Systematic Review of Cost Optimization Models for Green Building Construction Projects

References

[1] Adams, R., Jeanrenaud, S., Bessant, J., Denyer, D. and Overy, P., 2016. Sustainability‐oriented innovation: A systematic review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(2), pp.180-205.

[2] Aid, G., Eklund, M., Anderberg, S. and Baas, L., 2017. Expanding roles for the Swedish waste management sector in inter-organizational resource management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 124, pp.85-97.

[3] Akan, M.Ö.A., Dhavale, D.G. and Sarkis, J., 2017. Greenhouse gas emissions in the construction industry: An analysis and evaluation of a concrete supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, pp.1195-1207.

[4] Al-Zwainy, F.M.S., Amer, R. and Khaleel, T., 2016. Reviewing of the simulation models in cost management of the construction projects. Civil Engineering Journal, 2(11), pp.607-622.

[5] Androutsopoulou, A. and Charalabidis, Y., 2018, April. A framework for evidence based policy making combining big data, dynamic modelling and machine intelligence. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on theory and practice of electronic governance (pp. 575-583).

[6] Arashpour, M., Kamat, V., Bai, Y., Wakefield, R. and Abbasi, B., 2018. Optimization modeling of multi-skilled resources in prefabrication: Theorizing cost analysis of process integration in off-site construction. Automation in Construction, 95, pp.1-9.

[7] Arif, M., Katafygiotou, M., Mazroei, A., Kaushik, A. and Elsarrag, E., 2016. Impact of indoor environmental quality on occupant well-being and comfort: A review of the literature. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 5(1), pp.1-11.

[8] Borlase, S. ed., 2017. Smart grids: infrastructure, technology, and solutions. CRC press.

[9] Bradford, N., 2017. Canadian regional development policy: Flexible governance and adaptive implementation.

[10] Cairns, G., Goodwin, P. and Wright, G., 2016. A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(3), pp.1050-1062.

[11] Carlson, K. and Pressnail, K.D., 2018. Value impacts of energy efficiency retrofits on commercial office buildings in Toronto, Canada. Energy and Buildings, 162, pp.154-162.

[12] Celestin, M., 2018. The impact of cost accounting on product pricing and market competitiveness: Strategies for sustainable profitability. Brainae Journal of Business, Sciences and Technology (BJBST), 2(10), pp.730-740.

[13] Chan, A.P., Darko, A., Ameyaw, E.E. and Owusu-Manu, D.G., 2017. Barriers affecting the adoption of green building technologies. Journal of Management in Engineering, 33(3), p.04016057.

[14] Chidiebere, E.E. and Idiake, J.E., 2018. Analysis of cost of rework on time and cost performance of building construction projects in Abuja, Nigeria.

[15] Contestabile, P., Di Lauro, E., Buccino, M. and Vicinanza, D., 2016. Economic assessment of Overtopping BReakwater for Energy Conversion (OBREC): a case study in Western Australia. Sustainability, 9(1), p.51.

[16] Crawford, R.H., Bartak, E.L., Stephan, A. and Jensen, C.A., 2016. Evaluating the life cycle energy benefits of energy efficiency regulations for buildings. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 63, pp.435-451.

[17] Dahlman, C., Mealy, S. and Wermelinger, M., 2016. Harnessing the digital economy for developing countries.

[18] Darko, A. and Chan, A.P.C., 2018. Strategies to promote green building technologies adoption in developing countries: The case of Ghana. Building and Environment, 130, pp.74-84.

[19] Darko, A., Chan, A.P.C., Ameyaw, E.E., He, B.J. and Olanipekun, A.O., 2017. Examining issues influencing green building technologies adoption: The United States green building experts’ perspectives. Energy and Buildings, 144, pp.320-332.

[20] Dhodiya, J.M. and Tailor, A.R., 2016. Genetic algorithm based hybrid approach to solve fuzzy multi-objective assignment problem using exponential membership function. SpringerPlus, 5(1), p.2028.

[21] Djenontin, I.N.S., Foli, S. and Zulu, L.C., 2018. Revisiting the factors shaping outcomes for forest and landscape restoration in Sub-Saharan Africa: A way forward for policy, practice and research. Sustainability, 10(4), p.906.

[22] Erol, S., Schumacher, A. and Sihn, W., 2016, January. Strategic guidance towards Industry 4.0–a three-stage process model. In International conference on competitive manufacturing (Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 495-501).

[23] Exner, A., Politti, E., Schriefl, E., Erker, S., Stangl, R., Baud, S., Warmuth, H., Matzenberger, J., Kranzl, L., Paulesich, R. and Windhaber, M., 2016. Measuring regional resilience towards fossil fuel supply constraints. Adaptability and vulnerability in socio-ecological Transformations-the case of Austria. Energy Policy, 91, pp.128-137.

[24] Fauré, E., Arushanyan, Y., Ekener, E., Miliutenko, S. and Finnveden, G., 2017. Methods for assessing future scenarios from a sustainability perspective. European Journal of Futures Research, 5(1), p.17.

[25] Ford, S. and Despeisse, M., 2016. Additive manufacturing and sustainability: an exploratory study of the advantages and challenges. Journal of cleaner Production, 137, pp.1573-1587.

[26] Formisano, A., Castaldo, C. and Chiumiento, G., 2017. Optimal seismic upgrading of a reinforced concrete school building with metal-based devices using an efficient multi-criteria decision-making method. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 13(11), pp.1373-1389.

[27] França, C.L., Broman, G., Robert, K.H., Basile, G. and Trygg, L., 2017. An approach to business model innovation and design for strategic sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, pp.155-166.

[28] Galvis, Á.H., 2018. Supporting decision-making processes on blended learning in higher education: literature and good practices review. International journal of educational technology in higher education, 15(1), pp.1-38.

[29] Geels, F.W., Sovacool, B.K., Schwanen, T. and Sorrell, S., 2017. Sociotechnical transitions for deep decarbonization. Science, 357(6357), pp.1242-1244.

[30] Gelband, H., Sankaranarayanan, R., Gauvreau, C.L., Horton, S., Anderson, B.O., Bray, F., Cleary, J., Dare, A.J., Denny, L., Gospodarowicz, M.K. and Gupta, S., 2016. Costs, affordability, and feasibility of an essential package of cancer control interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: key messages from Disease Control Priorities. The Lancet, 387(10033), pp.2133-2144.

[31] Gupta, M., Marsden, S., Oluka, T., Sharma, R. and Lucas, H., 2017. Lessons Learned From Implementing E-Learning for the Education of Health Professionals in Resource-Constrained Countries. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 15(2), pp.144-155.

[32] Hasan, M.K., 2017. ABCD of social protection in Bangladesh. Cabinet Division and General Economics Division, Government of Bangladesh: Dhaka, Bangladesh.

[33] Huang, L., Krigsvoll, G., Johansen, F., Liu, Y. and Zhang, X., 2018. Carbon emission of global construction sector. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 81, pp.1906-1916.

[34] Iacovidou, E., Millward-Hopkins, J., Busch, J., Purnell, P., Velis, C.A., Hahladakis, J.N., Zwirner, O. and Brown, A., 2017. A pathway to circular economy: Developing a conceptual framework for complex value assessment of resources recovered from waste. Journal of cleaner production, 168, pp.1279-1288.

[35] Isopescu, D.N., 2018, August. The impact of green building principles in the sustainable development of the built environment. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 399, No. 1, p. 012026). IOP Publishing.

[36] Karimi, H., Taylor, T.R., Dadi, G.B., Goodrum, P.M. and Srinivasan, C., 2018. Impact of skilled labor availability on construction project cost performance. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(7), p.04018057.

[37] Kholodilin, K.A., Mense, A. and Michelsen, C., 2017. The market value of energy efficiency in buildings and the mode of tenure. Urban Studies, 54(14), pp.3218-3238.

[38] Khoshbakht, M., Gou, Z. and Dupre, K., 2017. Cost-benefit prediction of green buildings: SWOT analysis of research methods and recent applications. Procedia Engineering, 180, pp.167-178.

[39] Kibert, C.J., 2016. Sustainable construction: green building design and delivery. John Wiley & Sons.

[40] Knoeri, C., Steinberger, J.K. and Roelich, K., 2016. End-user centred infrastructure operation: towards integrated end-use service delivery. Journal of Cleaner Production, 132, pp.229-239.

[41] Lake, A., Rezaie, B. and Beyerlein, S., 2017. Review of district heating and cooling systems for a sustainable future. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 67, pp.417-425.

[42] Lanahan, L. and Armanios, D., 2018. Does more certification always benefit a venture?. Organization Science, 29(5), pp.931-947.

[43] Liu, X. and Zeng, M., 2017. Renewable energy investment risk evaluation model based on system dynamics. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 73, pp.782-788.

[44] Masood, O.A.I., Abd Al-Hady, M.I. and Ali, A.K.M., 2017. Applying the principles of green architecture for saving energy in buildings. Energy Procedia, 115, pp.369-382.

[45] Megginson, W.L. and Fotak, V., 2016. Rise of the fiduciary state: A survey of sovereign wealth fund research. A collection of reviews on savings and wealth accumulation, pp.163-212.

[46] Mostafa, S., Chileshe, N. and Abdelhamid, T., 2016. Lean and agile integration within offsite construction using discrete event simulation: A systematic literature review. Construction Innovation, 16(4), pp.483-525.

[47] Munn, Z., Peters, M.D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A. and Aromataris, E., 2018. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC medical research methodology, 18(1), p.143.

[48] Ng, T.H. and Tao, J.Y., 2016. Bond financing for renewable energy in Asia. Energy Policy, 95, pp.509-517.

[49] Pietzcker, R.C., Ueckerdt, F., Carrara, S., De Boer, H.S., Després, J., Fujimori, S., Johnson, N., Kitous, A., Scholz, Y., Sullivan, P. and Luderer, G., 2017. System integration of wind and solar power in integrated assessment models: a cross-model evaluation of new approaches. Energy Economics, 64, pp.583-599.

[50] Pollock, A. and Berge, E., 2018. How to do a systematic review. International Journal of Stroke, 13(2), pp.138-156.

[51] Radner, J.M., Ferrer, M.J., McMahon, D., Black, C.F., Shankar, A.H. and Silver, K.L., 2018. Practical considerations for transitioning early childhood interventions to scale: lessons from the Saving Brains portfolio. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1419(1), pp.230-248.

[52] Rockström, J., Gaffney, O., Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N. and Schellnhuber, H.J., 2017. A roadmap for rapid decarbonization. Science, 355(6331), pp.1269-1271.

[53] Sagbansua, L. and Balo, F., 2017. Ecological impact & financial feasibility of Energy Recovery (EIFFER) Model for natural insulation material optimization. Energy and Buildings, 148, pp.1-14.

[54] Scott, D., Hall, C.M. and Gössling, S., 2016. A review of the IPCC Fifth Assessment and implications for tourism sector climate resilience and decarbonization. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(1), pp.8-30.

[55] Shan, M., Hwang, B.G. and Zhu, L., 2017. A global review of sustainable construction project financing: policies, practices, and research efforts. Sustainability, 9(12), p.2347.

[56] Shi, Q., Yan, Y., Zuo, J. and Yu, T., 2016. Objective conflicts in green buildings projects: A critical analysis. Building and Environment, 96, pp.107-117.

[57] Singh, C.S., 2018. Green construction: analysis on green and sustainable building techniques. Civil Engineering Research Journal, 4(3), p.555638.

[58] Starkey, A., Hagras, H., Shakya, S. and Owusu, G., 2016. A multi-objective genetic type-2 fuzzy logic based system for mobile field workforce area optimization. Information Sciences, 329, pp.390-411.

[59] Tao, J.Y. and Finenko, A., 2016. Moving beyond LCOE: impact of various financing methods on PV profitability for SIDS. Energy Policy, 98, pp.749-758.

[60] Tapia, C. and Padgett, J.E., 2016. Multi-objective optimisation of bridge retrofit and post-event repair selection to enhance sustainability. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 12(1), pp.93-107.

[61] Xue, H., Zhang, S., Su, Y. and Wu, Z., 2018. Capital cost optimization for prefabrication: A factor analysis evaluation model. Sustainability, 10(1), p.159.

[62] Zhang, L., Wu, J. and Liu, H., 2018. Turning green into gold: A review on the economics of green buildings. Journal of cleaner production, 172, pp.2234-2245.

@article{1710577,
      author = {Olamide Folahanmi Bayeroju, Adepeju Nafisat Sanusi, Zamathula Queen Sikhakhane Nwokediegwu},
      title = {Systematic Review of Cost Optimization Models for Green Building Construction Projects},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2018},
      volume = {2},
      number = {5},
      pages = {231-247},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1710577.pdf},
      abstract = {Green building construction projects are increasingly recognized as essential for advancing environmental sustainability and reducing the ecological footprint of the built environment. However, the perception of higher upfront costs remains a barrier to their widespread adoption. Cost optimization models provide a pathway to balance financial viability with sustainability goals, making them a critical focus for both researchers and practitioners. This synthesizes the existing body of knowledge on cost optimization models applied to green building construction projects, with the objective of identifying prevailing approaches, evaluating their effectiveness, and highlighting areas for future advancement. This followed PRISMA guidelines, with searches conducted across major scientific databases to capture peer-reviewed articles, case studies, and technical reports published over the past two decades. Inclusion criteria focused on studies addressing explicit cost optimization strategies, economic evaluation methods, or decision-support frameworks in the context of certified or sustainability-oriented building projects. Models identified were categorized into economic and financial models (e.g., life cycle costing, net present value analysis), operational and resource-based approaches (e.g., value engineering, lean construction), technology-driven solutions (e.g., BIM-enabled cost simulations, machine learning forecasting), and integrated multi-criteria decision-making frameworks. Comparative analysis revealed that while economic and financial models remain foundational, emerging digital technologies and hybrid optimization techniques offer greater potential for achieving both cost efficiency and long-term environmental benefits. Findings also indicate persistent challenges, including limited empirical validation of models in real-world projects, regional disparities in adoption, and insufficient integration with advanced digital technologies. This concludes that cost optimization for green building construction requires multi-disciplinary collaboration, policy support, and stronger links between financial modeling and sustainability outcomes. Future research should focus on AI-enhanced decision tools, renewable energy integration, and context-sensitive frameworks that align cost efficiency with global sustainability targets.},
      keywords = {Cost Optimization, Green Building, Construction Projects, Sustainable Design, Energy Efficiency, Lifecycle Cost Analysis, Resource Management, Budget Planning, Financial Modeling, Project Performance, Risk Mitigation, Sustainability Metrics},
      month = {November},
  }