Validation of Challenges for Implementing ESG in the Construction Industry Considering the Context of an Emerging Economy Country

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for sharing your manuscript on this very interesting topic. This study aimed to validate challenges related to the implementation of ESG in the construction sector in an emerging economy, using the Lawshe method. The authors have shown the implementation of sustainable practices in construction in Brazil. I have offered some comments for your consideration.

 

1. Authors show challenges in implementing ESG practices in Table 1. How are these 27 challenges (codes) built up? Does any theoretical framework explain these challenges? How do the authors contribute to the framework in this manuscript?

 

2. The authors spend 27 paragraphs in the literature section to show the 27 challenges. This section should be dedicated to presenting a critical analysis of state-of-the-art related work to justify the objective of the study. Additionally, critical comments should be made on the results of the cited works.

 

3. Why is the construction sector chosen as the domain perspective when investigating the research question in the manuscript? The current elaboration in the Introduction section is vague. Similarly, why is Brazil chosen among the emerging countries?

 

4. Authors elaborate that grouping companies from developing countries with companies from emerging markets is inefficient. Please elaborate and justify more regarding this inefficiency issue when contributing to the literature.

 

5. More insights and discussion regarding the construction sector in Brazil are encouraged.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Rebuttal Letter

Manuscript ID: applsci-3018146

Title: Validation of challenges for implementing ESG in the construction industry considering the context of an emerging economy country.

 

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for the considerations presented. These considerations have enabled a considerable improvement in our paper. We try to heed all considerations. We list below all considerations made and we justify the actions taken. Thank you for you precious help.

 

Rebuttal items

 

Reviewer #1: Thank you for sharing your manuscript on this very interesting topic. This study aimed to validate challenges related to the implementation of ESG in the construction sector in an emerging economy, using the Lawshe method. The authors have shown the implementation of sustainable practices in construction in Brazil. I have offered some comments for your consideration.

Reply: Thanks for the comment.

 

1. Authors show challenges in implementing ESG practices in Table 1. How are these 27 challenges (codes) built up? Does any theoretical framework explain these challenges? How do the authors contribute to the framework in this manuscript?

Reply: Thanks for the comment. We emphasize that Table 1 (challenges considered in this study) is the result of the literature review initially carried out in the research. Each challenge is presented in the literature by the references indicated in Table 1. Details of the execution of the literature review can be seen in the methodological procedures section of the paper, as highlighted in the paragraph below. Please check this new version of the paper.

“For the literature review, the following scientific databases were consulted: Science Direct, Web of Science, and Scopus, aiming to identify articles addressing the challenges of implementing ESG practices. Specific queries were conducted using terms and combinations of keywords such as "Environmental, Social and Governance", "barriers", "difficulty", "obstacles", "impediments", "resistances", and "challenges".

These queries were applied to titles, abstracts, and keywords of articles, covering both original studies and reviews. In the initial phase of the research, 535 documents were identified. After excluding articles not available in open access and removing duplicates, 270 articles remained for analysis. From this selection, the challenges associated with ESG implementation were cataloged and classified through full document readings, as presented in Table 1.”

 

2. The authors spend 27 paragraphs in the literature section to show the 27 challenges. This section should be dedicated to presenting a critical analysis of state-of-the-art related work to justify the objective of the study. Additionally, critical comments should be made on the results of the cited works.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. In this new version of the paper, critical comments on the results of the cited works were inserted at the end of the literature review section, and a general critical analysis was also inserted in relation to the state of the art to better justify the objective of the study. As per the paragraphs presented below. Please check this new version of the paper.

”The literature on ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) criteria highlights the importance of such practices for sustainable corporate performance and market reputation. However, various challenges hinder the full adoption of these principles. Notable obstacles include the lack of an effective educational system for ESG, the absence of standardized indicators, and the limited familiarity of stakeholders with the ESG concept. The lack of harmonized guidelines and regulations complicates classification and comparison, while the scarcity of a standardized reporting model reduces transparency. Additionally, restricted access to green financing, especially for SMEs, and the high costs associated with ESG practices represent significant financial barriers.

Studies indicate that organizational resistance, lack of support for scientific research, investor uncertainty about returns on ESG investments, and managerial short-sightedness are critical challenges. The absence of standard definitions and metrics for ESG compromises data comparability and transparency, exacerbating the proliferation of practices such as greenwashing. Additional problems include the lack of adequate technological tools, the need for tax incentives and subsidies, and the difficulty of integrating ESG aspects into corporate management. Government support is essential to encourage innovation and facilitate the digital transformation necessary for the effective implementation of ESG principles.

Stakeholder resistance and political corruption also present challenges to the adoption of ESG practices. In regions with high corruption and political instability, transparency is compromised, and long-term sustainability is hindered. Integrating Industry 4.0 and 5.0 technologies can enhance the authenticity and efficiency of ESG reporting, but this requires significant investment in infrastructure and training. In summary, the literature review reveals the need for greater standardization, government incentives, and technological integration to overcome the challenges in implementing ESG practices and promoting sustainable development.”

 

3. Why is the construction sector chosen as the domain perspective when investigating the research question in the manuscript? The current elaboration in the Introduction section is vague. Similarly, why is Brazil chosen among the emerging countries?

Reply: Thanks for the comment. In order to clarify the choice of considering the construction sector, the sector data were better described in the introduction section. In addition, we highlight that the Brazilian context was considered due to the importance of the sector for the country's development, as presented in the introductory section and highlighted below. Please check this new version of the paper.

“In this scenario, the incorporation of sustainable practices emerges as an important necessity across various sectors, with the construction industry being one of them. Companies in this sector are among the main drivers of global growth, historically recognized for substantial environmental impact, ranging from intensive consumption of natural resources to waste generation[7]. In Brazil, according to the Annual Survey of Construction Industry [8], the sector employs 2,203,731 people, with a total gross revenue of R$ 397,166,925,000, in addition to an estimated total construction materials consumption of R$ 77,895,586,000 and expenditures on fuels and lubricants of R$ 9,711,825,000, among other costs, thus highlighting the significant relevance of this segment.

However, despite playing an important role in the dynamics of the Brazilian economy, there is a significant production of waste in construction, renovation, repair, and demolition activities, including those arising from site preparation and excavation for civil works. According to data from the National System of Information on Solid Waste Management [9], the amount of waste generated reaches 2,696,163,142.09 tons. The Water Thematic Committee of the Brazilian Council for Sustainable Construction (CBCS) reveals that, on average, 50% of the water supplied to urban areas is directed to the construction sector, and concerning energy consumption, estimates indicate that buildings account for about 40% of the total global energy consumption [10].”

 

 

4. Authors elaborate that grouping companies from developing countries with companies from emerging markets is inefficient. Please elaborate and justify more regarding this inefficiency issue when contributing to the literature.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. In fact, this part of the text was not clear. We made an improvement to clarify the importance of independently analyzing the contexts of emerging economy countries. Please check the new text below that was inserted in the introduction.

“However, considering analyzing companies from developing countries, such as Brazil, together with companies from developed markets may be inefficient, as economic development, political stability, institutional conditions and cultural values ​​are different in such contexts.”

 

5. More insights and discussion regarding the construction sector in Brazil are encouraged.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. In this new version of the paper, insights and discussions about the construction sector in Brazil have been inserted at the end of section 4.1 Associated Debates, as per the paragraphs below. Please check this new version of the article.

“In summary, the analysis of challenges validated by the Lawshe method reveals a complex landscape for the implementation of ESG practices in the Brazilian construction sector. One of the main obstacles is the absence of an effective educational system on ESG, highlighting the need for investments in education and training. Without proper knowledge and skills, professionals in the sector struggle to understand and implement sustainable practices. Cooperation between the government, academia, and industry is essential to overcome this skills deficit and promote innovation and sustainability in the sector. (Brodny and Tutak, 2022) emphasize that reducing this deficit is necessary for the progress of ESG practices.

Another significant challenge is the lack of standardized indicators to measure ESG performance, which makes monitoring and comparing efforts among companies difficult. The absence of consistent metrics impedes the definition of clear goals and transparency in sustainability reports, as highlighted by (Belinky, Saraiva and Miyake, 2022). Furthermore, the lack of interest and motivation among stakeholders, both internal and external, compromises the adoption of sustainable practices. Investments in educational programs and financial incentives, such as tax benefits, are necessary to engage and motivate stakeholders, as suggested by (Zumente, Bistrova and Lace, 2022).

Organizational resistance is another obstacle, often caused by concerns about cultural changes and additional costs. Overcoming this resistance requires awareness programs and the involvement of top management to demonstrate the financial and reputational benefits of ESG practices. (Meiden and Silaban, 2023) highlight the importance of stakeholder engagement and transparency in communicating environmental performance. Additionally, the lack of specific regulations and guidelines hampers the adoption of sustainable practices. Developing robust and consistent policies is fundamental to creating a regulatory environment that favors the effective implementation of ESG principles, thereby promoting a greater contribution of the construction sector to the Sustainable Development Goals.”

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The introduction section should include the research objectives, theoretical contributions and the structure of the paper. The authors are requested to further condense the novelty and theoretical contribution of the paper.

2. The literature review part is not logical, and the authors should further reflect on how to categorize it.

3. Empirical studies usually use a 5-point or 7-point scale. The authors have used a 3-point scale, please explain the reason and provide the scale in the Appendix section.

4. The text describes that “A total of six hundred and fifteen professionals were invited, resulting in a response rate of 11.54%.” Please ask the authors if the sample size was adequate and provide details of the sample description.

5. More than half of the sample was from the northern region of Brazil, could the author please explain the reasons for this choice and does this have an impact on the conclusions.

6. Please elaborate further on the Lawshe Method.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Rebuttal Letter

Manuscript ID: applsci-3018146

Title: Validation of challenges for implementing ESG in the construction industry considering the context of an emerging economy country.

 

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for the considerations presented. These considerations have enabled a considerable improvement in our paper. We try to heed all considerations. We list below all considerations made and we justify the actions taken. Thank you for you precious help.

 

Rebuttal items

 

1. The introduction section should include the research objectives, theoretical contributions and the structure of the paper. The authors are requested to further condense the novelty and theoretical contribution of the paper.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. The structure of the article was added at the end of Section 1 Introduction. The research objective, contributions and novelty factor are presented at the end of the introduction section, as highlighted in the new version and below. Please check this new version of the paper.

“Considering the relevance of ESG practices, the importance of the construction sector, and the scarcity of studies in emerging economies such as Brazil, it was found that there is a research gap that underpins the motivation for conducting this study. Upon examining the available literature, no work was identified that addressed the following research question for this study: "What are the challenges for implementing ESG practices in the construction industry in an emerging economy, validated by industry professionals?" Therefore, this study aims to validate the challenges for ESG implementation in the construction industry, considering the context of an emerging economy.

The remainder of the article is structured as follows: Section 2 presents a literature review. Section 3 provides a detailed description of the methodological procedures. Section 4 presents the results, with subsections covering associated discussions, implications for theory and practice, and the relationship with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Finally, the conclusions are presented in Section 5.”

 

2. The literature review part is not logical, and the authors should further reflect on how to categorize it.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. The literature review aimed to bring out the challenges found in the literature and describe them as several other authors do, for example Jonsdottir et al., 2022, where he presents some challenges and describes them in his review based on other authors. To improve this topic, an analysis was added at the end of section 2. Text added below. Please check this new version of the paper.

“The literature on ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) criteria highlights the importance of such practices for sustainable corporate performance and market reputation. However, various challenges hinder the full adoption of these principles. Notable obstacles include the lack of an effective educational system for ESG, the absence of standardized indicators, and the limited familiarity of stakeholders with the ESG concept. The lack of harmonized guidelines and regulations complicates classification and comparison, while the scarcity of a standardized reporting model reduces transparency. Additionally, restricted access to green financing, especially for SMEs, and the high costs associated with ESG practices represent significant financial barriers.

Studies indicate that organizational resistance, lack of support for scientific re-search, investor uncertainty about returns on ESG investments, and managerial shortsightedness are critical challenges. The absence of standard definitions and metrics for ESG compromises data comparability and transparency, exacerbating the proliferation of practices such as greenwashing. Additional problems include the lack of adequate technological tools, the need for tax incentives and subsidies, and the difficulty of integrating ESG aspects into corporate management. Government support is essential to encourage innovation and facilitate the digital transformation necessary for the effective implementation of ESG principles.

Stakeholder resistance and political corruption also present challenges to the adoption of ESG practices. In regions with high corruption and political instability, transparency is compromised, and long-term sustainability is hindered. Integrating Industry 4.0 and 5.0 technologies can enhance the authenticity and efficiency of ESG reporting, but this requires significant investment in infrastructure and training. In summary, the literature review reveals the need for greater standardization, govern-ment incentives, and technological integration to overcome the challenges in imple-menting ESG practices and promoting sustainable development.”

 

3. Empirical studies usually use a 5-point or 7-point scale. The authors have used a 3-point scale, please explain the reason and provide the scale in the Appendix section.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. The 3-point scale was based on the authors (Marinho et al. 2023; Rampasso et al. 2021, 2022) and to make it clearer it was added in the text. Please check the modification in the new version of the paper and below.

“After reading the challenge and description, invited experts evaluated using a three-point scale (options), which was based on the work of [116–118]:”

 

4. The text describes that “A total of six hundred and fifteen professionals were invited, resulting in a response rate of 11.54%.” Please ask the authors if the sample size was adequate and provide details of the sample description.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. Other studies, such as those by (Marinho et al. 2023; Rampasso et al. 2021, 2022), present similar response rates, showing that for this method this response rate is adequate and thus provides good results for validation. The sample description is highlighted in Section 3 Methodological procedures and below, and the access link is provided at the end of the file under "Data Availability Statement" for greater transparency. Please check the text below.

“The selection of experts to respond to the questionnaire was based on the following criteria: having experience in the sector, academic background (civil engineers or architects), and experience with ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance). The experts were contacted via emails and social media, while the form was made available through an online link created on the Google Forms platform, remaining open for responses for thirty days. A total of six hundred and fifteen professionals were invited, resulting in a response rate of 11.54%. Regarding the geographical distribution of participants, 62.5% were from the North region of Brazil, 20.83% from the Southeast region, 8.33% from the Northeast, 5.56% from the South, and 2.78% from the Midwest. In terms of participants' experience, 41.67% had up to 5 years of experience, 22.22% had more than 5 years up to 10 years of experience, and 36.11% had over 10 years of experience in the sector.”

 

5. More than half of the sample was from the northern region of Brazil, could the author please explain the reasons for this choice and does this have an impact on the conclusions.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. The reason why most of the interviewees are from the northern region is because the authors are from the Amazon region and have a larger network in this region.  But it is worth highlighting that the research has the participation of professionals from all regions of Brazil.

 

6. Please elaborate further on the Lawshe Method.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. As requested, explanatory text has been added in Section 3 Methodological procedures about the Lawshe method. Please check the new version of the paper and below.

“To conduct this study, four distinct and well-defined phases were delineated. Firstly, a literature review was conducted, focusing on previous research due to the exploratory nature of our study and the need to establish a strong foundation for our investigations into challenges related to ESG implementation. Next, a research instrument (questionnaire) was developed based on the challenges identified in the literature. Subsequently, a survey was conducted with professionals in the construction industry, using the Lawshe method to validate the challenges within the context of a developing economy and their relation to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Lawshe Method was chosen because it is used to determine the content validity of a measurement instrument, especially in research involving expert opinion. This method involves the evaluation of individual items by a panel of experts, who rate each item in terms of its essentiality to the concept being measured, thus making it fundamental for achieving the results in this research. Finally, discussions, conclusions, and proposals for future research were established.”

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I joined the review process after it had already begun and noticed that many comments and changes have already been made based on feedback from other reviewers. I would have suggested similar modifications.

At this stage, I recommend addressing two points:

1. Introduction: Clearly state the aim of your research and describe its novelty (your contribution to the field).
2. Methodology: Provide details on when and how you collected the data. Was the sample representative? How did you validate the data? You should describe all these aspects.

Aside from these comments, I believe your paper is ready for publication.

 

Author Response

I joined the review process after it had already begun and noticed that many comments and changes have already been made based on feedback from other reviewers. I would have suggested similar modifications.

Reply: Thanks for the comment.

 

1. Introduction: Clearly state the aim of your research and describe its novelty (your contribution to the field).

Reply: Thanks for the comment. The research objective, contributions and novelty factor are presented at the end of the introduction section, as highlighted in the new version and below. Please check this new version of the paper.

“Considering the relevance of ESG practices, the importance of the construction sector, and the scarcity of studies in emerging economies such as Brazil, it was found that there is a research gap that underpins the motivation for conducting this study. Upon examining the available literature, no work was identified that addressed the following research question for this study: "What are the challenges for implementing ESG practices in the construction industry in an emerging economy, validated by industry professionals?" Therefore, this study aims to validate the challenges for ESG implementation in the construction industry, considering the context of an emerging economy.”

 

2. Methodology: Provide details on when and how you collected the data. Was the sample representative? How did you validate the data? You should describe all these aspects.

Reply: Thanks for the comment. The data collection process is presented in Section 3, Methodological Procedures, as highlighted below. Regarding the sample representativeness and the validation method, these are described in Section 3 and highlighted below. The validation was conducted using the well-known Lawshe Method, and the sampling is representative for the methodology used. Information about when the research was conducted has been included in this new version of the article. Please check this new version of the paper.

“The selection of experts to respond to the questionnaire was based on the following criteria: having experience in the sector, academic background (civil engineers or architects), and experience with ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance). The experts were contacted via emails and social media, while the form was made available through an online link created on the Google Forms platform, remaining open for responses for thirty days. A total of six hundred and fifteen professionals were invited, resulting in a response rate of 11.54%. Regarding the geographical distribution of participants, 62.5% were from the North region of Brazil, 20.83% from the Southeast region, 8.33% from the Northeast, 5.56% from the South, and 2.78% from the Midwest. In terms of participants' experience, 41.67% had up to 5 years of experience, 22.22% had more than 5 years up to 10 years of experience, and 36.11% had over 10 years of experience in the sector. The research was carried out in March 2024 among professionals.”
“Subsequently, a survey was conducted with professionals in the construction industry, using the Lawshe method to validate the challenges within the context of a developing economy and their relation to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Lawshe Method was chosen because it is used to determine the content validity of a measurement instrument, especially in research involving expert opinion. This method involves the evaluation of individual items by a panel of experts, who rate each item in terms of its essentiality to the concept being measured, thus making it fundamental for achieving the results in this research.”

“The data obtained from the survey with professionals was analyzed using the Lawshe method, following the guidelines of [116–118]. In this method, professionals responded to questionnaires evaluating each criterion in three categories: "essential," "important but not essential," and "not important.”

 

Aside from these comments, I believe your paper is ready for publication.

Reply: Thanks for the comment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The comments have been incorporated in the desired manner. I have no further questions in the current form.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

1: The comments have been incorporated in the desired manner. I have no further questions in the current form.

Reply: Thanks for the comment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx