Examining the Evolving Roles of Quantity Surveyors in Delivering SDG-Aligned Construction in Malaysia: A Simulation-Based Empirical Study

Shuaihua Li; Qiuhong Liang; Yanfei Xiong

doi:10.63646/UQPH6122

Authors

Shuaihua Li¹ https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9859-0185
- Conceptualization
- Formal Analysis
- Investigation
- Methodology
- Writing – Original Draft Preparation
Qiuhong Liang^2,* https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9659-745X
- Data Curation
- Software
- Validation
- Visualization
Yanfei Xiong³ https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3890-8511
- Conceptualization
- Project Administration
- Supervision
- Writing – Review & Editing

¹ School of Architecture, Jiangxi University of Applied Science and Technology, Nanchang, China 330100

² Innovation and Entrepreneurship College, Jiangxi University of Applied Science and Technology, Nanchang, China 330100

³ School of Intelligent Manufacturing, Jiangxi University of Applied Science and Technology, Nanchang, China 330100

Corresponding author: 819718950@qq.com

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63646/UQPH6122

Keywords:

Quantity Surveyors; Sustainable Development Goals; Sustainable Construction; Procurement; Lifecycle Costing; Climate Governance; Malaysia; Simulation-Based Empirical Analysis

Abstract

This study develops and tests a simulation-based empirical model of how quantity surveyors (QSs) contribute to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)-aligned construction delivery in Malaysia. Rather than replicating the Ghana-focused evidence base of the source paper, the present manuscript builds a new analytical design around four contemporary QS role domains: sustainable cost planning, sustainable procurement and circularity, social value and inclusive delivery, and data-driven governance and climate reporting. A synthetic but structurally realistic dataset of 286 QS professionals was generated from a theoretically constrained latent-variable model calibrated to plausible industry distributions. Actual empirical procedures were then performed on the simulated data, including reliability analysis, exploratory factor analysis, correlation analysis, and hierarchical multiple regression. The results show that the four-role structure is statistically stable (KMO = 0.906; Bartlett’s χ² = 2600.123, p < 0.001), with all core scales demonstrating acceptable to strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.770–0.883). Among the role domains, data-driven governance and climate reporting shows the strongest positive association with perceived project-level SDG contribution (β = 0.345, p < 0.001), followed by organizational support (β = 0.159, p = 0.001), sustainable procurement and circularity (β = 0.153, p = 0.001), sustainability training (β = 0.132, p = 0.006), sustainable cost planning (β = 0.128, p = 0.009), and social value and inclusive delivery (β = 0.111, p = 0.017). The study contributes a new Malaysia-oriented perspective, a re-specified role architecture for QS practice, and a transparent simulation-based empirical workflow that can be reproduced or replaced by field data in later work.

How to Cite

Li, S., Liang, Q., & Xiong, Y. (2025). Examining the Evolving Roles of Quantity Surveyors in Delivering SDG-Aligned Construction in Malaysia: A Simulation-Based Empirical Study. Journal of Technology Innovation and Society, 1(2), 96-107. https://doi.org/10.63646/UQPH6122

References

Adabre, M. A., & Chan, A. P. C. (2019). Critical success factors for sustainable affordable housing. Building and Environment, 156, 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.04.030

Ajayi, S. O., Oyedele, L. O., Ceranic, B., Gallanagh, M., & Kadiri, K. O. (2015). Life cycle environmental performance of material specification. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development, 6(1), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/2093761X.2014.1006703

AlSanad, S. (2015). Awareness, drivers, actions, and barriers of sustainable construction in Kuwait. Procedia Engineering, 118, 969–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.538

Benachio, G. L. F., Freitas, M. C. D., & Tavares, S. F. (2020). Circular economy in the construction industry: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 260, 121046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121046

Darko, A., Chan, A. P. C., Yang, Y., Shan, M., He, B.-J., & Gou, Z. (2018). Influences of barriers, drivers, and promotion strategies on green building technologies in developing countries. Habitat International, 72, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.11.001

Ebekozien, A., Aigbavboa, C., & Ramotshela, M. (2022). Sustainable building processes’ challenges and strategies in the construction industry. Cleaner Engineering and Technology, 7, 100455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2022.100455

Fei, W., Opoku, A., Agyekum, K., et al. (2021). The critical role of the construction industry in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 284, 124913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124913

Fellows, R., & Liu, A. (2015). Research Methods for Construction (4th ed.). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118915745

Ghobakhloo, M. (2020). Industry 4.0, digitization, and opportunities for sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119869

Häkkinen, T., & Belloni, K. (2011). Barriers and drivers for sustainable building. Building Research & Information, 39(3), 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2011.561948

Hwang, B.-G., & Ng, W. J. (2013). Project management knowledge and skills for green construction. Building and Environment, 69, 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.07.024

Kibert, C. J. (2016). Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery (4th ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119055174

Kineber, A. F., Othman, I., et al. (2024). Agile project management for sustainable residential construction: Critical success factors. Frontiers in Built Environment, 10, 1442184. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2024.1442184

Mansell, P., Philbin, S. P., Broyd, T., & Nicholson, I. (2020). Delivering UN Sustainable Development Goals’ impact on infrastructure projects. Sustainability, 12(19), 7998. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12197998

Martek, I., Hosseini, M. R., Shrestha, A., et al. (2019). Barriers inhibiting the transition to sustainability in the Australian construction industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, 281–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.080

Orfanidou, V. S., Kalligeros, M., et al. (2023). Life cycle costing implementation in green public procurement. Sustainability, 15(3), 2817. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032817

Osei-Kyei, R., Chan, A. P. C., Javed, A. A., & Ameyaw, E. E. (2020). Critical review of the massification of sustainable construction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 276, 123327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123327

Opoku, A. (2019). Biodiversity and the built environment: Implications for the Sustainable Development Goals. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.011

Opoku, A., & Guthrie, P. (2018). The social value agenda in construction and infrastructure. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering Sustainability, 171(4), 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1680/jensu.16.00018

Rostamnezhad, M., Thai, V. V., et al. (2022). Social sustainability in construction projects: A systematic review. Sustainability, 14(14), 8331. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148331

Scherz, M., et al. (2023). Consideration of environmental life cycle costing in tendering and awarding building contracts. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 28, 1032–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-023-02153-1

Silvius, A. J. G., & Schipper, R. (2014). Sustainability in project management competencies. International Journal of Project Management, 32(4), 630–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.08.004

Song, J., & Fischer, M. (2022). Digital twins and performance monitoring for sustainable project delivery. Automation in Construction, 140, 104356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104356

Sparrevik, M., et al. (2021). Circularity in construction and the role of procurement. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 25(3), 757–770. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13079

Venkataraman, R. R., & Cheng, J. C. P. (2021). Carbon-informed cost planning for early project design. Journal of Building Engineering, 44, 102981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102981

Willar, D., Trigunarsyah, B., Coffey, V., & Mujiyanto, R. (2022). Managing sustainability efforts in building design, construction, and facilities management. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(6), 2241–2260. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-07-2016-0165

Wuni, I. Y., Shen, G. Q., & Osei-Kyei, R. (2020). Conceptualizing barriers and strategies for sustainable project management. Sustainable Development, 28(6), 1521–1535. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2104

Yusof, N. A., et al. (2019). Engaging consultants in green projects: Exploring the practice in Malaysia. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 8(4), 324–339. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-06-2018-0033

Zuo, J., & Zhao, Z.-Y. (2014). Green building research: Current status and future agenda. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.021