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2007). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2007/07/using-the-balanced-scorecard-as-a-strategic-management-systemKhang, D. B., & Moe, T. L. (2008). Success Criteria and Factors for International Development Projects: A Life-Cycle-Based Framework. Project Management Journal, 39(1), 72-84. doi:10.1002/pmj.20034Kim, D. Y., Ashuri, B., & Han, S. H. (2013). Financial Valuation of Investments in International Construction Markets: Real-Options Approach for Market-Entry Decisions. Journal of Management in Engineering, 29(4), 355-368. doi:10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000152Kirsch, R. J., Laird, K. R., & Evans, T. G. (2000). The Entry of International CPA Firms into Emerging Markets: Motivational Factors and Growth Strategies. The International Journal of Accounting, 35(1), 99-119. doi:10.1016/s0020-7063(99)00048-5Kivrak, S., Arslan, G., Tuncan, M., & Birgonul, M. T. (2014). Impact of national culture on knowledge sharing in international construction projects. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 41(7), 642-649. doi:10.1139/cjce-2013-0408Konijn, P., & van Tulder, R. (2015). Resources-for-infrastructure (R4I) swaps. critical perspectives on international business, 11(3/4), 259-284. doi:10.1108/cpoib-02-2013-0008Korkmaz, S., & Messner, J. I. (2008). Competitive Positioning and Continuity of Construction Firms in International Markets. Journal of Management in Engineering, 24(4), 207-216. doi:10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(2008)24:4(207)Kytle, B., & Ruggie, J. G. (2005). Corporate social responsibility as risk management. A model for multinationals (Working paper No. 10). Harvard University.LAMBERT, D. R. (1980). PRICE AS A QUALITY SIGNAL: THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG. Economic Inquiry, 18(1), 144-150. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.1980.tb00565.xLee, S.-H., Jeon, R.-K., Kim, J.-H., & Kim, J.-J. (2011). Strategies for Developing Countries to Expand Their Shares in the Global Construction Market: Phase-Based SWOT and AAA Analyses of Korea. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(6), 460-470. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000316Lee, K.-W., Han, S. H., Park, H., & David Jeong, H. (2016). Empirical Analysis of Host-Country Effects in the International Construction Market: An Industry-Level Approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(3), 04015092. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001083Lei, Z., Tang, W., Duffield, C., Zhang, L., & Hui, F. K. P. (2017). The impact of technical standards on international project performance: Chinese contractors’ experience. International Journal of Project Management, 35(8), 1597-1607. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.09.002Ling, F. Y. Y., & Hoi, L. (2006). Risks faced by Singapore firms when undertaking construction projects in India. International Journal of Project Management, 24(3), 261-270. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.11.003Liu, X., Buck, T., & Shu, C. (2005). Chinese economic development, the next stage: outward FDI? International Business Review, 14(1), 97-115. doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2004.12.003Lu, W., Li, H., Shen, L., & Huang, T. (2009). Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats Analysis of Chinese Construction Companies in the Global Market. Journal of Management in Engineering, 25(4), 166-176. doi:10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(2009)25:4(166)Lu, W., Liu, A. M. M., Rowlinson, S., & Poon, S. W. (2013). Sharpening Competitive Edge through Procurement Innovation: Perspectives from Chinese International Construction Companies. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(3), 347-351. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000614Luu, V. T., Kim, S.-Y., & Huynh, T.-A. (2008). Improving project management performance of large contractors using benchmarking approach. International Journal of Project Management, 26(7), 758-769. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.10.002Marinič, P., & Záthurecký, V. (2014). Evaluation of the construction industry’s economic situation and expected development according to managers of SMBs. Central European Journal of Management, 1(1). doi:10.5817/cejm2014-1-5Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363. doi:10.1086/226550Mohr, A. T., & Puck, J. F. (2005). Managing Functional Diversity to Improve the Performance of International Joint Ventures. Long Range Planning, 38(2), 163-182. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2005.02.004Antonio J. (2011). Financial risks in construction projects. AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, 5(31). doi:10.5897/ajbm11.1463Mosley, J. C., & Bubshait, A. A. (2016). Performance Evaluation of International Contractors in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 142(1), 04015007. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000254Ngowi, A. B., Pienaar, E., Talukhaba, A., & Mbachu, J. (2005). The globalisation of the construction industry—a review. Building and Environment, 40(1), 135-141. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.05.008Öz, Ö. (2001). Sources of competitive advantage of Turkish construction companies in international markets. Construction Management and Economics, 19(2), 135-144. doi:10.1080/01446190010009988Ozorhon, B., Arditi, D., Dikmen, I., & Birgonul, M. T. (2010). Performance of International Joint Ventures in Construction. Journal of Management in Engineering, 26(4), 209-222. doi:10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000022Papadopoulos, N., & Martín Martín, O. (2011). International market selection and segmentation: perspectives and challenges. International Marketing Review, 28(2), 132-149. doi:10.1108/02651331111122632Park, H., Lee, K.-W., Jeong, H. D., & Han, S. H. (2014). Effect of Institutional Risks on the Performance of International Construction Projects. Construction Research Congress 2014. doi:10.1061/9780784413517.216Parkhe, A. (1991). Interfirm Diversity, Organizational Learning, and Longevity in Global Strategic Alliances. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(4), 579-601. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490315Price, A. D. F., & Newson, E. (2003). Strategic Management: Consideration of Paradoxes, Processes, and Associated Concepts as Applied to Construction. Journal of Management in Engineering, 19(4), 183-192. doi:10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(2003)19:4(183)Rutihinda, C. (2011). Factors Influencing The Internationalization Of Small And Medium Size Enterprises. International Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER), 7(12). doi:10.19030/iber.v7i12.3312Sakakibara, M., & Porter, M. E. (2001). Competing at Home to Win Abroad: Evidence from Japanese Industry. Review of Economics and Statistics, 83(2), 310-322. doi:10.1162/00346530151143842Sambasivan, M., & Soon, Y. W. (2007). Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 25(5), 517-526. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.11.007Scherer, F. M., & Ross, D. (1990). Industrial market structure and economic performance. University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign’s Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1496716Sierra, L. A., Pellicer, E., & Yepes, V. (2017). Method for estimating the social sustainability of infrastructure projects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 65, 41-53. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2017.02.004Sierra, L. A., Yepes, V., & Pellicer, E. (2018). A review of multi-criteria assessment of the social sustainability of infrastructures. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 496-513. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.022Utama, W. P., Chan, A. P. C., Zahoor, H., & Gao, R. (2016). Review of research trend in international construction projects: a bibliometric analysis. Construction Economics and Building, 16(2), 71-82. doi:10.5130/ajceb.v16i2.4866Wang, S. Q., Tiong, R. L. K., Ting, S. K., & Ashley, D. (1999). Political Risks: Analysis of Key Contract Clauses in China’s BOT Project. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(3), 190-197. doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(1999)125:3(190)Watt, D. J., Kayis, B., & Willey, K. (2010). The relative importance of tender evaluation and contractor selection criteria. International Journal of Project Management, 28(1), 51-60. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.04.003Welch, D. E., Welch, L. S., & Marschan-Piekkari, R. (2001). The Persistent Impact of Language on Global Operations. Prometheus, 19(3), 193-209. doi:10.1080/08109020110072180Winch, G. M. (2008). Internationalisation strategies in business-to-business services: the case of architectural practice. The Service Industries Journal, 28(1), 1-13. doi:10.1080/02642060701725347Wu, C.-L., Fang, D.-P., Liao, P.-C., Xue, J.-W., Li, Y., & Wang, T. (2015). Perception of corporate social responsibility: the case of Chinese international contractors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 107, 185-194. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.143Xia, B., Chan, A., Molenaar, K., & Skitmore, M. (2012). Determining the Appropriate Proportion of Owner-Provided Design in Design-Build Contracts: Content Analysis Approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(9), 1017-1022. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000522Xiaopeng, D., & Pheng, L. S. (2013). Understanding the critical variables affecting the level of political risks in international construction projects. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 17(5), 895-907. doi:10.1007/s12205-013-0354-5Yalegama, S., Chileshe, N., & Ma, T. (2016). Critical success factors for community-driven development projects: A Sri Lankan community perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 34(4), 643-659. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.02.006Yang, H., Chan, A. P. C., & Yeung, J. F. Y. (2015). Niche Width, Competitive Positioning, and Performance of International Construction Contractors (1992–2009). Journal of Management in Engineering, 31(3), 04014040. doi:10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000250Ye, K., Lu, W., & Jiang, W. (2009). Concentration in the international construction market. Construction Management and Economics, 27(12), 1197-1207. doi:10.1080/01446190903222429Yildiz, A. E., Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M. T., Ercoskun, K., & Alten, S. (2014). A knowledge-based risk mapping tool for cos

Study of Social and Environmental Needs for the Selection of Sustainable Criteria in the Procurement of Public Works

This research was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, grant number BIA2017-85098-R and the Valencian Regional Government, grant number GV/2018//085Montalbán-Domingo, L.; Aguilar-Morocho, M.; García-Segura, T.; Pellicer, E. (2020). Study of Social and Environmental Needs for the Selection of Sustainable Criteria in the Procurement of Public Works. Sustainability. 12(18):1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187756S1211218Xia, B., Chen, Q., Xu, Y., Li, M., & Jin, X. (2015). Design-Build Contractor Selection for Public Sustainable Buildings. Journal of Management in Engineering, 31(5), 04014070. doi:10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000295Ruparathna, R., & Hewage, K. (2015). Sustainable procurement in the Canadian construction industry: current practices, drivers and opportunities. Journal of Cleaner Production, 109, 305-314. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.007Testa, F., Grappio, P., Gusmerotti, N. M., Iraldo, F., & Frey, M. (2015). Examining green public procurement using content analysis: existing difficulties for procurers and useful recommendations. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 18(1), 197-219. doi:10.1007/s10668-015-9634-1Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 On Public Procurement and Repealing Directive 2004/18/EChttps://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0024&rid=1Montalbán-Domingo, L., García-Segura, T., Sanz, M. A., & Pellicer, E. (2018). Social sustainability criteria in public-work procurement: An international perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 198, 1355-1371. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.083Sourani, A., & Sohail, M. (2011). Barriers to addressing sustainable construction in public procurement strategies. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering Sustainability, 164(4), 229-237. doi:10.1680/ensu.2011.164.4.229Ugwu, O. O., Kumaraswamy, M. M., Wong, A., & Ng, S. T. (2006). Sustainability appraisal in infrastructure projects (SUSAIP). Automation in Construction, 15(2), 239-251. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2005.05.006Shi, Ge, Yuan, Wang, Kellett, Li, & Ba. (2019). An Integrated Indicator System and Evaluation Model for Regional Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 11(7), 2183. doi:10.3390/su11072183Szopik-Depczyńska, K., Cheba, K., Bąk, I., Stajniak, M., Simboli, A., & Ioppolo, G. (2018). The study of relationship in a hierarchical structure of EU sustainable development indicators. Ecological Indicators, 90, 120-131. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.03.002Yli-Viikari, A., Hietala-Koivu, R., Huusela-Veistola, E., Hyvönen, T., Perälä, P., & Turtola, E. (2007). Evaluating agri-environmental indicators (AEIs)—Use and limitations of international indicators at national level. Ecological Indicators, 7(1), 150-163. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.11.005Antanasijević, D., Pocajt, V., Ristić, M., & Perić-Grujić, A. (2017). A differential multi-criteria analysis for the assessment of sustainability performance of European countries: Beyond country ranking. Journal of Cleaner Production, 165, 213-220. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.131Phillis, Y. A., Kouikoglou, V. S., & Verdugo, C. (2017). Urban sustainability assessment and ranking of cities. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 64, 254-265. doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.03.002Illankoon, I. M. C. S., Tam, V. W. Y., & Le, K. N. (2017). Environmental, Economic, and Social Parameters in International Green Building Rating Tools. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 143(2), 05016010. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000313Cook, D., Saviolidis, N. M., Davíðsdóttir, B., Jóhannsdóttir, L., & Ólafsson, S. (2017). Measuring countries’ environmental sustainability performance—The development of a nation-specific indicator set. Ecological Indicators, 74, 463-478. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.12.009Walker, H., & Brammer, S. (2012). The relationship between sustainable procurement and e-procurement in the public sector. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 256-268. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.008Varnäs, A., Balfors, B., & Faith-Ell, C. (2009). Environmental consideration in procurement of construction contracts: current practice, problems and opportunities in green procurement in the Swedish construction industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(13), 1214-1222. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.04.001Anthonissen, J., Van Troyen, D., Braet, J., & Van den bergh, W. (2015). Using carbon dioxide emissions as a criterion to award road construction projects: a pilot case in Flanders. Journal of Cleaner Production, 102, 96-102. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.020Testa, F., Annunziata, E., Iraldo, F., & Frey, M. (2016). Drawbacks and opportunities of green public procurement: an effective tool for sustainable production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1893-1900. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.092Ekener, E., Hansson, J., Larsson, A., & Peck, P. (2018). Developing Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment methodology by applying values-based sustainability weighting - Tested on biomass based and fossil transportation fuels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 181, 337-351. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.211Carnevalli, J. A., & Miguel, P. C. (2008). Review, analysis and classification of the literature on QFD—Types of research, difficulties and benefits. International Journal of Production Economics, 114(2), 737-754. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.03.006Rodríguez López, F., & Fernández Sánchez, G. (2011). Challenges for Sustainability Assessment by Indicators. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 11(4), 321-325. doi:10.1061/(asce)lm.1943-5630.0000142Dasgupta, S., & Tam, E. K. . (2005). Indicators and framework for assessing sustainable infrastructure. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 32(1), 30-44. doi:10.1139/l04-101Dobrovolskienė, N., & Tamošiūnienė, R. (2015). An Index to Measure Sustainability of a Business Project in the Construction Industry: Lithuanian Case. Sustainability, 8(1), 14. doi:10.3390/su8010014Shen, L., Wu, Y., & Zhang, X. (2011). Key Assessment Indicators for the Sustainability of Infrastructure Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(6), 441-451. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000315Ugwu, O. O., & Haupt, T. C. (2007). Key performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustainability—a South African construction industry perspective. Building and Environment, 42(2), 665-680. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.10.018Mihyeon Jeon, C., & Amekudzi, A. (2005). Addressing Sustainability in Transportation Systems: Definitions, Indicators, and Metrics. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 11(1), 31-50. doi:10.1061/(asce)1076-0342(2005)11:1(31)Wu, Z., Zhang, X., & Wu, M. (2016). Mitigating construction dust pollution: state of the art and the way forward. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1658-1666. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.015Azapagic, A. (2004). Developing a framework for sustainable development indicators for the mining and minerals industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(6), 639-662. doi:10.1016/s0959-6526(03)00075-1Bajjou, M. S., Chafi, A., Ennadi, A., … Hammoumi, M. E. (2017). he Practical Relationships between Lean Construction Tools and Sustainable Development: A literature review. JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY REVIEW, 10(4), 170-177. doi:10.25103/jestr.104.20Fuentes-Bargues, J., González-Cruz, M., & González-Gaya, C. (2017). Environmental Criteria in the Spanish Public Works Procurement Process. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(2), 204. doi:10.3390/ijerph14020204Faith-Ell, C., Balfors, B., & Folkeson, L. (2006). The application of environmental requirements in Swedish road maintenance contracts. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(2), 163-171. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.11.004Sarkis, J., Meade, L. M., & Presley, A. R. (2012). Incorporating sustainability into contractor evaluation and team formation in the built environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 31, 40-53. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.02.029Valdes-Vasquez, R., & Klotz, L. E. (2013). Social Sustainability Considerations during Planning and Design: Framework of Processes for Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(1), 80-89. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000566Whang, S.-W., & Kim, S. (2015). Balanced sustainable implementation in the construction industry: The perspective of Korean contractors. Energy and Buildings, 96, 76-85. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.03.019McCrudden, C. (2004). Using public procurement to achieve social outcomes. Natural Resources Forum, 28(4), 257-267. doi:10.1111/j.1477-8947.2004.00099.xPellicer, E., Sanz, M. A., Esmaeili, B., & Molenaar, K. R. (2016). Exploration of Team Integration in Spanish Multifamily Residential Building Construction. Journal of Management in Engineering, 32(5), 05016012. doi:10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000438Shiau, T.-A., & Chuen-Yu, J.-K. (2016). Developing an Indicator System for Measuring the Social Sustainability of Offshore Wind Power Farms. Sustainability, 8(5), 470. doi:10.3390/su8050470Purcell, P., Bruen, M., O’Sullivan, J., Cocchiglia, L., & Kelly-Quinn, M. (2011). Water quality monitoring during the construction of the M3 motorway in Ireland. Water and Environment Journal, 26(2), 175-183. doi:10.1111/j.1747-6593.2011.00274.xXiahou, X., Tang, Y., Yuan, J., Chang, T., Liu, P., & Li, Q. (2018). Evaluating Social Performance of Construction Projects: An Empirical Study. Sustainability, 10(7), 2329. doi:10.3390/su10072329Eurostat Eurostat Databasehttps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/databaseOECD Datahttps://data.oecd.org/The sustainable development goals (SDGs) indexhttp://sdgindex.org/International Labour Organization Statistics and Datablaseshttps://www.ilo.org/global/statistics-and-databases/lang--en/index.htmUnited Nations System. Chief Executives Board for Coordination. Statisticshttps://www.unsceb.org/content/statisticsPuig, M., Wooldridge, C., & Darbra, R. M. (2014). Identification and selection of Environmental Performance Indicators for sustainable port development. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 81(1), 124-130. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.02.006World Bank World Bank Open Datahttps://data.worldbank.org/Dos Santos, S. F., & Brandi, H. S. (2015). Model framework to construct a single aggregate sustainability indicator: an application to the biodiesel supply chain. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 17(7), 1963-1973. doi:10.1007/s10098-015-0919-8Młodak, A. (2013). On the construction of an aggregated measure of the development of interval data. Computational Statistics, 29(5), 895-929. doi:10.1007/s00180-013-0469-7Kazançoğlu, Y., Özbiltekin, M., & Özkan-Özen, Y. D. (2019). Sustainability benchmarking for logistics center location decision. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 31(5), 1239-1260. doi:10.1108/meq-08-2019-0177Pohekar, S. D., & Ramachandran, M. (2004). Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning—A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 8(4), 365-381. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2003.12.007Neofytou, H., Nikas, A., & Doukas, H. (2020). Sustainable energy transition readiness: A multicriteria assessment index. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 131, 109988. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.109988Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R. B., Albadvi, A., & Aghdasi, M. (2010). PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 200(1), 198-215. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.021Rehman, A. U., Abidi, M. H., Umer, U., & Usmani, Y. S. (2019). Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Selecting Wind Energy Power Plant Locations. Sustainability, 11(21), 6112. doi:10.3390/su11216112Laxe, F. G., Bermúdez, F. M., Palmero, F. M., & Novo-Corti, I. (2016). Sustainability and the Spanish port system. Analysis of the relationship between economic and environmental indicators. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 113(1-2), 232-239. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.09.022García-Segura, T., Montalbán-Domingo, L., Sanz, M. A., & Lozano-Torró, A. (2020). Sustainable Decision-Making Module: Application to Public Procurement. Journal of Civil Engineering Education, 146(3), 04020004. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.2643-9115.0000014Phillis, A., Grigoroudis, E., & Kouikoglou, V. S. (2020). Assessing national energy sustainability using multiple criteria decision analysis. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 28(1), 18-35. doi:10.1080/13504509.2020.1780646Oswald, D., Sherratt, F., & Smith, S. (2018). Problems with safety observation reporting: A construction industry case study. Safety Science, 107, 35-45. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2018.04.00

New Third Rail Implementation System for Conventional Railroad Tracks in Service

[EN] Two track gauges coexist in Spain, the Iberian gauge (1668 mm) and the international gauge (1435 mm). Solutions applied on the track were considered to improve the interoperability in Spain. First solution proposed was tracks with two-gauge-ready sleepers. This solution allows changing the gauge from Iberian to International gauge or from International to Iberian gauge. The need of two gauges evolved this solution to the third rail system with two-simultaneous-gauge sleepers. In this paper, a new third-rail track solution is proposed. This solution is a novel system based on the introduction of special concrete blocks between the existing sleepers to fasten the third rail. Thus, the conventional railroad track becomes in a double-simultaneous-gauge lines without needing change existing sleepers and make long traffic interruptions of the track like in common third-rail systems. In the present study, threedimensional numerical models are generated using finite-element method. The analysis of the vertical displacements of the top head of the rails, vertical stresses transmitted to the substructure layers and vertical track stiffness, demonstrate the good vertical performance of the new system compared to the conventional lines with dual-gauge-ready sleepers and the common third rail tracks.Montalbán-Domingo, L.; Zamorano-Martín, C.; Real Herráiz, JI.; Gomez Del Rey, L. (2018). New Third Rail Implementation System for Conventional Railroad Tracks in Service. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 22(2):622-628. doi:10.1007/s12205-017-0251-4S622628222Banimahd, M., Woodward, P., Kennedy, J., and Medero, G. (2013). “Three-dimensional modeling of high speed ballasted railway tracks.” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers–Transport, Vol. 166, No. 2, pp. 113–123, DOI: 10.1680/tran.9.00048.Choi, J. (2013). “Influence of track support stiffness of ballasted track on dynamic wheel-rail forces.” Journal of transportation engineering. Vol. 139, No. 7, pp. 709–718, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000543.Cuadrado, M., Zamorano, C., González, P., Nasarre, J., and Romo, E. (2008). “Analysis of buckling in dual-gauge tracks.” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers–Transport, Vol. 161, No. 4, pp. 177–184, DOI: 10.1680/tran.2008.161.4.177.Dahlberg, T. (2010). “Railway track stiffness variations–consequences and countermeasures”. International journal of civil engineering. Vol. 8, No. 1, pp.1–12Drucker, D. C. and Prager, W. (1952). “Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design.” Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 157–165.Gallego, I. and López, A. (2009). “Numerical simulation of embankmentstructure transition design.” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 223, No. 4, pp. 331–343, DOI: 10.1243/09544097JRRT234.Gallego, I., López, A., Vieira, E. and Rivas, A. (2012). “Design of embankment-structure transitions for railway infrastructure.” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Transport. Vol. 165, No. 1, pp. 27–37, DOI: 10.1680/tran.8.00037.Gallego, I., Muñoz, J., Rivas, A., and Sánchez-Cambronero, S. (2011). “Vertical track stiffness as a new parameter involved in designing highspeed railway infrastructures.” Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 137, No. 12, pp. 971–979, DOI: 10.1243/09544097JRRT234.Ministerio de fomento/Secretaría de estado de Infraestructuras y Transportes (1999). Recomendaciones para el proyecto de plataformas ferroviarias, Centro de publicaciones, Madrid.Montalbán, L., Real, J., and Real, T. (2013). “Mechanical characterization of railway structures based on vertical stiffness analysis and railway substructure stress state.” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 227, No. 1, pp. 74–85, DOI: 10.1177/0954409712452348.Montalbán, L., Real, J., Zamorano, C., and Real, T. (2014). “Design of a new high lateral resistance sleeper and performance comparison with conventional sleepers in a curved railway track by means of finite element models.” Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol. 11, No. 7, pp.1238–1250.ORE committee D-117 (1983). Adaptation optimale de la voie classique au traffic de l’avenir, Rapport nº 27, Comportament des structures d’assise de la voie sous changes répétées. E.T.F., Paris.Pita, A. L., Teixeira, P. F., and Robusté, F. (2004). “High speed and track deterioration: the role of vertical stiffness of the track.” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 218, No. 1, pp. 31–40, DOI: 10.1243/ 095440904322804411.Puzavac, L., Popovic, Z., and Lazarevic, L. (2012). “Influence of track stiffness on track behaviour under vertical load.” PROMETTRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION. Vol. 24, No. 5, pp. 405–412Real, J., Gómez, L., Montalbán, L., and Real, T. (2012). “Study of the influence of geometrical and mechanical parameters on ballasted railway tracks design.” Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, Vol. 26, No. 9, pp. 2837–2844, DOI: 10.1007/s12206-012-0734-7.Santamaría, J., Herreros, J., Vadillo, E., and Correa, N. (2013). “Design of an optimized wheel profile for rail vehicles operating on two track gauges.” Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 54–73, DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2012.711478.Teixeira, P. F. (2003). Contribution to the reduction of track maintenance costs by optimizing its vertical stiffness, PhD. Dissertation, Technical University of Catalonia, Barcelona

Social Sustainability in Delivery and Procurement of Public Construction Contracts

[EN] Boosting sustainability in public construction procurement implies new challenges associated with incentivizing integrated approaches and the inclusion of sustainability criteria in tendering procedures. Thus, the choice of project-delivery method and procurement procedure is a key decision to ensure project success for sustainable outcomes. This study focused on the social dimension of sustainability and analyzed 451 tendering documents from 10 countries to assess the influence of procurement procedures and delivery methods on the inclusion of social criteria in public construction procurement. Content analysis, descriptive statistics, and logistic regression were applied. The results show the international trends in delivery methods and procurement procedures. Country and contract size were found to be the most influential variables for the inclusion of social criteria in tendering procedures. There were no significant differences between project-delivery methods and between procurement procedures with respect to the inclusion of social criteria. However, criteria associated with employment and cultural heritage were mainly considered in traditional delivery methods, whereas professional ethics and cultural heritage were associated with the lowest price procurement procedures. Finally, subjective methods were predominantly used to assess social sustainability.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, along with FEDER funding (Project BIA2017-85098-R) and the Valencian Regional Government (Project GV/2018//085). Furthermore, the valuable commentaries and suggestions of three anonymous reviewers are highly appreciated.Montalbán-Domingo, L.; García-Segura, T.; Sanz-Benlloch, MA.; Pellicer, E. (2019). Social Sustainability in Delivery and Procurement of Public Construction Contracts. Journal of Management in Engineering. 35(2):04018065-1-04018065-10. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000674S04018065-104018065-1035

Social sustainability criteria in public-work procurement: An international perspective

[EN] Scientific literature highlights the need to engage social sustainability more effectively in the construction industry through public procurement. Previous contributions have been focused on establishing strategies and defining guides to encourage and facilitate the inclusion of social criteria in public procurement. However, to reach effective results, the characterization of the current scenario needs to be clarified. With this aim, this research analyzes 451 tendering documents from 10 countries in terms of social sustainability. Three research questions are stated to characterize what the current main social criteria are, how these are defined, and what the differences and similarities are with respect to the inclusion of social criteria in tendering procedures at the international level. To analyze tendering documents, a quantitative content analysis that combines inductive and deductive approaches is developed. Descriptive statistics and statistical analysis based on correspondence analysis and the chi-square contingency table analysis are performed. The results show a lack of metrics to assess social sustainability objectively, the predominance of health and safety as the main social criteria that are included in public procurement, and the importance of the contract size in the number of social categories considered in procurement procedures. However, the main result of this research is focused on showing the important role that the variable "country" plays when the behavior regarding the inclusion of social sustainability is compared at the international level since significant differences are found between Anglo-Saxon and Spanish-speaking countries. Policies should be implemented to promote the use of social criteria and metrics in the award of projects and in the evaluation and monitoring of social performance in the construction industry. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, along with FEDER funding (Project: BIA2017-85098-R).Montalbán-Domingo, L.; García-Segura, T.; Sanz-Benlloch, MA.; Pellicer, E. (2018). Social sustainability criteria in public-work procurement: An international perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production. 198:1355-1371. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.083S1355137119

Enhancing a Comprehensive View of the Infrastructure Life Cycle through Project-Based Learning

[EN] This paper describes a teaching innovation project that adopts the project-based learning approach to introduce civil engineering students to their future professional roles and tasks throughout the infrastructure life cycle. The successful development of the whole process and completion of the infrastructure in the best technical and sustainable conditions require a comprehensive view of the infrastructure life cycle. Courses on Project Design and Project and Business Management at the B.Sc. in Civil Engineering simulated practical experiences in bidding, design, estimation, preliminary analysis, and construction planning, linking theory to professional practice. This study describes the organization of both courses to implement the simulations. To analyze the experience from the student¿s point of view, a survey examined the students¿ perceptions of the achievement of higher-order learning and their comprehensive view of the infrastructure life cycle. In addition, the learning results were compared with the students¿ perceptions. Results indicated that students are aware of the learning improvement after performing the proposed activities. In addition, this approach helps the students to develop the professional competencies needed for the curricula. The coordination of the courses to align the learning activities with the life cycle phases enables students to deepen their understanding of the phases of the infrastructure life cycle while they acquire a comprehensive view of the process. In addition, this approach has improved the motivation and engagement of the students. This teaching innovation project is easily adaptable to other engineering curricula.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Universitat Politècnica de València (Teaching Innovation Project PIME/18-19/84).García-Segura, T.; Montalbán-Domingo, L.; Sanz-Benlloch, A.; Domingo Cabo, A.; Catalá Alís, J.; Pellicer, E. (2023). Enhancing a Comprehensive View of the Infrastructure Life Cycle through Project-Based Learning. Journal of Civil Engineering Education. 149(1):1-13. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.2643-9115.0000072113149

Impact of game-based learning on understanding Lean Construction Principles

[EN] Lean philosophy introduces a new approach for maximizing value while minimizing waste, facilitating sustainable practices at the same time. Companies have become aware of these improvements and are demanding students well formed in Lean concepts. However, to meet this demand, universities must adapt their curricula to include courses that use alternative teaching methods to connect to real contexts. This paper seeks to analyze the benefits of lecture- and game-based learning for developing students¿ understanding of Lean Construction Principles. A case study is carried out in the ¿Lean Construction¿ course of the Master of Planning and Management in Civil Engineering of the Universitat Politècnica de València. A combination of a traditional lecture and three simple games is applied. Descriptive statistics, the Mann¿Whitney U-test, and the Wilcoxon test are performed to analyze the impact of each activity on the understanding of each Lean Construction Principle. Results highlight the importance of combining the lecture class with multiple games to effectively impart knowledge about Lean principles and their application in the construction industry. In addition, they emphasize the importance of selecting the game according to the Lean principle to be taught.This research was funded by CONICYT grant number PCHA/National Doctorate/2018-21180884 for funding the graduate research of Herrera, and by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, along with FEDER funding, grant number BIA2017-85098-R. The APC was funded by School of Civil Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso, Chile.Herrera, RF.; Sanz-Benlloch, MA.; Montalbán-Domingo, L.; García-Segura, T.; Pellicer, E. (2019). Impact of game-based learning on understanding Lean Construction Principles. Sustainability. 11(19):1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195294S1161119Gao, S., & Low, S. P. (2013). The Toyota Way model: an alternative framework for lean construction. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 25(5-6), 664-682. doi:10.1080/14783363.2013.820022González, V. A., Orozco, F., Senior, B., Ingle, J., Forcael, E., & Alarcón, L. F. (2015). LEBSCO: Lean-Based Simulation Game for Construction Management Classrooms. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 141(4), 04015002. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000243Ballard, G., & Howell, G. (2003). Lean project management. Building Research & Information, 31(2), 119-133. doi:10.1080/09613210301997De Carvalho, A., Granja, A., & da Silva, V. (2017). A Systematic Literature Review on Integrative Lean and Sustainability Synergies over a Building’s Lifecycle. Sustainability, 9(7), 1156. doi:10.3390/su9071156Martínez León, H. C., & Calvo-Amodio, J. (2017). Towards lean for sustainability: Understanding the interrelationships between lean and sustainability from a systems thinking perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 4384-4402. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.132Florida, R. (1996). Lean and Green: The Move to Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing. California Management Review, 39(1), 80-105. doi:10.2307/41165877Pellicer, E., Yepes, V., & Ortega, A. J. (2013). Method for Planning Graduate Programs in Construction Management. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 139(1), 33-41. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000120Jeong, W., Chang, S., Son, J., & Yi, J.-S. (2016). BIM-Integrated Construction Operation Simulation for Just-In-Time Production Management. Sustainability, 8(11), 1106. doi:10.3390/su8111106Ahmed, S. M., Yaris, C., Farooqui, R. U., & Saqib, M. (2014). Key Attributes and Skills for Curriculum Improvement for Undergraduate Construction Management Programs. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 10(4), 240-254. doi:10.1080/15578771.2014.900833Burch V, R. F., & Smith, B. (2017). Using simulation to teach lean methodologies and the benefits for Millennials. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(3-4), 320-334. doi:10.1080/14783363.2017.1303330Becerik-Gerber, A.M.ASCE, B., Ku, K., & Jazizadeh, F. (2012). BIM-Enabled Virtual and Collaborative Construction Engineering and Management. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 138(3), 234-245. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000098Clevenger, C., Glick, S., & del Puerto, C. L. (2012). Interoperable Learning Leveraging Building Information Modeling (BIM) in Construction Education. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 8(2), 101-118. doi:10.1080/15578771.2011.647249Kuriger, G. W., Wan, H., Mirehei, S. M., Tamma, S., & Chen, F. F. (2009). A Web-Based Lean Simulation Game for Office Operations: Training the Other Side of a Lean Enterprise. Simulation & Gaming, 41(4), 487-510. doi:10.1177/1046878109334945Pivec, M. (2007). Editorial: Play and learn: potentials of game-based learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 387-393. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00722.xDe Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & Education, 46(3), 249-264. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.007Torres, M., & Macedo, J. (2000). Learning Sustainable Development with a New Simulation Game. Simulation & Gaming, 31(1), 119-126. doi:10.1177/104687810003100112Qian, M., & Clark, K. R. (2016). Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50-58. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of Game-Based Learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258-283. doi:10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533Badurdeen, F., Marksberry, P., Hall, A., & Gregory, B. (2009). Teaching Lean Manufacturing With Simulations and Games: A Survey and Future Directions. Simulation & Gaming, 41(4), 465-486. doi:10.1177/1046878109334331Deif, A. (2017). Insights on lean gamification for higher education. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 8(3), 359-376. doi:10.1108/ijlss-04-2016-0017Brioso, X. (2015). Teaching Lean Construction: Pontifical Catholic University of Peru Training Course in Lean Project & Construction Management. Procedia Engineering, 123, 85-93. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2015.10.062Thomson, R., & McLeod, J. (2015). New frontiers in qualitative longitudinal research: an agenda for research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(3), 243-250. doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1017900Make a Card Simulationhttps://www.leanconstruction.org/learning/game-simulations/make-a-card-simulation/Thomas, H. R. (1991). Labor Productivity and Work Sampling: The Bottom Line. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 117(3), 423-444. doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(1991)117:3(423)Gouett, M. C., Haas, C. T., Goodrum, P. M., & Caldas, C. H. (2011). Activity Analysis for Direct-Work Rate Improvement in Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(12), 1117-1124. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000375Dao, B., Kermanshachi, S., Shane, J., Anderson, S., & Hare, E. (2017). Exploring and Assessing Project Complexity. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(5), 04016126. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001275Park, C. S., Le, Q. T., Pedro, A., & Lim, C. R. (2016). Interactive Building Anatomy Modeling for Experiential Building Construction Education. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 142(3), 04015019. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000268Da Rocha, C. G., & Miron, L. I. G. (2018). The House Factory: A Simulation Game for Understanding Mass Customization in House Building. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 144(1), 05017007. doi:10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000347Shaaruddin, J., & Mohamad, M. (2017). Identifying the Effectiveness of Active Learning Strategies and Benefits in Curriculum and Pedagogy Course for Undergraduate TESL Students. Creative Education, 08(14), 2312-2324. doi:10.4236/ce.2017.81415

Assessing social performance of construction companies in public-works procurement: Data envelopment analysis based on the benefit of the doubt approach

[EN] There is an urgent need to improve the assessment of construction companies' Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in public-works procurement. Current procurement procedures assign a high level of subjectivity to CSR assessment and lack transparency. Existing research basically highlights the need to define weighting systems in which the importance of each social criterion is objective and based on the social weaknesses in the context of a project. In order to fulfill this gap, this research proposes a composite indicator for assessing CSR in public construction procurement. A Data Envelopment Analysis based on the Benefit of Doubt Approach (DEA-BOD) was chosen to define the weighting system based on the main social weaknesses that exist in the country where the contract is procured. The research employs simulation to assess the validity of this indicator. The results highlight that the use of national indices as a proxy for CSR indicators can be helpful in determining the level of importance of CSR in public procurement. The simulation showed that the proposed approach allows the objective comparison of CSR performance of construction companies, regardless of their size. This research assists decision-makers in properly integrating social sustainability in procurement procedures.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Universitat Politecnica de Valencia (PAID -00-17) . The authors are grateful to the expert panel for their participation in this research.Montalbán-Domingo, L.; García-Segura, T.; Sanz-Benlloch, A.; Pellicer, E.; Torres-Machí, C.; Molenaar, K. (2022). Assessing social performance of construction companies in public-works procurement: Data envelopment analysis based on the benefit of the doubt approach. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 96:1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.1068441159