International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4124

Sustainability and Pollution Impacts at a Civil Engineering Project in Doha:

Contractor Management Implications

P. James Project Director, Graduate School Bangkok University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Abstract

This is a research paper focused on assessing the Client’s

Engineer(PMC) managers/senior engineer’s perceptions of

sustainability management issues relating to a civil

engineering project in Doha. In order to consider more

implicitly the questions and issues raised, this empirical

groundwork utilised an interpretive perspective. The scope for

this research was the PMC managers/senior engineers of a

single civil engineering project situated in Doha, Qatar. The

population for this study was made up of a number of

individual (26) PMC managers/senior engineer’s located at

one main-site, and a total of 14managers/senior engineers

were determined as the resultant sample frame.

The outcomes consisted of five (5) main themes, namely:

Contractor Management Operating Strategies; Client

Management Strategies; Costs of Contractor Mismanagement

of Pollution; Management Responsibility; Pollution Issues;

and 13 sub-themes raised from an initial question.

The paper gives a clear insight into the practical sustainability

issues surrounding a civil engineering project setting in Doha,

and the implications of contractor management strategies in

relation to environmental management and developments

were illuminated. The paper suggests that developments of

this kind may benefit from a greater awareness and

transparency of implementation of environmental

management standards, whilst delineating the issues of

significant costs and associated concerns, and the effects on

environmental mitigation opportunities through the use of

appropriate management strategies.

Very little research has been conducted in this area in Qatar

and the paper exposes weak aspects of environmental

management in Doha, which is previously unexplored in

today’s demanding civil engineering environment.

Keywords: Environment; Projects; Civil Engineering;

Management, Doha

Introduction Most writers observe that construction activities have a great

effect on the environment in which they are situate (1). An

environmental assessment is carried out on almost every

construction activity today (2), which is done to assure that

the construction activities and practices that are carried out

minimize environmental damage (3). As such, considerable

attention has been given to environmental impacts of

construction sites because of the destructive impacts (4) where

construction appears to be a major focus for polluting agents

(5) as they affect the sustainability capability of the area (6)

and pose a serious risk for contamination (7). This is often

through air, water and land contamination risks. Clients and

operating contractors don’t always pay specific attention to

environmental matters (8) and thus the construction managers

environmental knowledge needs to be enhanced (9) and

actions monitored to help mitigate such impacts (10). Further,

site management of environmental matters requires more than

just a cursory evaluation (11)as the site can quickly suffer

from the effects of pollution and mismanagement (12).It

requires a considered and integrative assessment (13), to

reassure the integrity of the environment (14) and the

sustainability of the ongoing construction activity (15).

Determining Construction Activity Environmental Impacts

in Doha

Development of an environmental management plan is often

the first step towards managing the environmental effects of

construction (16).This assessment process has been utilised

for almost 50 years and has now been accepted world-wide as

the “norm” as part of a larger international programme of

planning and assessment tools (17) underpinning

environmental evaluations of construction projects (18). There

would appear to be a wide variety of ways in which

environmentally impacting activities of construction can be

specified. One way would be through an Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA) – for example in the UK or EU

(Directive 85/337; 2011/92/EU as amended by EC Directive

97/11/EC) or its equivalent-leading to an Environmental

Statement of proposed construction activity. Its main aim is to

obtain judicial planning approval from the local authorities

overseeing the project – where the project is likely to have a

significant impact (19). However, some writers take a

different view and assess the various environments and their

impacts – such as Ecosystem(9), Natural Resources (5), and

Public Health impacts (7). The assessment framework

determines the quality and environmental orientation of the

project (20). Of importance is that cognizance is taken of the

legal and regulatory framework underpinning the

environmental assessment and to mitigate any raised issues

that arise from developing the environmental statement(21).

Environmental impacts can occur as a result of the use of a

resource or the pollution of a resource (22). An impact could

also be foreseen (and planned for) and thus be avoidable; or

unforeseen or cumulative leading to loss of plants, animals,

soil pollution, dust, soil compaction and/or erosion, water

pollution, air pollution, injuries and health debilitation

(humans and animals) (23). Most causes of impacts relate to

inadequate planning/management and not observing the

requirements of the EMS (24).

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4125

On Going Auditing and Monitoring of Environmental

Impacts

Environmentally responsible practices indicate that most large

projects would engage in an Environmental Management

System (EMS) (25) which is designed to provide the

objectives, methodology and the managerial motivation for

making appropriate ongoing management decisions(24). Thus,

environmental monitoring and consequent action leads to the

informed mitigation of environmental impacts (26).It also

leads to greater understanding of these impacts in terms of the

construction process and become preserved in the legacy

documents of the project (27).Where monitoring is conducted,

it is assumed that the supervising agency have a duty to

prescribe and moderate auditing returns to appropriate

standards (e.g. Legislative requirements–which is different

across countries and areas of operations); standards

requirements-e.g. ISO 14000:2015 (28); management best

practice requirements –e.g. sectorial reference document-Eco

Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) regulation (EC) No

1221/2009; and the donor (bank) exclusive requirements–e.g.

World Bank (29). It is difficult to understand how these could

all work together (e.g. see Shen and Walker, 30)-except that

local/national legislation and operating requirements would

provide specific obligations that must be met-all the others

may be considered voluntary or only operating at that location

for the duration of the construction of that project and are thus

independent and environmental decisions and outcomes result

from applicable analyses (31). These reflect important

frameworks/methodologies such as Life-Cycle Assessment

(LCA) (32)in the design of construction projects;

LEED/BREEAM (UK); Strategic Environmental Assessment

(SEA) (33); Risk Assessment (34); Economic Valuation (35);

and Multi-Attribute Approaches (36).

Having raised this as a literature gap issue (37; 38), this

creates the context for the research question, What are the Sustainability Issues and Impacts at the Construction Project for the Contractor and how can these be mitigated?

Methodology To investigate the issues generated within anon-site civil

engineering context, a deeper, more involved approach was

considered appropriate that required personal discussions on

such critical and important issues. In order to consider more

implicitly these generated issues, this empirical foundation

exploited an interpretive approach (39; 40). An assessment of

environmental issues targets personal components raised out

of individual experiences and is therefore an area of interest

where qualitative methodology is most appropriate to generate

this type of data.

This was an attempt to understand the perceptions of

managerial experiences at site. The Client’s Engineer (PMC)

managerial staff were considered specialist knowledge agents

and actors (41) as their opinions and experiences influenced

the perception of such engineering practices, and the

development and application of building appropriate site-

based management knowledge.

The research used a semi-structured interview conducted with

the PMC managers/senior engineer’s, who provided an

appropriate element of context and flexibility (42) and this

was further aided by applying an inductive/theory building

approach (43). Given the lack of appropriately focused

research in this area, this methodology is seen as suitable for

creating contextual data for the purpose of forming richer

theory development (44). A pilot study was carried out (4

respondents – not used in main interview/data collection

process) that allowed changes to language and questions that

had more meaning and understanding by the respondents

(following Kim, 45). This led to a more effective and

streamlined question routine and an enhanced communication

approach with respondents (46).

The population frame {26} for this study was made up of

available PMC managers/senior engineer’s who had direct on-

site responsibility for managing at site the

civil/electrical/mechanical engineering programmes and were

situate at identifiable locations, which is considered an

existing frame (47). This delivered an initial means for

appropriate sampling assessment with clear boundaries (48).

Given that not all individuals in this working group were

available for interview or were employed in the pilot study,

the sampling frame was configured as {19}, where all

respondents were included (49), and no respondent was

considered out of scope relative to the research orientation and

requirements (50). Consequently, and in line with a qualitative

approach (51), the respondents were chosen through applying

the approach of a targeted population of interest (52) and this

reflected the criteria of theoretical purpose, relevance and

appropriateness (43). This was considered adequate and

appropriate for this inquiry (53; 51), but it had no bearing on

the research logic (54). Additionally, using Glaser’s (55)

sampling processes, a total of {14}PMC managers/senior

engineers were thus determined as the resultant sample frame-

which could also be considered convenience sampling

according to Harrel and Fors (56); and meets the saturation

requirements of Guest, Bunce and Johnson (53) and thus takes

the sample frame beyond an empirically expected level.

Each interview was audio recorded for future analysis.

Interviews were conducted in English and took approximately

one hour. All interviews were conducted through Skype and

recorded digitally after gaining explicit permission (following

Duranti, 57) and were later transcribed verbatim using NVivo

12(a qualitative software package) using the approach

indicated by Bailey (58). The conduct of the interviews

follows a similar process used by Gray and Wilcox (59) and

James (60), with each individual being asked the same set of

questions – modified through ancillary questioning (probes

and follow-ups) in the same way as Balshem (61). To increase

the reliability of the data, the actual transcription was returned

to each respondent – via e-mail – for comment, correction,

addition or deletion and return, which followed the process of

validated referral (62). Whole-process validity was achieved

as the respondents were considered widely knowledgeable of

the context and content associated with the research

orientation (63). Each interview was initially manually

interrogated and coded using the Acrobat software according

to sub-themes that 'surfaced' from the interview dialogue-

using a form of open-coding derived from Glaser (64), and

Straus and Corbin (65). This treatment was also reinforced

and extended through the use of thematic analysis conducted

using the NVivo 12 (40). Each interview was treated and

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4126

coded independently. In this way, no portion of any interview

dialogue was left uncoded and the overall outcome

represented the shared respondent’s views and perspectives

through an evolving coding-sequence (66). Various themes

were sensed from the use of the software packages, as well as

from the initial manual-coding attempts. This multiple form of

interrogation was an attempt to increase the validity of the

choice of both key themes and sub-themes through a

triangulation process (67). NVivo 12 was further used to

explore these sub-themes by helping to pull together each of

these sub-themes from all the interviews (68). In this way, it

was possible to capture each respondent's comments across

transcripts (69) on each supported sub-theme and place them

together for further consideration and analysis (70).

The structure of the outcome is greatly influenced by the

emergence of the key-themes and sub-themes. The preferred

strategy for the analysis of the primary data was to use the

stated research question, which was used as a guide to

providing the outcome (based on Yin, 71). The research

methodology used was considered a mixed methodology

approach (46) and was determined to create the best possible

narrative of the situation in question. The application of the

overall research methodology produces construct validity

(72)-based upon the realism paradigm; and preferring to use

the terms of credibility and dependability which are accepted

by many qualitative researchers in place of reliability by

applying Guba’s constructs (73) and leading to the Lincoln

and Guba’s (74) notion of “progressive subjectivity”.

Figure 1: Research Outcomes

Illustration of Research Outcomes

The outline of the research outcomes for this study is shown

in Figure 1 above. The framework supported by appropriate

literature, illustrated below in Table 1, consists of five (5)

main themes, and fourteen (13) sub-themes. The outcomes are

stated below where the discussion focuses on the sub-theme

elements within each key theme. The discussion format used

in this paper reflects the respondent’s voice through a

streamlined and articulated approach for reporting. Thus, the

style adopted for reporting and illustrating the data is greatly

influenced by Gonzalez, (75) and also to a greater extent

Daniels et al. (76) and is discussed below, focusing on the

raised research question and the resultant themes. Table 1,

below illustrates the respondent references for each sub-

theme.

Table 1. Research question, themes and references

Table 1 above indicates the minimum responses for each

identified sub-theme.

Table 2. Major themes and respondents

Table 2above indicates the major themes and respondents

Results The results are presented below using the research question as

a pointer and supportive empirical evidence through indicated

extractions as in Gonzalez, (74). Consequently, considering

the research question-What are the Sustainability Issues and Impacts at the Construction Project for the Contractor and how can these be mitigated? The results are stated as five (5)

main themes, and thirteen (13) sub-themes as indicated below,

where each sub-theme theme is placed with each

corresponding main theme.

Main Theme – Contractor Management Operating Strategies

In order to acquire a picture of the status of the environmental

issues at site in relation to this theme, management

approaches to managing environmental problems appeared to

lack appropriate legal, financial or practical implementation.

Further, the focus for such issues is firmly located in the lack

of Client understanding.

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4127

In terms of Environmental Management Spending, this is

typified by one respondent (3) who suggested that, …I think that the Contractor should manage this problem better. They have the money, but they just won’t spend it on the workers living accommodations and facilities…Another respondent

(11) signified that, …There is a simple issue here, negligence. The Contractor doesn’t understand how not managing this is so negative. The Contractor just doesn’t care… Another

respondent (7) indicated that, …I think the Contractor perceives that spending on environmental matters is a waste of money and time. Sad but true…

In terms of Dealing with contaminated water and land, this is

illustrated by one respondent (9) who proposed that, …The PM just does not come here. This is too difficult of a job for them to do anything about now…Another respondent (13)

signified that, …It’s so sad to see. It was very pristine once. Now, it is a waste-ground. Very unforgiveable of the Contractor to let it go to this…Another respondent (2)

denoted that, …They[the Contractor] just don’t seem to want to do anything. They just dump and pollute on top of further pollution. It just isn’t right. I’m really not sure how legal it is, but it can’t go on like this…

In terms of Failure of Contractor to act when pollution is

revealed, this is exemplified by one respondent (4) who

suggested that, …The Contractor just left us here. We’ve had many people hospitalized and then sent home [out of the

country]. It is just not acceptable…Another respondent (8)

signified that, …Our management tends to be focused in the short-term. This is because they are finding it difficult to get their money from the client. And this may reflect their [Contractor] inability to do the construction correctly – but it may also reflect their ignorance of environmental issue management…Another respondent (10) denoted that, …The Contractor has had notices from its own staff about the pollution but has no interest in doing anything about it…

In terms of Contractor does not utilise a due diligence system,

this is illustrated by one respondent (1) who suggested that,

…We see it all the time here. It’s just not important to them because the client is also the “overseeing agency”. It’s that transparent…Another respondent (9) indicated that, …It is very clear that the Contractor follows instructions from the Client by ignoring such environmental problems and against our views and advice. No matter what evidence is put in front of them…Another respondent (13) advised that, …The system the Contractor uses is flawed, as it only allows certain data to be entered into it. The rest is left unreported. Not a good way to build confidence about environmental matters…

In terms of Contractor does not observe environmental policy

or EMS system requirements, this is characterized by one

respondent (7) who suggested that, …Management have the system, it’s just simply operationalizing it. But that costs effort and money. So it won’t happen here…Another respondent

(11) signified that, Because there is no oversight, the Contractor does what he likes. There is no point in reporting any pollution issues – they just get ignored. The Contractor operates with impunity…Another respondent (5) expressed

that, …The policy documents and the EMS are just paper chases. No real teeth is attached to them. All data and reports are just filed. Whoever, certifies the EMS does not mirror the reality of the site. No way…

Main Theme – Client Management Strategies

The project appears to have persistent issues with water

pollution and the Client’s lack of will to act. This predisposes

negative attitudes to industry best-practices and results in a

project oriented to possible failure through an intransient

Client.

In terms of Lack of will of the authorities to prevent water

pollution, this is typified by one respondent (6) who suggested

that, …The authorities don’t want to know. It just sickens you to know that our workers have to sleep and work in this mess-every day…Another respondent (12) denoted that, …It is significant that the client is central to these environmental problems. They just don’t care!..Another respondent (4)

indicated that, …I know of reports – whole reports – sent to the authorities, and yet nothing is done. It is as if the pollution doesn’t exist…Another respondent (10) determined that

…This is a serious issue. I know of a number of middle managers who have now departed, who were harassed by the client directly for reporting pollution issues. It’s serious, because they were trying to do something about this and were penalised…

In terms of Failure of Client to act when told about the issue,

this is characterized by one respondent (3) who suggested

that, …They don’t want to do anything. It just isn’t fair. They only have themselves to blame…Another respondent (9)

signified that, …It is clear that the client does not support best-practices regarding the environment…Another

respondent (7) advised that, …No matter how many reports I make, the client insists the problems are ours for showing them and that we should deal with them. How can you, when you can’t get permission to make the Contractor dig the road-up unless the client agrees…

Main Theme – Costs of Contractor Mismanagement of

Pollution

The Contractor appears to ignore their responsibilities for

managing health and environmental issues at site. There is the

perspective that adherence to ignoring pollution issues may

attract international attention as the monies associated with its

improper management resulting in worker illnesses and

polluted camp and work site are being siphoned off

unreasonably as profit.

In terms of Worker Based Issues, this is demonstrated by one

respondent (6) who suggested that, …We suffer and the management [Contractor] make the profit. There are substantial health issues for us, but we are ignored by everyone. People have died here because of pollution illnesses…Another respondent (11) signified that,

…Contractor management do not have a policy or the will to implement any repairs to the system to prevent any environmental problems. So at site and in the dorm, we have to manage ourselves…Another respondent (5) advocated that,

…Workers are expected to perform duties irrespective of the health and social issues when engaging in work at site. The site is often contaminated by foul smelling water and other materials. It can’t go on like this…

In terms of Site Pollution Cleanup, this is characterized by one

respondent (13) who proposed that, …Management don’t seem to want to deal with the pollution of soils on site. It’s got so bad that they just cover it up with new soil and hope for the

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4128

best. It’s going to take an awful lot of money to clean this site up when we are finished…Another respondent (2) advocated

that, …There’s a whole lot of dust caused by site vehicles. I think it has led to some serious concern by the locals…Another respondent (7) advocated that, …I would think that the Contractor sees the mess here, but because the Client doesn’t support any prevention measures then the cost of making the site clean is “wasted”. So nothing gets done…

Main Theme – Management Responsibility

This aspect appears to be flawed as the Contractor pursues a

management strategy that keeps it firmly in contradiction with

the Engineer’s views on managing appropriately. Further,

there would also appear to be issues raised relating to Client

protection which suggests a corrosive relationship for any

individual requiring financial transparency and environmental

advocation.

In terms of Lack of understanding of need to prevent water

pollution, this is typified by one respondent (7) who suggested

that, …Management [Contractor] don’t realise that it is their duty to seek out and then prevent pollution at site. But not here…Another respondent (4) indicated that, …I know that pollution is a problem here-and so does management[Contractor]. But they don’t take their responsibility seriously or carefully enough. Sad, but that’s how it is here…Another respondent (9) advocated that, …We tell management [Contractor] to do something, but they answer the same way each time. “It’s not our issue”…

In terms of Client Protection, this is epitomized by one

respondent (1) who suggested that, …Management [Contractor] did not conduct any risk assessments. It seems they didn’t know what to do. This pollution has been happening for a long time…Another respondent (6) advocated

that, …The Client is never seen around here. And when they do come, the screens go up. They don’t visit that often. It shows they are not interested…Another respondent (11)

advised that, …In this case, it is management [Contractor]

who go out of their way to make sure that the Client doesn’t see anything on site. It is choreographed wherever they go, they are chaperoned. They do this with the project data too. So management [Contractor] are scared of what the Client will find. So they hide it to protect them…

Main Theme – Pollution Issues

Manu pollution issues appear prevalent at site and the

Contractor does not appear to want to reduce its effects or at

least document/assess the pollution through the application of

appropriate environmental methodologies.

In terms of Variety of Types of Pollution, this is illustrated by

one respondent (8) who suggested that, …We experience a lot of pollution. Human waste, oil leakages, diesel leakages, and the vehicles exhaust [situation] is another indication that management are not serious about preventing pollution….Another respondent (2) advocated that, …There has been so much oil disposal in the water-runoff channel from the garage that you see see clearly successive events…Another respondent (5) advised that, …We see it every day. Most pollution is from human waste and oil leaks. Why can’t management see the problems created by polluting the site…

In terms of Pollution Assessment, this is epitomized by one

respondent (6) who informed that, …No, we never have any specific pollution tests. They are called for in writing, but ignored by the Contractor. The pollution is left in the ground and sometimes gets off-site too. It has never been catalogued, so the amount of pollution is unknown, but you can smell it clearly in the mornings as you walk by…Another respondent

(10) indicated that, …Management don’t seem to want to do such activities because it doesn’t help. It only signals that something is wrong and that they need to do something about it…Another respondent (3) suggested that, …No it’s not normal. Other sites have people employed to conduct environmental audits. But not here. It is very difficult to solve, because no one is monitoring the pollution. No one…

Results

In order to take this inquiry forward, the discussion

concentrates on the raised question to help address the

outcomes. The outcome illustrates the conceptual

development and relationships perceived to correspond to the

features informing sustainability management at site with the

need to illuminate Contractor management practices and to

focus on how these influence their possible strategic intent.

Consequently, the main focus for this discussion are the

characteristics revolving around the main themes-Contractor

Management Operating Strategies; Client Management

Strategies; Costs of Contractor Mismanagement of Pollution;

Management Responsibility; and Pollution Issues, as:

Contractor Management Operating Strategies

The Contractor and the Client appear to misunderstood their

collective responsibility to manage water pollution at site(77)

and this is reported frequently as a concern elsewhere too

(78). Further, the Contractor appears to make managerial

choices that reflect their strategic intent to ignore site and

wider pollution issues (contrary to good practice-see Teo, et

al., 79) as they refuse to acknowledge that there are any

environmental concerns(80)and that explicit attention needs to

be concentrated on its management ethic (81). Consequently,

the Contractor and the Client, need to be motivated to comply

with environmental legislation and codes – both national and

international (see Winter and May, 82). Underpinning this

aspect appears to be the lack of financial resolution and the

Contractor cost orientation (83) relating to address such

environmental issues(84) leading to inefficiency problems and

elevated wastage (85). Contractor management also appears to

have not accepted their duty of care to their workers(86)by

maintaining qualities of “vulnerability” (87) through

providing little or no training or education (88)in managing

the environment at site. This does little to deal with pollution

issues and fails in the development and application of a due

diligence system as evidenced through the inadequate

application of an EMS (89). Adherence to the EMS

requirements could provide a lead into building sustainable

construction (90) by providing tangible value (91), reduced

costs (92) and less waste (93).

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4129

Client Management Strategies

Contractor appears culpable, but so does the environmental

agency as their oversight requires greater engagement of site

activities leading to pollution issues. This may also reflect the

attitude of the Client, who appears to embodied in the same

legal relationship but should be epitomized by resolute

sustainable development practices (94) and transparency of

operations (95; 96).

Costs of Contractor Mismanagement of Pollution

The health of workers appears to be seriously affected by the

raised pollution issues but are consistently ignored by

Contractor management as reinforced by Haan, Barfield and

Hayes (97).Water quality has been cited by the U.N. (98) as

one of the key issues in water management in the 21st Century

and management’s response is therefore deemed inadequate to

protect worker’s health at site and to a wider degree

inadequate to protect local water supplies contrary to SCENR

No. 30, 2002 promulgating the Environmental Protection Law

(2003) and the Construction Dewatering Guidelines Qatar,

2014, 5.2 Construction Environmental Management Plan

(CEMP) and 5.3, Monitoring Plan, p28-29. The costs of

dealing with consistent pollution trails indicate that the costs

of environmental remediation can only increase as the

construction phases end (99). However, since most countries

have an independent overseeing authority for managing

pollution, this may not be a useful practice as the Client and

the overseer are one and the same – hindering the major

principles of transparency (95);independency (100) and

accountability (101). This raises the issue of the efficacy of

arrangements to manage environmental matters at site, lack of

engagement of the major stakeholders (102) and who will

reimburse the cleanup costs after construction has been

concluded (for example, Superfund, 103). Further, there is a

lack of Contractor or Client will to actively estimate the level

and impact of the pollution on site (104), which does little to

help mediate the true cost of the cleanup (105).Additionally,

treatments of the soil include Biological (106); Chemicals

(107); Physical stabilization methods (108) and washing

systems (109) will be costly and time-consuming. It is

expected that construction creates waste and that managing

this waste requires some sort of investment as for example,

upto 25% of construction materials are wasted (110; 111) and

at site this assertion has not been recognized by the Contractor

management, examined nor anticipated in their environmental

management plan.

Management Responsibility A lack of management understanding may also be a result of

insufficient scientific data regarding pollution and its

management (112). Construction creates enhanced

environmental risks, high levels of nonpoint sources (113) and

these need to be managed appropriately (114). Client

protection may be a result of major stakeholder pressure (23)

and related to financing issues (115).

Pollution Issues

The Contractor failed to utilize basic process-based controls-

such as the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control

(IPPC) EC Directive-2008/1/EC. This was necessary to ensure

the working site adhered to and conformed to internationally

respect operational environmental codes (116). It is further

evident from the data, that no water quality monitoring or

water-treatments (physical) was carried out by the Contractor-

either prior to, during or after construction. Contractor

management has the responsibility for overseeing the

pollution issue (Clause 26-Red Book Contract, 117) but

appears to refuse to assess and mediate the problems caused

by the pollution and so does not understand their

responsibility regarding pollution management (see for

example, The Considerate Constructor’s Scheme, 118), in the

UK). This is exasperated further as there does not appear to be

any LEED trained managers at site which would help to

provide more informed green project management practices

(119) and LEED construction efficacies (120).

Mitigating These Identified Issues Contractor site management strategies need to be changed to

offer a more professional undertaking by recognizing the

pollution requirements operating at site and to take such steps

that are necessary to reduce the impact of the construction

activities to acceptable levels (121)-and to continue

monitoring to make sure that such pollution issues are

managed appropriately (19).

The Contractor and the Client engineers may need training in

pollution management (122) and mechanisms to ensure that

they are aware of international best practices(123) thus

securing a consistent management outlook to managing

environmental matters at site.

The costs of pollution management and any environmental

activities necessary to provide a sustainable construction

process need to be fully minimized (124) through appropriate

intra-funding, possible alternative financing and consequent

financial management (125).

Introducing more visible independent, inter-regional

environmental inspections may lead to increased compliance

with appropriate legislation such as the Environmental

Protection Law (2003)-thus increasing oversight transparency

(126).

Training senior engineers in LEED techniques may help with

developing the culture of environmental management (127)

reducing overall environmental costs and help point to what is

important in a sustainable construction environment.

Integrating control of pollution with operationalized

scheduling (23) will ensure a modified construction process

focused on waste reduction (128) and lessening of other

pollution issues created at site. This will redistribute pollution

emission timelines to more manageable levels in line with

planned resources use variations (129).

Conclusions The Contractor, the Client and the environmental overseeing

entity has failed this construction sites requirement for

sustainable development (130), which has also had a negative

effect on worker and local health patterns (13).Building in a

safe working environment has also been negatively impacted

by the strategically negative intent of the Contractor and

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4130

therefore the need to maintain sustainability through

construction processes using environmental benchmarking

tools such as LEED (131) becomes a realistic educational

necessity for Contractor management (132).

Further elucidated problems of contractor management such

as no base-lining of soil pollution levels before construction or

during construction phases (contrary to European

Commission, 133); lack of engagement in an EIA process

(134); and the lack of interest in assessing and dealing with

pollution problems at site (135) must all be mitigated through

a streamlined sustainability process (23; 136) focusing on

generating appropriate environmental data in order to help

diminish environmental impacts of the construction activity

through appropriate strategic decision-making (131).

Consequently, this construction project in Doha, may not be

environmentally defensible in the short-term (137) as

sustainability issues remain at best a work in-progress as

present construction behavior exceeds the “capacity of the

waste system” at site (138). The Contractor management also

appear to fail to integrate environmental, social and economic

issues (139)but this can be moderated through crafting a

decision-centred approach focusing on the institutional

context (140).Additionally, renewable water supplies are

negligible in Doha (141) and therefore it is difficult to

understand the reticence of the Contractor and especially the

Client to deal with site environmental problems.

Further Work This inquiry assessed PMC Manager’s and Engineer’s

perceptions of pollution at a Doha construction project.

However, the research orientation could be extended to

include all engineers for their views of the pollution

management at site and also include Contractor managers and

engineers. Further implications could be drawn from such

work and evaluations made as to how such views could be

assessed, evaluated in terms of crucial legal/environmental

and international requirements and mitigated in the present

structuring and management of the construction project.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with

respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this

article.

Funding The author received no financial support for the research

and/or authorship of this article.

References

[1] Hendrickson, C. T., and Horvath, A., 2000,

“Resource use and environmental emissions of U.S.

construction sectors, ”.J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,

126(1), pp. 38-44.

[2] Rubin, E.S., and Davidson, C.T., 2001, Introduction

to Engineering and Environment, McGraw-Hill, New

York, US.

[3] Hardy, A., 2007, “Environmental Design of

Buildings, ” Ekistics, 23(136), pp. 181-187.

[4] Bossink, B.A., and Brouwers, H.J., 1996,

“Construction Waste: Quantification and Source

Evaluation, ” Journal of Construction Engineering

and Management, 122(1), pp. 55-60.

[5] Shen L.Y., Lu W.S., Yao H., and Wu D.H., 2005, “A

computer-based scoring method for measuring the

environmental performance of construction activities,

” Automation in Construction, 14(13), pp. 297-309.

[6] Howard, N., 2000, Data for Sustainable

Construction, Center for Sustainable Construction,

CR258/99, BRE, UK.

[7] Li, X., Zhu, Y., and Zhang, Z., 2010, “An LCA-

based environmental impact assessment model for

construction processes, ” Building and Environment,

45(3), pp. 766-775.

[8] Poon C.S., Yu A.T., and Ng L.H., 2001, “On-site

sorting of construction and demolition waste in Hong

Kong, ” Resource, Conservation and Recycling,

32(2), pp. 157-172.

[9] Zolfagharian S., Nourbakhsh M., Irizarry J., Ressang

A., andGheisari M., 2012, “Environmental impacts

assessment on construction sites, ” Construction

Research Congress 2012, ASCE, Purdue University,

West Lafayette, Indiana, May 21-23, pp. 1750-1759.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/9780784412329.176

[10] Pittet, D., andKotak, T., 2009, “Environmental

impact of building technologies, a comparative study

in Kutch District, Gujarat State, India,

”Ecomateriales 4, Paths towards Sustainability

conference, November 2009, Bayamo, Cuba (2009).

[11] Macozoma, D.S., 2002, Construction site waste

management and minimization: international report,

International council for Research and Innovation in

Buildings, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

http://cibworld.xs4all.nl/dl/publications/Pub278/06C

onstruction.pdf

[12] Ijigah E.A., Jimoh R.A., Aruleba B.O., and Ade

A.B., 2013, “An assessment of environmental

impacts of building construction projects, ” Civil and

Environmental Research, 3(1), pp. 93-105.

[13] Chen Z., Li H., and Hong J., 2004, “An integrative

methodology for environmental management in

construction, ” Automation in Construction, 13(5),

pp. 621-628.

[14] Kaur, M., and Arora, S., 2012, “Environment impact

assessment and environment management studies for

an upcoming multiplex-a Case Study, ” IOSR

Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering

(IOSRJMCE), 1(4), pp. 22-30.

[15] Tam, V.W., Tam, C.M., Zeng, S.X., and Chan, K.K.,

2006, “Environmental performance measurement

indicators in construction, ” Building and

environment, 41(2), pp. 164-173.

[16] Schoenberger, H., 2009, “Integrated pollution

prevention and control in large industrial installations

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4131

on the basis of best available techniques – The

Sevilla Process, ” Journal of Cleaner Production,

7(16), pp. 1526-1529.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.06.002

[17] Sadler, B., 1996, Environmental assessment in a

changing world: Evaluating practice to improve

performance, International study on the effectiveness

of environmental assessment, Canadian

Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa, Canada.

[18] Bruch, C., Nakayama, M., Troell, J., Goldman, L.,

andMrema, E.M., 2007, “Assessing The

Assessments: Improving methodologies for impact

assessment in transboundary watercourses,

”International Journal of Water

ResourcesDevelopment, 23(3), pp. 391-410.

[19] Ilnitch, A.Y., Soderstrom, N.S., and Thomas, T.E.,

1998, “Measuring corporate environmental

performance, ”J. Accounting Public Policy, 17, pp.

383-408.

[20] Hanna, K.S., 2009, Environmental Impact

Assessment: Practice and Participation, Oxford

University Press, Oxford, UK.

[21] Fischer, T.B., 2007, Theory and practice of strategic

environmental assessment: Towards a more

systematic approach, Earthscan Publications,

London, UK.

[22] Shen, L.Y. and Tam, W.Y., 2002.“Implementation of

environmental management in the Hong Kong

construction industry, ”International Journal of

Project Management, 20, pp. 535-

543.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(01)00054-

0

[23] Chen, Z., Heng, L., Wong, C., and Love, P., 2002,

“Integrating construction pollution control with

construction schedule: an experimental approach, ”

Environmental Management and Health, 13(2), pp.

142-151.

[24] Morledge, R., and Jackson, F., 2001, “Reducing

environmental pollution caused by construction

plant, ” Environmental Management and Health,

12(2), pp. 191-206.

[25] Ortiz, O., Castells, F., andSonnemann, G., 2009,

Sustainability in the construction industry: A review

of recent developments based on LCA, ”

Construction and Building Materials, 23, pp. 28-39.

[26] Crawley, D., andAho, I., 1999, “Building

environmental assessment methods: applications and

development trends, ” Building Research and

Information, 27(4), pp. 300-308.

[27] Glasson, J., Therivel, R., and Chadwick, A., 2005,

Introduction to environmental impact assessment,

3rd ed., Rutledge, London, UK.

[28] Valdez, H.E., andChini, A.R., 2002, “ISO 14000

standards and the U.S. construction industry,

”Environ. Practice J., 4(4), pp. 210-219.

[29] World Bank, 2002, “Environmental impact

assessment system in Europe and Central Asia

Countries, ”.www.worldbank.org/eca/environment

[30] Shen, Y.J., and Walker, D.H., 2001, “Integrating

OHS, EMS and QM with constructability principles

when construction planning-A design and construct

project case study, ”TQM Magazine, 13(4), pp. 247-

259.

[31] Manorom, K., 2007, “People’s EIA: A mechanism

for grassroots participation in environmental

decision-making, ” Watershed, 12(1), pp. 26-30.

[32] Guinée, J., et al., 2002, Handbook of Life Cycle

Assessment-Operational Guide to ISO Standards,

Kluwer, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48055-7

[33] Brown, A.L., 1997, “The environmental overview in

development project formulation, ”Impact

Assessment, 15(1), pp. 73-88.

[34] Diakaki, C., Grigoroudis, E., and Stabouli, M., 2006,

“A risk assessment approach in selecting

environmental performance indicators, ”

Management of Environmental Quality: An

International Journal, 17(2), pp. 126-139.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14777830610650456

[35] Crookes, D., and de Wit, M., 2002, “Environmental

economic valuation and its application in

environmental assessment: an evaluation of the status

quo with reference to South Africa, ” Impact

Assessment and Project Appraisal, 20(2), pp. 127-

134. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154602781766753

[36] Wu, K.K., and Zhang, L.P., 2014, “Progress in the

Development of Environmental Risk Assessment as

a Tool for the Decision-Making Process, ”Journal of

Service Science and Management, 7, pp. 131-143.

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2014.72011

[37] Arksey, H., and O'Malley, L., 2005, “Scoping

studies: Towards a Methodological Framework, ”Int

J Soc Res Methodol. 8, pp. 19-32.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

[38] Househ, M., 2011, “Sharing sensitive personal health

information through Facebook: the unintended

consequences, ”Stud Health Technol Inform, 169,

pp. 616-620.

[39] Hill, C.E., Thompson, B.J., and Williams, E.N.,

1997, “A guide to conducting consensual qualitative

research, ” The Counseling Psychologist, 25(4), pp.

517-572.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000097254001

[40] Walsh, S.P., White, K.M., Young, R.M., 2008,

“Over-Connected? A Qualitative Exploration of the

Relationship between Australian Youth and Their

Mobile Phones, ” Journal of Adolescence, 31(1), pp.

77-92.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.04.004

[41] Benn, N., Buckingham, S., Domingue, J., and

Mancini, C., 2008, Ontological Foundations for

Scholarly Debate Mapping Technology, In 2nd

International Conference on Computational Models

of Argument (COMMA ’08), Toulouse, France.

[42] Cassell, C., andSymon, G., 2004, Essential Guide to

Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research,

Sage Publications, London, UK.

[43] Glaser, B.G., and Strauss, A.L., 1967, The Discovery

of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative

Research, Aldine, Chicago, US.

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4132

[44] Cayla, J., and Eckhardt, G.M., 2007, “Asian Brands

without Borders: Regional Opportunities and

Challenges, ”International Marketing Review, 24(4),

pp. 444-456.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02651330710761017

[45] Kim, Y., 2011, “The Pilot Study in Qualitative

Inquiry: Identifying Issues and Learning Lessons for

Culturally Competent Research, ” Qualitative Social

Work, 10(2), pp. 190-206.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1473325010362001

[46] James, P., and James, T., 2011, Qualitative Research

Methods for Health Services, Megellan UK Press,

London, UK.

[47] Ritchie, J., and Lewis, J., 2003, Qualitative Research

Practice, Sage Publications, London, UK.

[48] Coyne, I.T., 1997, “Sampling in qualitative research:

purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or

clear boundaries?, ” Journal of Advanced Nursing,

26(3), pp. 623-30.

[49] Fink, A.S., 2000, “The Role of the Researcher in the

Qualitative Research Process. A Potential Barrier to

Archiving Qualitative Data, ” Forum: Qualitative

Social Research. 1(3), article 4.

[50] Koerber, A., and McMichael, L., 2008, “Qualitative

Sampling Methods A Primer for Technical

Communicators, ” Journal of Business and Technical

Communication. 22(4), pp. 454-473.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1050651908320362

[51] Bryman, A., 2012, Social Research Methods, (4thEd),

Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

[52] Carman, J.M., 1990, “Consumer Perceptions of

Service Quality: An Assessment of the SERVQUAL

Dimensions, ” Journal of Retailing, 66(1), pp. 33-55.

[53] Guest, G., Bunce, A., and Johnson, L., 2006, “How

Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with

Data Saturation and Variability, ” Field Methods,

18(1), pp. 59-

82.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903

[54] Crouch, M., and McKenzie, H., 2006, “The logic of

small samples in interview-based qualitative

research, ” Social Science Information, 45(4), pp.

483-499.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0539018406069584

[55] Glaser, B.G., 2004, “Remodeling Grounded Theory,

” The Grounded Theory Review: An international

Journal, 4(1), pp. 1-24.

[56] Harrel, G.D., and Fors, M.F., 1995, “Marketing

services to satisfy internal customers, ” Logistics

Information Management, 8(4), pp. 22-27.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09576059510091887

[57] Duranti, A., 2007, “Transcripts, like Shadows on a

Wall, ” Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(4), pp. 301-

310.

[58] Bailey, K.D., 2008, Methods of Social Research.

(4thEd), The Free Press, NY, US.

[59] Gray, J., and Wilcox, B., 1995, Good Schools, Bad

Schools, Open University Press, UK.

[60] James, P., 2014, “Managerial Challenges Impacting

on Contractor Led Tunnel TBM Design: A Kingdom

of Saudi Arabia Metro Project, ”Engineering

Management Review, 3(2).

[61] Balshem, M., 1991, “Cancer, Control and Causality:

Talking about Cancer in a Working-Class

Community, ” American Ethnologist, 18(1), pp. 152-

172.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/ae.1991.18.1.02a00070

[62] Reeves, T.K., and Harper, D., 1981, Surveys at

Work, McGraw-Hill, London, UK.

[63] Tull, D.S., and Hawkins, D.I., 1990, Marketing

Research: Measurement and Method, Macmillan,

London, UK.

[64] Glaser, B.G., 1992a, Basics of grounded theory

analysis: Emergence vs. Forcing, Mill Valley,

Sociology Press, CA, US.

[65] Strauss, A.L., and Corbin, J., 1990, Basics of

Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory, Procedures

and Techniques, Sage, Newbury Park, Chicago, US.

[66] Buston, K., 1999, “NUD*IST in action: its use and

its usefulness in a study of chronic illness in young

people, ” In Bryman A., and Burgess R.G., (Eds.)

Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data, Sage

Publications, London, UK.

[67] Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Leech, N.L., and Collins, K.M.,

2012, Qualitative Analysis Techniques for the

Review of the Literature, The Qualitative Report, 17,

Article 56, pp. 1-28.

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/onwuegbuzie.pd

f

[68] Harwood, T.G., and Garry, T., 2003, “An Overview

of Content Analysis. The Marketing Review, ” 3(4),

pp. 479-498.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/146934703771910080

[69] Reisman, C.K., 1993, Narrative Analysis, Sage,

London, UK

[70] Ryan, G.W., and Bernard, H.R., 2003, “Techniques

to Identify Themes, ” Field Methods, 15(1), pp. 85-

109. http://dx.doi.org.10.1177/1525822X02239569

[71] Yin, R.K., 1994, Case study research: Design and

methods, (2nd ed.), Sage Publications, Newbury

Park, CA, US.

[72] Healy, M., and Perry, C., 2000, “Comprehensive

criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative

research within the realism paradigm, ” Qualitative

Market Research: An International Journal, 3(3), pp.

118-126.

[73] Guba, E.G., 1981, “Criteria for assessing the

trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries, ”

Educational Communication and Technology

Journal, 29, pp. 75-91.

[74] Lincoln, Y.S., and Guba, E.G., 1985, Naturalistic

Inquiry, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, US.

[75] Gonzalez, C., 2008, “Conceptions of, and approaches

to, teaching online: a study of lecturers teaching

postgraduate distance courses, ” Higher Education,

57(3), pp. 299-314.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-

008-9145-1

[76] Daniels, J.A., et al., 2007, “The Successful

Resolution of Armed Hostage/Barricade Events in

Schools: A Qualitative Analysis, ” Psychology in the

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4133

Schools, 44(6), pp. 601-613.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.20250

[77] Aaltonen, K., and Kujala, J., 2010, “A project

lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence

strategies in global projects, ” Scand. J. Manag.,

26(4), pp. 381-397.

[78] Lindsey, G., 1995, “Managing implementation of

environmental programs: the case of erosion and

sediment control, ” Public Productivity and

Management Review, 18, pp. 247-261.

[79] Teo, M.M., Loosemore, M., Masosszeky, M., and

Karim, K., 2000, “Operatives attitudes towards waste

on a construction project, ” Proceedings of the annual

conference – ARCOM, 2, pp. 509-17.

[80] Boonstra A., Boddy, D., and Bell, S., 2008,

“Stakeholder management in IOS projects: analysis

of an attempt to implement an electronic patient file,

” Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 17(2), pp. 100-111.

[81] Mendler, S., and Odell, W., 2000, The HOK

Guidebook to Sustainable Design. Wiley, New York,

US.

[82] Winter, S., and May, P.J., 1999, “Regulatory

enforcement and compliance: examining agro-

environmental policy, ” Journal of Policy Analysis

and Management. 18, pp. 625-651.

[83] Osmani, M., Glass, J., and Price, A.D., 2008,

“Architects' perspectives on construction waste

reduction by design, ” Waste Manag., 28(7), pp.

1147-1158.

[84] Aguado, S., Alvarez, R., and Domingo, R., 2013,

“Model of efficient and sustainable improvements in

a lean production system through processes of

environmental innovation, ” J. Clean. Prod., 47, pp.

141-148.

[85] Barlish, K., and Sullivan, K., 2012, “How to measure

the benefits of BIM — A case study approach,

”Autom. Constr., 24, pp. 149-159.

[86] Brown, E., 2013, “Vulnerability and the basis of

business ethics: From fiduciary duties to

professionalism, ” Journal of Business Ethics, 113,

pp. 489-504.

[87] Adger, W.N., 2006, “Vulnerability, ” Global

Environmental Change, 16, pp. 268-281.

[88] Saunders, J., and Wynn, P., 2004, “Attitudes towards

waste minimisation amongst labour only sub-

contractors, ”Struct. Surv., 22(3), pp. 148-155.

[89] Zhang, Z., Shen, L., Love, P., andTreloar, G., 2000,

“A framework for implementing ISO 14000 in

construction, ” Environmental Management and

Health, 11(2), pp. 139-

149.http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09566160010321541

[90] Plessis, C., 2007, “A strategic framework for

sustainable construction in developing countries,

”Construction Management and Economics, 25, pp.

67-76.

[91] Walker, D.H., 2000, “Client/customer or stakeholder

focus? ISO 14000 EMS as a construction industry

case study, ” The TQM Magazine, 12, pp. 18‐ 25.

[92] Yates, A., 2003, BRE IP13/03 Part 4 Sustainable

Buildings: Benefits for Constructors, BRE Centre for

Sustainable Construction, Watford, England, UK.

[93] Bekr, G.A., 2014, “Study of the Causes and

Magnitude of Wastage of Materials on Construction

Sites in Jordan, ” Journal of Construction

Engineering, Article ID 283298,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/283298

[94] Curwell, S., and Cooper, I., 1998, “The implications

of urban sustainability, ” Building Research and

Information, 26, pp. 17‐ 28.

[95] Walker, D., 2008, “Sustainability: Environmental

management, transparency and competitive

advantage, ”Journal of Retail and Leisure Property,

7, pp. 119-130.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/rlp.2008.4

[96] Formoso, C.T., Dos Santos, A., and Powell, J.A.,

2002, “An Exploratory Study on the Applicability of

Process Transparency in Construction Sites, ” J.

Construct. Res., 03(1), pp.

35.http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/

S1609945102000102

[97] Haan, C.T., Barfield, B.J., and Hayes, J.C., 1994,

Design Hydrology and Sedimentology for Small

Catchments, Academic Press, NY, US.

[98] U.N., 1997, Comprehensive Assessment of the

Freshwater Resources of the World, World

Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

www.un.org/esa/documents/ecosoc/cn17/1997/ecn17

1997-9.htm

[99] Alberini, A., Tonin, S., andTurvani, M., 2007,

“Willingness to pay for contaminated site cleanup

policies: evidence from a conjoint choice study in

Italy, ” Rev. Econ. Polit. 117(5), pp. 737-749.

[100] Wood, C., and Bailey, J., 1994, “Predominance and

independence in environmental impact assessment:

The Western Australia model, ” Environmental

Impact Assessment Review, 14(1), pp. 37-59.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0195-9255(94)90041-8

[101] Therivel, R., andParidario, M.R., 2002, The Practice

of Strategic Environmental Assessment, Earthscan

Publications, Abingdon, UK.

[102] Cundy, A.B., Bardos, R.P., Church, A.,

Puschenreiter, M., Friesl-Hanl, W., Müller, I., Neu,

S., Mench, M., Witters, N., andVangronsveld, J.,

2013, “Developing principles of sustainability and

stakeholder engagement for “gentle” remediation

approaches: The European context, ” J. Environ.

Manage., 129(15), pp. 283-291.

[103] Superfund (2012).Basic Information, Superfund

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

2012).http://www.epa.gov/superfund/about.htm

[104] Psarros, G., Skjong, R., andVanem, E., 2011, “Risk

acceptance criterion for tanker oil spill risk reduction

measures, ” Mar. Pollut. Bull., 62(1), pp. 116-127.

[105] Goldstein, M., andRitterling, J., 2001, “A Practical

Guide to Estimating Cleanup Costs, ” U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency Papers. Paper 30.

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usepapapers/30

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4134

[106] Hoeppel, R.E., andHinchee, R.E., 1994, Enhanced

biodegradation for on-site remediation of

contaminated soils and groundwater, In: Hazardous

Waste Site Soil Remediation: Theory and

Application of Innovative Technologies, Wilson, D.

J., and Clarke, A. N., Dekker, M., New York, NY,

US.

[107] Bellandi, R., 1995, Innovative engineering

technologies for hazardous waste remediation, Van

Nostrand Reinhold, New York, US.

[108] Smith, D.L., and Hayward, W.M., 1993,

“Decommissioning of a resource conservation and

recovery act treatment, storage, and disposal facility:

a case study of the interim stabilization of the 216-A-

29 ditch at the Hanford Site, ” Waste Management,

13, pp. 109-116.

[109] Kim, I., 1993, “Mobile soil-washing system,

”Chemical Engineering, 100, pp. 104.

[110] Hamassaki, L.T., andNeto, C.S., 1994, “Technical

and economic aspects of construction/demolition

waste utilization, ” Proceedings of the 1st

Conference of CIB TG16, Tampa, FL, November

6‐ 9, pp. 395‐ 403.

[111] Fishbein, B.K., 1998, Building for the Future:

Strategies to Reduce Construction and Demolition

Waste, INFORM Committee of Environment,

American Institute of Architects, New York, NY,

US.

[112] Kaufman, M.M., 2000, “Erosion control at

construction sites: the science-policy gap, ”

Environmental Management, 26, pp. 89-97.

[113] Myers, C.F., Meek, J., Tuller, S., and Weinberg, A.,

1985, “Nonpoint sources of water pollution, ”

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 40, pp. 14-

18.

[114] Zeng, S.X., Tam, C.M., Deng, Z.M., and Tam, V.W.,

2003, “ISO 14000 and the construction industry:

survey in China, ” J Manage in Eng, 19(3), pp. 107-

115.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-

597X(2003)19:3(107)

[115] Jones, C., Baker, M., Carter, J., Fay, S, Short, M.,

and Wood, C., 2013, Strategic Environmental

Assessment and Land Use Planning: An International

Evaluation, Earthscan Publications, Abingdon, UK.

[116] Huovila, P., and Richter, C., 1997, “Life cycle

building design in 2010, ” Proceedings of the 11th

International Conference on Engineering Design

ICED 97, Tampere, 19-21 August 1997, 2, Tampere

University of Technology, pp. 635-643.

[117] Red Book Contract, 1999, FIDIC Conditions of

Contracts for Construction-The Red Book, Thomas

Telford Publishing, London, UK.

[118] The Considerate Constructor’s Scheme, 2013,

Pollution Control Construction Site

Handbook.www.cardiff.gov.uk/pollution/

[119] Robichaud, L.B., and Anantatmula, V.S., 2011,

“Greening Project Management Practices for

Sustainable Construction, ”Journal of Management

in Engineering, 27(1), pp. 48-57.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/ASCEME.1943-

5479.0000030

[120] Kubba, S., 2012, Handbook of Green Building

Design and Construction, Butterworth-Heinemann,

London, UK.

[121] Winch, G., 2010, Managing construction projects,

2nd Ed., John Wiley and Sons, London, UK.

[122] Tam, C.M., Tam, V.W., andZeng, S.X., 2002,

“Environmental performance evaluation EPE for

construction, ”Build. Res. Inf., 30(5), pp. 349-361.

[123] Uren, S., and Griffiths, E., 2000, Environmental

management in construction, CIRIA, London, UK.

[124] Proverbs, D.G., and Holt, G.D., 2000, “Reducing

construction costs: European best practice supply

chain implications, ” European Journal of Purchasing

and Supply Management, 6(3-4), pp. 149-158.

[125] Huovila, P., andKoskela, L., 1998, “Contribution of

the Principles of Lean Construction to Meet the

Challenges of Sustainable Development, ”

In:Proceedings Proceedings of IGLC-6 6th

Conference of the International Group for Lean

Construction, 13th-15th August, 1998.

www.IGLC.net.

[126] Firestone, J., 2002, “Agency governance and

enforcement: the influence of mission on

environmental decision making, ”Journal of Policy

Analysis and Management, 21, pp. 409-426.

[127] Kibert, C.J., 2013, Sustainable Construction: Green

Building Design and Delivery, 3rd Ed., John Wiley

and Sons, London, UK.

[128] Thomas, H.R., Riley, D.R., andMessner, J.I., 2005,

“Fundamental principles of site material

management, ” Journal of Construction Engineering

and Management, 131(7), pp. 808-815.

[129] Hegazy, T., 1999, “Optimization of resource

allocation and leveling using genetic algorithms,

”ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and

Management, 125(3), pp. 167‐ 175.

[130] Foxon, T., Makuch, Z., Mata, M., and Pearson, P.,

2004, “Towards a Sustainable Innovation Policy-

Institutional Structures, Stakeholder Participation and

Mixes of Policy Instruments, ” Berlin Conference on

the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental

Change. December 3-4. Berlin: Environmental

Policy Research Centre, FreieUniversität. http://userpage.fuberlin.de/ffu/akumwelt/bc2004/dow

nload/foxon_makuch_mata_pearson_f.pdf.

[131] Zimmerman, A., and Kibert, C.J., 2007, “Informing

LEED's next generation with the natural step, ”

Build. Res. Inf., 35(6), pp. 681-689.

[132] Hay, L., Duffy, A., and Whitfield, R.I., 2014, “The

sustainability cycle and loop: models for a more

unified understanding of sustainability, ” J. Environ.

Manag., 133(c), pp. 232-257.

[133] European Commission, 2001, Guidance on EIA, EIS

review, Environmental Resources Management,

Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.

[134] Wood, C., 1995, Environmental impact assessment:

A comparative review, Longman, Harlow, London,

UK.

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 6 (2016) pp 4124-4135

© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4135

[135] Gangolells, M., Casals, M., Gassó, S., Forcada, N.,

Roca, X., and Fuertes, A., 2011, “Assessing concerns

of interested parties when predicting the significance

of environmental impacts related to the construction

process of residential buildings, ” Building and

Environment, 46(5), pp. 1023-1037.

http://dx.dio.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.11.004

[136] Muhwezi, L., Kiberu, F., Kyakula, M., and

Batambuze, A., 2012, “An assessment of the impact

of construction activities on the environment in

Uganda: A case study of Iganga municipality, ”

Journal of construction Engineering and Project

Management, 2(4), pp. 20-

24.http://dx.dio.org/10.6106/JCEPM.2012.2.4.020

[137] Gangolells, M., Casals, M., Gassó, S., Forcada N.,

Roca, X., and Fuertes, A., 2009, “A methodology for

predicting the severity of environmental impacts

related to the construction process of residential

buildings, Building and Environment, 44(3), pp. 558-

571.

http://dx.dio.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.05.001

[138] Rennings, K., and Wiggering, H., 1997, “Steps

towards indicators of sustainable development:

Linking economic and ecological concepts, ”Ecol

Econ., 20(1), pp. 25-36.

[139] Robinson, J., 2004, “Squaring the circle? Some

thoughts on the idea of sustainable development,

”Ecol Econ., 48(4), pp. 369-384.

[140] Nilsson, M., and Dalkmann, H., 2001, “Decision

Making and Strategic Environmental Assessment, ”

Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and

Management, 3(3), pp. 305-327.

[141] U.N., 2007, National Information, Qatar Country

Statistics.http://data.un.org/