Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Review

Exploring the relationship between lean construction and

environmental sustainability: A review of existing literature to
decipher broader dimensions
Ann Francis, Albert Thomas*
Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Bombay, Mumbai, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Lean construction and sustainable construction are perceived to be two individual philosophies that
Received 17 September 2019 possess distinct goals. Lean construction is oriented towards the process-related parameters of con-
Received in revised form struction associated with improving flow, enhancing productivity, eliminating waste and reducing de-
10 December 2019
lays. Meanwhile, sustainable construction aims at reducing the harmful impacts on the environment due
Accepted 27 December 2019
Available online 27 December 2019
to construction activities along with due attention to the economic and social aspects of the project.
However, both these paradigms are found to hold certain common objectives in the form of promoting
Handling editor: Prof. Jiri Jaromir Kleme
s resource efficiency and minimizing waste. This paper reviews the studies published in the domain of lean
construction and environmental sustainability by categorizing the links between them within various
Keywords: dimensions of the lean philosophy such as lean principles, lean wastes, lean tools, and other associated
Lean Construction lean tenets. The review deciphers the influence of these individual realms of lean construction on some
Environmental Sustainability environmental parameters such as resource use, emissions, pollution, and energy use. The review pro-
Lean Energy vides insights into important and distinct linkages between lean and the environment and further
Lean Project Delivery System
motivates the expansion of the boundaries of lean construction philosophy into the operation phase of a
Last Planner System
project’s life-cycle where its influence is found to be sparse. Hence, the study briefly examines the po-
tential of considering energy waste under the ambit of lean construction philosophy and the prospects of
research in this domain. The knowledge synthesized in this paper will motivate the implementation of
lean construction, seeking broader benefits in terms of environmental sustainability.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Lean philosophy in construction and its influence on the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. Interaction between Lean and environment: a perspective from the manufacturing environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Broad classification of the literature related to Lean and its influence on the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2.1. Principles of LEAN construction and their implication on environmental sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.2. ‘Waste’ in the LEAN language and its consequences on the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.3. Lean construction tools and their impact on environmental parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.4. Other modes of interaction between LEAN and the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3. Introducing energy waste under the ambit of Lean construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. Discussions and future implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Declaration of competing interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: annfrancis@iitb.ac.in (A. Francis), albert@iitb.ac.in (A. Thomas).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119913
0959-6526/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
1. Introduction
The construction industry is expected to contribute to about 15
percent of the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2020 and is
projected to exhibit a growth rate of 4 percent annually over the
next few years (Global_Construction, 2015). This anticipated
growth makes it one of the fastest progressing sectors in the
coming decades. However, the industry’s growth has been
constantly challenged by a wide variety of issues such as low pro-
ductivity levels, varying profitability, lack of skilled workforce,
project delays and slow technology adoption (Hussin et al., 2013;
Nam and Tatum, 1988). A potential solution to these problems is
found in the philosophy of lean construction that emerged in the
1990s because it challenged the conventional approach of the in-
dustry. Conventional construction approach focuses on discrete
activities and their productivities with limited attention to the
overall performance of the project. On the contrary, lean con-
struction aims at reducing variability, enhancing reliability and
productivity, minimizing waste, improving the workflow and
overall efficiency in the project delivery, which eventually leads to
increased profits and reduced costs (Babalola et al., 2019; Ballard
and Howell, 2003; Koskela et al., 2007; Mossman, 2009).
Meanwhile, the growing global concern on the environment has
posed an additional challenge to the construction industry. The
construction sector, which includes the infrastructure and the
building segments, is a principal consumer of global resources,
energy, and materials (Huovila and Koskela, 1998). Further, the
sector’s activities result in the generation of large quantities of
wastes in the form of materials and pollutants and cause a large
quantum of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Degani and Cardoso,
2002; Horvath, 2004). Such environmental impacts are a concern
because, according to the ‘Stern Review’ (Stern, 2006), the overall
costs and climate change risks associated with the environmental
problems are equivalent to losing five percent of the annual global
GDP. Therefore, the construction industry needs to make significant
efforts to reduce its environmental impact by adopting more sus-
tainable practices. In general, sustainable construction practices
focus on improving the resource (land, water, materials) use effi-
ciency by reducing waste, controlling emissions and pollution,
promoting energy efficiency and eventually reducing the overall
impact on the environment (J. Kibert, 2013).
In addition to improving the performance-related parameters
such as time, profits, productivity, and workflow; lean philosophy is
also found to possess the potential to reduce environmental im-
pacts (de Carvalho et al., 2017; Degani and Cardoso, 2002; Florida,
1996; Ghosh et al., 2014). Although, lean philosophy is not specif-
ically designed to address environmental issues, it promotes effi-
cient use of resources and emphasizes on waste reduction that
eventually influences environmental performance (Bae and Kim,
2008; Bidarianzadeh and Fortune, 2002; Degani and Cardoso,
2002; Horman et al., 2004; Khodeir and Othman, 2018; Nahmens,
2009). Therefore, this study deciphers the compelling relation-
ship between lean construction and the environmental dimension
of sustainability, by systematically reviewing the studies from
different aspects such as; lean wastes, lean principles, and lean
tools to explore broader applications of the lean philosophy in
enhancing the environmental performance of construction pro-
jects. Further, the lean project delivery system (LPDS) and its in-
fluence on environmental sustainability is investigated by
introducing a life cycle perspective. Additionally, this study at-
tempts to provide novel insights into the possibility of expanding
the application of lean construction in the use phase of a built
environment, where the manifestation of lean is primarily imper-
ceptible. The influence of lean on the economic and social dimen-
sion of sustainability is beyond the purview of this study. However,
the papers that have addressed all the three dimensions of sus-
tainability have been included in the study with a prime focus on
the environmental influence of lean construction.
Most of the relevant papers that resulted from the search of
“lean construction, sustainability, and environment” in the SCOPUS
database (Elsevier, 2016) have been reviewed in this study. Of the
101 papers yielded in this particular search, 55 papers were found
to be relevant to the theme of this study. Apart from these, about 12
papers that are not part of the SCOPUS database but obtained
through Google scholar search has been considered in this review
owing to their relevance to the theme of lean construction and
environmental sustainability. 10 of the papers reviewed in this
study belong to proceedings of the Annual Conference of the In-
ternational Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), which is a promi-
nent conference in the domain of lean construction. These studies
are very significant in their discussion on the influence of lean
construction practices on the environment and hence included for
discussion. This review differs from similar studies in this domain
because of its approach adopted in categorizing the lean con-
struction philosophy into its various components and discussion on
the environmental relevance of each component. Fig. 1 describes
the broad structure of the literature review describing the various
sections considered in this manuscript to illustrate the relationship
between lean construction and environmental sustainability. The
following sections attempt to explore and investigate the influence
of the different dimensions of lean construction on the various
environmental parameters such that the broader influence of lean
philosophy could be illustrated.
2. Lean philosophy in construction and its influence on the
environment
Lean philosophy that emerged from the Toyota Production
System (TPS) primarily focuses on improving the process efficiency
in a process by eliminating anything that does not add value to the
customer (Womack and Jones, 1996). Before the emergence of lean,
many philosophies originated in the manufacturing sector and
attracted the interests of construction practitioners. However, most
of them did not find ample acceptance in the construction sector
owing to the complexities, uniqueness, and the on-site production
associated with construction projects. However, lean philosophy
received significant attention in the construction domain because,
it contrasts the conventional practices of the industry by intro-
ducing the concept of ‘value’; and provides a broader meaning to
the term ‘waste’ in construction. Thus, emerged the concept of ‘lean
Fig. 1. Structure of the literature review.
 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
construction’ that was a term coined by the international group of
lean construction (IGLC) in their first meeting in 1993.
Several studies report that the adoption of lean construction led
to timely project completion, enhanced profits, safe and efficient
processes and reduced variability in construction projects (Mao and
Zhang, 2008; Salem et al., 2006). However, most of these studies
have evaluated it, only on the basis of economic benefits derived
because, that has been the primary motivation for the imple-
mentation of lean construction. However, if lean philosophy focuses
on reaping economic benefits alone in the form of reduced cost and
increased profits, it might lead to negative impacts on the envi-
ronment (Song and Liang, 2011). Therefore, it is necessary to eval-
uate the impact of the philosophy beyond the economic
perspective. However, the difficulties in quantifying the environ-
mental benefits of lean philosophy hinder its exploration beyond
the established boundaries (Bae and Kim, 2008; Carneiro et al.,
2012; King and Lenox, 2009). Nevertheless, the increasing
emphasis on environmental protection in recent times is a poten-
tial background for evaluating the influence of lean construction on
environmental parameters such as pollution, waste, natural
resource consumption, and emissions.
The concept of promoting environmental sustainability in con-
struction is mainly centered around reducing material wastage,
water conservation, reducing pollution, dust control, use of
environment-friendly materials and methods, and encouraging
recycling thereby, minimizing the impact on biodiversity (Cib and
Unep-Ietc, 2002). Subsequently, several studies have been high-
lighting a positive relationship between lean construction and
environmental sustainability because, it is found to minimize
resource depletion and pollution by eliminating waste and adding
additional value to the customer in the form of lesser environ-
mental impacts (Huovila and Koskela, 1998; Riley et al., 2005;
Sertyesilisik, 2014; Solaimani and Sedighi, 2019). The emphasis of
lean philosophy on waste minimization and improving resource
efficiency implicitly reflects the underlying essence of environ-
mental sustainability. In this context, Vieira and Cachadinha (2011)
suggested that, instead of considering environmental benefits due
to lean construction practices as an unexpected outcome, the in-
dustry should implement them with reassigned additional social
and environmental targets to help achieve sustainable
development.
The following sections attempt to bifurcate the existing studies
on lean construction to understand its relationship with the envi-
ronmental pillar of sustainability in detail. However, before cate-
gorizing and evaluating these interactions in the construction
sector, it is necessary to understand the merger of lean and envi-
ronmental sustainability from the perspective of the manufacturing
environment from where the philosophy emerged and advanced
consistently since its origin. This will establish a strong base for
understanding the impact of lean on the environment in the con-
struction industry as well.
2.1. Interaction between Lean and environment: a perspective from
the manufacturing environment
The environmental influence of lean philosophy has been
extensively researched in the manufacturing environment (Abreu
et al., 2017; Dhingra et al., 2014; Florida, 1996; King and Lenox,
2009; Maxwell et al., 1993; Rothenberg et al., 2001). Most studies
among them have reported a positive relationship of improvement
in environmental sustainability as a result of lean philosophy, i.e.,
lean is green as well. ‘Green’ in this context primarily refers to the
practices that are environmentally conscious, or in other terms,
eco-friendly and cause lesser harmful effects on the environment.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has been a
3
pioneer in establishing the potential of lean production in sup-
porting the enhancement of the environmental performance of the
manufacturing sector. The US EPA’s belief that lean production
enabled a favorable cultural working atmosphere for waste mini-
mization and pollution prevention led to the development of ‘Lean
and Environment Toolkit’ (US EPA, 2007). This toolkit provides a
framework for achieving higher environmental performance in
manufacturing and services sectors. It also provides practical stra-
tegies, tools, and techniques to consider environmental parameters
into the existing lean production efforts. It further recommends
that lean production practices and tools should explicitly observe
environmental wastes for enhancing lean performance. Developing
a similar toolkit for the construction sector can enhance the role of
lean construction in promoting sustainable development.
Meanwhile, this influence of lean production on environmental
parameters has been reported to be implicit rather than explicit,
owing to the sparse amount of empirical and anecdotal investiga-
tion involved (Found, 2009). King and Linox (2009) explored
empirical evidence on the relationship between lean production
and environmental performance in the production segment. The
study reports empirical confirmation that lean production can help
in lowering emissions and reduce pollution and related costs and
hence proposes that the firms that adopt the lean production
strategies will quickly adopt environmental management system
(EMS), i.e., ISO 140001 into their organization. EMS helps organi-
zations to manage and operate in a manner suited to reduce the
environmental impact and enhance environmental performance
throughout its operations. In a similar study, Puvanasvaran. (2012)
also propose a linkage between lean production principles and
EMS. Since lean production and EMS share a common objective of
reducing wastage, it is observed that lean production can easily be
integrated into EMS in the manufacturing and services industry.
Therefore, lean philosophy and environmental sustainability are
found to be parallel paradigms in the manufacturing sector, and
organizations that adopt lean production practices can easily
embed green practices into their existing processes and vice-versa
(Larson and Greenwood, 2004).
Fliedner (2008) proposes that sustainability needs to be
included as a new lean principle in the services and manufacturing
atmosphere. Therefore, the positive influence of lean philosophy on
the environment identified in the manufacturing literature further
encourages the exploration of these interfaces in the construction
sector. Hence, the following sections review the relationship be-
tween lean construction and environmental sustainability to eval-
uate how it can address the environmental concerns along with the
challenges of project performance.
2.2. Broad classification of the literature related to Lean and its
influence on the environment
Various studies have explored the advantages and disadvan-
tages of lean construction on environmental parameters in order to
establish the connections between the two domains. Hence, it can
be observed that the existing literature on lean construction and its
impact on the environment can be categorized into three major
fragments based on their main objectives. Fig. 2 is an emblematic
representation of this categorization along with a list of prominent
studies in each segment. A major portion of the existing literature
tries to establish the link between lean construction and sustain-
ability as a whole encompassing social, economic, and environ-
mental dimensions. These studies indicate the influence of lean on
economic sustainability in terms of higher productivity, increased
process efficiency, and reduced variability. Meanwhile, social sus-
tainability is recognized through reduced accidents and a cleaner
work environment, facilitated through lean construction. Similarly,
4 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
Fig. 2. Distribution of prominent literature on the interactions of lean and environ-
mental sustainability in the construction domain.
the environmental pillar is reported to be benefitted by lean con-
struction in the form of reduced emissions and minimum resource
waste in construction.
The second core portion of literature primarily focuses on
establishing that, lean construction leads to ‘greener construction
and that both lean and green concepts complement each other.
Authors of these studies have exclusively investigated the influence
of lean construction on reducing the harmful effects on the envi-
ronment and attempted to establish the parallelism between lean
and green construction. The third section is primarily motivated by
the observation that lean construction would be an ideal project
implementation mechanism for the smooth delivery of green or
sustainable facilities that are exclusively built with features to
reduce the impact on the environment. Such projects involve some
amount of complexities and additional costs due to specific addi-
tional requirements. Studies, therefore, claim that lean project de-
livery can ensure better control and flow in the delivery process of
such projects by addressing the intricacies and improving the ef-
ficiency of processes. Table 1 briefly summaries the prominent
studies within each of the mentioned categories as in Fig. 2.
The studies listed in Table 1 reinforce the understanding that
lean construction has a significant role in promoting environmental
sustainability. Several studies use the term sustainability in their
discussion in this domain. However, many of these studies imply
only to the environmental dimension and have ignored the social
and economic aspects. Whereas, some studies do address all the
dimensions of sustainability in an integrated manner. For instance,
Nahmens and Ikuma (2012) investigate the effect of lean con-
struction principles on sustainability in a modular home building
process. The study derives that considerable environmental
advantage can be obtained by implementing lean by reducing the
material waste by about 64 percent. Lean process mapping and
improvements were carried out on the activity of gypsum board
hangings, leading to significant material waste reduction that
indirectly benefits the environment. The study reports a reduction
in production hours by about 31 percent and improved safety post-
implementation of lean construction practices. Thus, it concludes
that lean has the potential to positively impact sustainability along
the economic, social, and environmental dimensions. A similar
observation is stated by Johnsen and Drevland (2016) by citing that
lean construction can positively affect some indicators of sustain-
ability. However, this study also reports that among the different
indicators the least influence of lean is on the environmental
indicators such as air pollution and CO2 emissions, as compared to
social and economic sustainability indicators such as sick leaves,
productivity, and quality. Similarly, another study demonstrates
that, lean can contribute beyond economic value in the form of
environmental and social benefits in construction projects (Bajjou
et al., 2017).
Meanwhile, few authors claim that lean philosophy, which is
popularly known as ‘doing more with less’ also implies, doing
processes with lower energy, lesser amount of raw materials and
less amount of toxic waste generation thereby, accounting for the
environmental perspective (Found, 2009). Likewise, a study by
Bidarianzadeh and Fortune (2002) shows that lean construction
reduces the quantum of wastes going to the landfills and hence,
saves the energy associated with its transport, thus leading to lesser
pollution. Meanwhile, Belayutham et al. (2017) found success in
improving the production variables (cost, time, quality) and
reducing some amount of water pollution for earthmoving opera-
tions through lean construction practices.
Even though most of these studies establish the notion that, lean
construction can influence the environmental aspects such as en-
ergy, pollution, waste generation, and resource use efficiency, a
detailed understanding is required on how the different di-
mensions of lean philosophy influence the environment. Hence,
different modes of interactions between lean construction and
environmental sustainability are appraised in the following sec-
tions, along with some unique interfaces. Such a sorted analysis will
enable an in-depth understanding of how lean construction aids in
addressing the environmental concerns of the construction in-
dustry and promoting sustainability. Such an understanding will
also enable formulating frameworks for the integration of lean
construction and sustainable construction. Therefore, in the
following sections, it is attempted to recapitulate the findings from
different studies across the dimensions of lean philosophy such as
lean principles, waste, tools, and other modes of lean and their
influence on various environmental aspects.
2.2.1. Principles of LEAN construction and their implication on
environmental sustainability
In general, lean construction follows the essence of lean pro-
duction, which is simplified by Womack and Jones (1996) into five
core elements, i.e., value, value stream, flow, pull, and perfection. It
follows the production management principles that are centered
around; elimination of wastes, meeting customer requirements,
focusing on value-generating activities and value streams, pursuing
perfection, ensuring reliability in project delivery and warranting
continuous improvement (Kaizen) of construction processes
(Salem et al., 2006). Lean construction aims to reduce waste, vari-
ability, cycle time and the number of steps in the processes;
improve flow, transparency, flexibility and control in the con-
struction processes; meet customer needs, benchmarking and
promoting continuous improvement (Koskela, 1992). The major
founding principles of lean construction and their environmental
implications are summarized in Table 2 below.
With an understanding that the principles of lean philosophy
possess ample potential to contribute to environmental well-being,
it is worth exploring the core principle of lean construction that
focuses on the identification and minimization of wastes. Hence,
the following section deciphers the environmental gains or losses
due to addressing different lean wastes in construction.
2.2.2. ‘Waste’ in the LEAN language and its consequences on the
environment
The primary point of confluence between lean construction and
the environment is the aspect of minimizing or eliminating waste
(Carneiro et al., 2012; Ghosh et al., 2014; Horman et al., 2004;
 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913 5

Table 1
Summary of literature related to lean and the environment in the construction domain.

Central Theme General approach Topic of Discussion/Contribution Reference

Lean and Green Concept of clean Proposes the extension of lean philosophy to address some aspects of environmental Degani and Cardoso (2002)
construction planning thereby promoting cleaner construction
Lean and Green Case study-based A conceptual connection between lean production and sustainable (green) development Horman et al. (2004)
approach is proposed in the study through case studies.
Lean and Green Case study-based Study shows the means of achieving sustainability in precast concrete factories through Peng and Pheng (2011)
approach the implementation of lean
Lean and Green Relationship matrix A relationship matrix is created based on the interaction between lean and Carneiro et al. (2012)
between lean and environmental performance based on sustainability guidelines for LEED certification
green
Lean and Green Case study-based Use of VSM as a tool for evaluating environmental and production performance during Rosenbaum et al. (2013)
approach the execution of construction projects.
Lean and Green Conceptual A framework combining lean, green and six-sigma for identifying and reducing wastes Banawi and Bilec (2014)
integration of lean in construction sites is proposed.
green and six-
sigma
Lean and Green Case study-based Using lean tools, significant material savings were achieved which were translated to Ghosh et al. (2014)
approach environmental savings.
Lean and Green Empirical Study Green construction practices such as the use of sustainable materials, building rating Maris and Parrish (2016)
systems, and waste reduction can be easily enabled through lean construction.
Lean and Green Case study-based Using discrete event simulation, the environmental and production variables are Golzarpoor et al. (2017)
approach simultaneously evaluated to understand the lean and green relationship.
Lean and Green Empirical Study Based on a questionnaire survey of the Nigerian construction, it concludes that lean ( Babalola et al., 2019a, 2019b)
construction practices can help in achieving environmental sustainability.
Lean and A Conceptual Discussion on the contribution of lean practices towards sustainable development Huovila and Koskela (1998)
Sustainability Framework
Lean and Qualitative The study identifies the commonalities and divergences between lean and sustainable Bidarianzadeh and Fortune (2002)
Sustainability assessment construction.
Lean and Conceptual The paper examined the feasibility of interactions between sustainability and lean and Bae and Kim (2008)
Sustainability relationship the impact of lean on the delivery and use of sustainable projects
Lean and Case study-based Implementation of Lean in modular homebuilding resulted in significant benefits across Nahmens and Ikuma (2012)
Sustainability approach the three dimensions of sustainability
Lean and Case study-based Lean tools and methods were applied on a construction site to understand the Vieira and Cachadinha (2011)
Sustainability approach relationship between lean and a metrics (sustainability construction metrics) of
sustainability.
Lean and Case study-based Lean and sustainability integration based on the scale of projects by identifying the Koranda et al. (2012)
Sustainability approach barriers in integration
Lean and Literature review Enhance sustainability in Malaysia’s construction industry through lean construction. Marhani et al. (2013)
Sustainability
Lean and Empirical Study Brings out the benefits of implementing lean construction in sustainable construction Ogunbiyi et al. (2014)
Sustainability through literature and questionnaire survey among construction professionals in the UK
Lean and Integration for Lean construction provides sustainable solutions for pavement construction by reducing Salem et al. (2014)
Sustainability pavement projects the social economic and environmental impact of work zones.
Lean and Literature review Developing a correlation matrix to verify the area of interaction between sustainability Khodeir and Othman (2018)
Sustainability and lean
Lean and Sustainable lean Strategically integrating lean and sustainable construction to enhance the performance Jamil and Fathi (2016)
Sustainability construction of projects
Lean and Lean wastes to The study recommends redefining the meaning of wastes in construction as defined by Arroyo and Gonzalez (2016)
Sustainability incorporate lean construction to include environmental and social parameters also.
economic and
social impacts
Lean and Case study-based Attempts to decipher the concurrencies between lean and sustainability and define Johnsen and Drevland (2016)
Sustainability approach indicators to express this relationship.
Lean and Literature review Theoretical Framework to integrate lean, sustainability and life cycle of buildings Besser Freitag et al. (2017)
Sustainability
Lean and Literature review Investigates empirical evidence to identify the synergies between lean and de Carvalho et al. (2017)
Sustainability sustainability
Lean and Case study-based Applied lean principles to earthwork operations to show that it leads to the Belayutham et al. (2017)
Sustainability approach improvement of environmental performance and production goals.
Lean for delivery of Prefabrication for Shows the benefits of the application of prefabrication and its potential impact on green Luo et al. (2005)
sustainable green design-build design-build projects.
projects projects
Lean for delivery of Case study-based Insights on how to deliver sustainable projects successfully and economically using lean Lapinski et al. (2006)
sustainable approach practices
projects
Lean for delivery of Lean and green Developing a structured modeling process based on lean construction to evaluate the Klotz et al. (2007)
sustainable modeling protocol delivery process of green projects.
projects
Lean for delivery of Conceptual Formulating a Green Lean approach by developing a model for applying sustainability Martínez et al. (2011)
sustainable integration using lean principles for the development of green facilities
projects
6 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913

Table 2
Lean Construction Principles and their environmental implications.

Lean Construction Principles Description Environmental Implications

Eliminating waste Core principle of lean philosophy and served as a background for identifying Minimizing non-value adding activities
similar kind of wastes in the construction environment and eliminating them. directly or indirectly helps in the
reduction of undesirable environmental
impacts as discussed in the previous
section.
Meeting customer needs Relates closely to the manufacturing environment where individual customers A study suggests that it is advantageous
can drive the cycle of production. The customer defines value, and it is what to consider the environment as an
contributes to the final output. additional customer (Lapinski et al.,
2006). The needs of the customer, i.e.,
the environment is defined in terms of
lower environmental impact,
maximum building performance, and a
favorable and healthy built
environment that are addressed
through lean practices.
Cycle time reduction Cycle-time reduction helps in saving costs due to speedy completion and It helps in the reduction of inventory or
ensures better flow and optimum usage of available resources. work in progress that are sources of
environmental wastes (Sacks et al.,
2009).
Continuity in the workflow To ensure proper control and flow in the construction processes, Kanban or pull Reducing variability and ensuring
philosophy should be used (Mao and Zhang, 2008). By pull-based approach, it is continuity in the workflow will lead to
intended that the work is planned based on the downstream demand in order to reduced environmental impacts in the
reduce the variability between different activities in a process. form of a reduction in resource use and
elimination of wastes.
Continuous improvement- Kaizen and It is necessary to ensure continuous improvement in reducing variability, Continuous improvement helps in
Kaikaku minimizing waste, and improving flow to change the conventional approach of improving most of the sustainability
the industry and hence is a central principle in lean construction as well. indicators (Vieira and Cachadinha,
Similarly, another lean feature Kaikaku represents kaizen events in which, 2011). Kaikaku has found success in
teams work towards improving the product and processes, reducing pollution and material wastes
(Cherrafi et al., 2016). US EPA’s Lean and
Environment Toolkit (2007) proposes
that these Kaizen events should also
incorporate Environment, Health, and
Safety (EHS) considerations to influence
the environment.

Huovila and Koskela, 1998; Johnsen and Drevland, 2016; Luo et al.,
2005; Nahmens, 2009). Traditionally waste in construction was
characterized as physical or material waste (Hosseini et al., 2012).
However, lean construction philosophy provides a broader mean-
ing to waste. Lean philosophy primarily classifies activities in a
process into value-adding and non-value adding activities or waste.
The former includes those activities that process material and in-
formation to produce the value desired by the customer. The latter
includes activities that do not add value to the final product but
consume resources. However, defining value in a construction
process is difficult since it involves many support activities that do
not add value but are necessary.
. The seven major wastes recognized by literature related to lean
philosophy, namely transportation, waiting, overproduction, de-
fects, inventory, motion, and extra-processing (Ohno, 1988;
Womack and Jones, 1996) are listed and briefly described in
Table 3 below in the specific context of construction. Defining
wastes according to the lean philosophy provided an insight into
the wastes embedded in construction such as rework that occurs
primarily due to inefficient collaboration; excessive transportation
and movements in the work zone due to poor logistics design;
undue waiting due to lack for resources or information and; extra-

Table 3
Wastes in the context of lean construction (Ballard and Howell, 1997; Hosseini et al., 2012; Serpell et al., 1995).

Wastes Description

Transportation Unnecessary or excessive transportation due to poor site logistics or inappropriate supply chain practices is considered as waste
because it leads to additional costs and increased variability in the construction project.
Waiting When there is much variability in the construction processes, it leads to flow problems that eventually lead to excessive waiting
for the following activities. Equipment and labor idling in construction belong to this category of waste. Other examples are
waiting for work-front, drawings, instructions, inspections, and resources.
Overproduction Producing earlier or more than what is expected can lead to misuse of materials and damage, which can indirectly lead to other
wastes of inventory, waiting and rework.
Defects Errors in drawings or construction lead to defective work that leads to rework. It is a major kind of waste because it results in
wasted productive hours, material, equipment, and other resources. Lack of planning and not anticipating the problems before
executing leads to a significant amount of rework.
Inventory Excessive inventory storage is a form of waste if it results in spoilage, theft, excessive capital costs, insufficient space and lack of
workspace availability in construction projects
Motion Unnecessary movements for the site activities due to poor layout planning leading to excessive lifting, bending, and shifting
could result in loss of productivity and injuries and hence categorized as a waste to be eliminated
Extra-processing Producing something which has features or standards not solicited for by the customer could lead to wastage of resources and
unwanted effort being spent. It leads to loss of profits as well as productivity and hence should be identified promptly.
 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
Table 4
Relationship between Lean wastes and Environment.
Relationship matrix between lean Air pollution or Particulate
wastes and environmental impacts matter
Transport Direct
Waiting
Overproduction Indirect
Defects
Inventory Indirect
Motion Direct
Extra-Processing Indirect
processing, over-production and excessive inventory due to
improper planning and control. Knowledge of these seven wastes
and the ability to identify them in the construction environment is
the first step in the lean implementation process.
Table 4 illustrates the relationship between different wastes
identified in lean construction literature and their relationship with
certain environmental parameters. Lean wastes of overproduction
and extra-processing directly result in excessive consumption of
energy and material waste and could lead to additional raw ma-
terial extraction due to the making of unwanted quantities or
components and indirectly polluting the environment (Vinodh
et al., 2011). Waiting waste could directly lead to higher emis-
sions if equipment such as concrete mixers and pile boring ma-
chines must wait due to the non-availability of work front for
operation (Francis and Mahalingam, 2012). The study also dem-
onstrates that concrete in transit mixers waiting to be poured and
structural elements waiting to be installed could deteriorate with
time leading to material waste.
Similarly, excessive transport or motion due to improper site
layout and logistics causes a direct impact on the environment in
the form of pollution and particulate matter. It leads to excessive
fuel consumption that indirectly results in excessive emissions (US
EPA, 2007). Rework leads to defective work that might need to be
abandoned or rectified. It causes direct material waste, emissions,
and energy consumption due to raw material loss and indirectly
leads to carbon emissions due to operations (Martínez et al., 2011).
Similarly, excessive inventory could lead to improper storage and
space constraints that could lead to material waste due to spillage
or deterioration indirectly causing pollution and excessive energy
expenditure and raw material loss (Fliedner, 2008). Therefore,
identifying wastes as defined by lean philosophy and making ef-
forts to minimize or eliminate them will have a positive influence
on the environment in the construction sector. Just as identifying
the lean wastes is a critical part of lean construction, minimizing
them and improving the workflow and process efficiency by opti-
mizing the process with the help of various lean tools is a crucial
aspect. Hence the following section deals with the application of
lean principles with the help of various tools that are developed in
the background of lean philosophy.
2.2.3. Lean construction tools and their impact on environmental
parameters
Even though lean construction originated from Toyota’s lean
philosophy, it differs in conception and implementation despite
having the same fundamental structure. Lean philosophy in con-
struction has evolved and adopted two different modes of appli-
cation (Babalola et al., 2019c; Koskela et al., 2002). These modes of
application of lean principles are termed as tools. One of these
approaches tries to apply the lean tools directly from the produc-
tion environment into construction (5S, Value Stream Mapping
(VSM), Just-in-Time (JIT)), while the other takes inspiration from
the original theory and has tried to formulate a new set of which are
7
Energy waste and extra raw GHG emissions due to operations Material waste generation
material extraction.
Indirect
Indirect Direct Indirect
Direct Direct
Direct Indirect Direct
Indirect Direct
Indirect
Direct Direct
exclusive for construction e.g., Last Planner System (LPS). The
following subsections describe the lean tools that were developed
within the lean philosophy and attempts to decipher their effects
on environmental sustainability. It should be noted that in this
subsection lean tools imply to those that directly evolved from the
principles of lean construction. It does not include other general
tools that have been adopted by lean practitioners to facilitate lean
thinking. Such tools are discussed in 2.2.4.2.
2.2.3.1. 5S. 5S that stands for “sort, straighten, standardize, shine,
sustain” (Salem et al., 2014) is a lean tool that is usually adopted as
the first step towards lean construction by most firms. Studies
reveal that 5S that primarily focuses on labeling and organizing
material storage and inventory management could help in quickly
identifying hazardous spills and leakages and in reducing air
pollution (Bae and Kim, 2008; Vieira and Cachadinha, 2011). Bae
and Kim (2008) report that implementing 5S facilitated in
securing credits in the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environ-
mental Design) rating system, which is a rating metric for green
buildings. It is because 5S ensured to provide an accident-free,
healthy and clean work environment for the workers. Similarly,
Salem et al. (2014) propose the implementation of 5S in the work
zones of pavement projects to minimize waste and pollution in
those areas, thus improving environmental sustainability. There-
fore, 5S is found to be inherently aligned with the principles of
environmental sustainability.
2.2.3.2. Just-in-time. The Just-in-Time (JIT) concept which is one of
the most implemented lean tools in construction (Babalola et al.,
2019c; Nahmens, 2009; Ogunbiyi et al., 2014) is closely related to
the pull principle of lean. It focuses on introducing the right re-
sources at the right time and maintaining optimum inventory
levels (Cherrafi et al., 2016). However, in the manufacturing sector,
the implementation of JIT is disputed in situations where envi-
ronmental concerns are raised. It is argued that frequent transits for
JIT delivery could increase emissions due to transportation
(Rothenberg et al., 2001). Hence, many plants in the US and Japan
have been willing to modify their JIT principles to reduce urban
congestion and pollution (Cusumano, 1994) to ensure environ-
mental sustainability.
However, in construction projects, it has been recognized that
JIT reduces damages and spoilage of materials that could occur due
to excessive inventory thus, reducing any form of energy use or
emissions that could occur otherwise (Koranda et al., 2012;
Ogunbiyi et al., 2014; Riley et al., 2005). Implementing JIT in con-
struction is justified in the context of environmental sustainability
only if the materials are locally available and procured from reliable
suppliers; and if the delivery distances are short. Therefore, it is
essential to evaluate the impact of JIT implementation in con-
struction sites based on the feasibility of JIT delivery and resulting
environmental impacts (Kim and Bae, 2010; Vieira and Cachadinha,
2011).
8 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
2.2.3.3. Prefabrication. Prefabrication, which is a critical compo-
nent of lean supply philosophy, involves preparation of the various
construction elements in a controlled off-site environment and
then transporting them to the construction projects to be assem-
bled. It enables a better supply chain of materials and easier recy-
cling and waste management, thus implying a positive influence on
the environment. Prefabrication or factory-based design will help
reduce material consumption and energy and water requirements,
thereby implying green benefits (Luo et al., 2005; Riley et al., 2005).
Peng and Pheng (2011) conducted a study on the impact of lean
philosophy in precast concrete factories to understand its effect on
emissions. The study reports that about 8.3 percent reduction of
carbon emissions due to lean implementation in the precast yard,
thus proving that environmental performance and production ef-
ficiency can be enhanced. In a similar study conducted by
Bhattacharjee et al. (2016) two different facades are compared in
which one uses prefabricated components, and the other follows
conventional construction. In terms of cost, quality and time, the
prefabricated section shows superior characteristics and reduces
the rework and hence contributing positively to the environment.
However, on the contrary, similar to JIT, prefabrication may lead to
more energy consumption and pollution if excessive transportation
is involved in delivering the precast elements (Kim and Bae, 2010;
Luo et al., 2005). In this context, the location of the prefabricating
yards is a defining aspect to determine environmental impacts.
2.2.3.4. Value Stream Mapping (VSM). Values stream mapping
(VSM) is another popular visual tool of lean that helps in mapping
the process flows by incorporating time and information flows and
providing a visual representation of the entire process. VSM helps
in identifying various wastes embedded in the value stream and
attempts to eliminate them (Rother and Shook, 2003). It is a simple
pen and paper tool that is highly flexible, easy to adapt, and pro-
vides both quantitative and qualitative analyses of processes (Seth
et al., 2017). The first step involves representing the existing pro-
cess as it occurs in a current state map. This record is then carefully
studied to isolate the wastes of lean if present. It is then analyzed to
identify the areas of improvement and propose suggestions. Then, a
future state map is developed, which represents the ideal but
practical scenario of the process after optimizing it (Rosenbaum
et al., 2013).
In the study by Rosenbaum et al. (2013), VSM is used to optimize
the construction of various structural elements for a medical center
in Chile. This VSM is embedded with several environmental in-
dicators to identify various material wastes (steel, concrete) and
energy wastes (fuel) in the current state maps apart from the usual
time indicators (lead time, changeover time, cycle time). This
simplified representation enabled easy identification of the bot-
tlenecks in the process. The future state maps produced, recom-
mended measures for the reduction of waste and proper allocation
of resources with due consideration to the environment. It should
thus be understood that VSM is a potential visual tool for identi-
fying different lean wastes and that it can be extended to identify
environmental impacts as well.
Owing to the flexibility and simplicity of VSM, it has evolved into
a robust lean tool that could assist in achieving environmental
sustainability. Hence, several modified versions of VSM in both
manufacturing and construction environment have evolved.
Faulkner and Badurdeen (2014) propose a modified VSM called Sus-
VSM or Sustainable-VSM for incorporating environmental and so-
cietal performance-related parameters to the original VSM. This
new form of VSM visually highlights the flow and movement of the
parameters impacting sustainability in a process. Such a VSM could
incorporate parameters such as water, energy, and emissions to
quantify their flows in the entire process and identify potential
sources of environmental waste.
Similarly, Vinodh et al. (2011) incorporated additional attributes
such as ‘Environment Health Safety’ (EHS) data, water usage, ma-
terial usage, and an Eco-Function Matrix into VSM. The lean and
environment toolkit (US EPA, 2007) proposes a similar VSM, where
environmentally sensitive actions are to be represented by a star-
burst. It also incorporates a materials line along with the timeline of
the traditional VSM to map the material inflow to evaluate the
material components that add value to the customer and to track
material waste.
VSM has been used popularly in construction as a visual tool to
visualize the process and improve it by eliminating the different
lean wastes. For the purpose of recognizing environmental impacts
in the construction processes, the conventional VSM has been
incorporated with additional information apart from time related
parameters (Bae and Kim, 2008; Banawi and Bilec, 2014; Francis
and Mahalingam, 2012; Klotz et al., 2007; Lapinski et al., 2006;
Ogunbiyi et al., 2014; Vieira and Cachadinha, 2011). Such an
extension of VSM has been used to design actions to eliminate or
control environmental impacts due to various construction pro-
cesses. VSM is, therefore, found to be a useful tool to quantify
environmental impacts due to construction processes and propose
mitigation measures.
2.2.3.5. Last Planner System (LPS). The Last Planner System (LPS) is
a prominent lean tool developed by the construction industry
taking insights from the original lean production philosophy. LPS is
a collaborative planning scheme that focuses on ensuring that, all
the preconditions and constraints involved in a construction pro-
cess are considered in the initial phases of planning so that, the
activities could be completed without disruption and on schedule
(Ballard and Howell, 2003). Although LPS is not a tool with direct
implications on the environment, it has an indirect influence on
projects involving sustainable or green features (Valente et al.,
2013). The study shows that implementation of LPS eases the de-
livery of sustainable facilities that involve several additional re-
quirements due to better coordination in the execution. LPS enables
the management of new constraints and creates flexibility to
incorporate modifications easily.
Fig. 3. A snapshot of lean elements of each tool and their relationship with the
environment.
 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
According to Maris and Parrish (2016), the most prominent
connection between lean and green construction is cooperation
and accountability; and an effective way to enable it is through LPS.
LPS also assists in making better strategic decisions in terms of
sustainability. Salem et al. (2014) demonstrate that the delivery of
pavement projects is accelerated, and the emissions caused due to
the work zones are reduced by implementing LPS. The work zones
of pavement projects lead to highly unstable traffic, which further
leads to environmental pollution. The study shows that by
following LPS principles, this traffic instability is reduced because of
better coordination of the activities. In another study, two similar
projects (in which one of them implemented LPS) are compared in
terms of the difference in CO2 emissions (Ghosh et al., 2014). The
project that implemented LPS could identify the constraints be-
forehand and minimize material and labor wastage that could have
resulted due to rework. It resulted in a reduction of material waste
by 6 percent and emissions of about 7.5 MT CO2 equivalent in a
single component process itself, which is a significant improve-
ment. In a different study by Ladhad and Parrish (2013), LPS is
implemented for the retrofitting and delivery of a net-zero energy
office in Arizona. LPS contributed to improving the collaborative
planning and ensuring that, the entire team’s goal orients towards
achieving the net zero energy building that would produce as much
as the energy it would consume. These observations indicate that
even though inherently LPS does not include any distinct envi-
ronmentally centered objectives, they circuitously influence the
environmental parameters.
It is thus evident from various studies that, lean principles and
tools have underlying repercussions on the environment which are
quantifiable in some manner. A snapshot of the different lean tools
discussed above and their relationship with the parameters of
environment is summarized in Fig. 3 below. This understanding
motivates to explore the influence of lean on the environment in
broader facets to extend its potential beyond the existing strengths
of waste elimination and value enhancement in construction.
Therefore, the following section explores the other modes through
which the relationship between lean and environmental sustain-
ability can be observed apart from lean principles, wastes, and
tools.
2.2.4. Other modes of interaction between LEAN and the
environment
2.2.4.1. Lean construction in green project delivery. Apart from the
interactions of lean wastes, tools, and principles with environ-
mental aspects, literature also proposes other modes through
which lean construction could indirectly influence the environ-
ment such as by easing the delivery of green or sustainable build-
ings. Horman et al. (2006) and Lapinski et al. (2006) suggest that by
implementing lean construction practices, the overall delivery
performance of green buildings could be improved. On these
grounds, it is suggested that lean could be implemented as a control
mechanism for the delivery of sustainable projects, as it eliminates
waste and pursues perfection (Bidarianzadeh and Fortune, 2002).
Lapinski et al. (2006) empirically experimented this theory through
the implementation of lean in the delivery of a capital facility for
Toyota sales. The case study establishes that, by choosing the right
project delivery mechanism such as lean construction, the cost of
sustainable projects can be controlled, and they can be delivered
with higher efficiency.
Understanding the cost-saving potential of lean construction
philosophy, Klotz et al. (2007) proposed a lean and green protocol
to model the delivery process of green buildings. This framework
conceptually establishes the sustainable outcomes associated with
process improvements and waste minimization due to lean project
delivery approach. On similar lines, Carneiro et al. (2012) developed
9
a correlation matrix between lean construction principles and the
LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating
system for new construction. Even though conceptually both are
different, the study shows that, if applied simultaneously, both
LEED and lean construction can contribute to optimize resources
and add value to the customer and enhance the environmental
performance of construction projects. A similar study conducted by
Castro-Lacouture et al. (2008) proposes that lean methods can
assist in optimizing the LEED credits.
2.2.4.2. Lean construction in combination with BIM (Building Infor-
mation Modeling), six-sigma and DES (discrete event simulation) to
enhance environmental performance. Apart from studies that
focused on green buildings or sustainable facilities and lean
implementation, few studies also introduced additional elements
or tools such as Building Information Modeling (BIM), six-sigma
and Discrete Event Simulation (DES), into the lean and environ-
mental sustainability frontiers. Such tools have been adopted from
other individual domains to facilitate the implementation of lean
practices. It can be found that these adopted tools possess synergies
with environmental sustainability as well. For example, few studies
propose BIM as a suitable platform and enabler for the integration
of lean and green concepts (Ahuja et al., 2017; Maltese et al., 2017),
Enache-Pommer et al. (2010) proposes a conceptual model by
combining the concepts of lean, green construction, and BIM to
address the challenges associated with the delivery of healthcare
projects. The study emphasizes on the integration of these concepts
throughout the project and specifically during the initial design
phases to ensure fast and efficient delivery of healthcare projects.
Similarly, Ahuja et al. (2017), confirms with the help of sixteen case
scenarios that BIM can assist in deriving lean and green results in
construction projects. These studies suggest that BIM provides an
ideal platform for the integration of lean and green construction.
Furthermore, Banawi and Bilec (2014) conducted a study to
develop a framework to integrate lean, environmental sustain-
ability, and six-sigma. The study focused on establishing that, by
incorporating project management tools such as lean and six-
sigma, sustainability can be easily integrated and achieved in
construction. The lean tool of VSM is used to understand the wastes
and value in the process of a pile cap construction. Simultaneously,
a life cycle assessment (LCA) is done for the activity to understand
the impact it caused on the environment. Following this, the six-
sigma approach is taken through cause and effect diagrams and
Pareto charts. This helps in adopting measures to mitigate and
control the wasteful activities in the processes. Hence, the study
concludes that such a framework incorporating lean, green, and
six-sigma can be used by project teams to evaluate and improve
their processes to achieve better efficiency with lower environ-
mental impact.
Similarly, in another study by Erdil et al. (2018), a model
framework capable of incorporating sustainability into projects
implementing lean and six-sigma is developed and demonstrated
with examples from manufacturing and construction. It introduces
sustainability aspects into lean, and six sigma’s DMAIC (Define,
Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) cycle to promote im-
provements in projects across all the dimensions of sustainability.
In another study, DES is used in quantifying environmental impacts
in terms of CO2 emissions for operations involved in road projects
(Golzarpoor et al., 2017). By varying the production parameters of
road construction operations through lean implementation, the
subsequent environmental impact is quantified. It helps in
choosing the most optimum model in terms of production as well
as environmental aspects for road construction.
It can be thus understood that the studies investigating the
relationship between lean construction and environmental
10 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
Table 5
Phases of LPDS and salient features.
LPDS Phases Salient Features (Koskela et al., 2002)
Project Definition
Includes namely three elements
o Generating and associating stakeholders and
customer needs;
o The conception of design;
o Defining design standards

Unlike traditional project delivery in which in the design
phase, only the architect communicates with the client;
in LPDS, all stakeholders are brought on board in the early
stages of the project definition itself
Lean Design
In the phase of lean design, the project and process design
are formulated, and the team pursues opportunities to
enhance value unlike traditional design, where a single
entity usually finalizes the decisions and design without
due consideration to other stakeholder interests.

In lean design, several alternatives are explored with
enough flexibility, to ascertain value at all levels of
design with the clear communication and involvement of
different stakeholders.

Lean Design also accounts for all the stages of the project
lifecycle, unlike traditional design.
Lean Assembly
After completion of the lean design phase, the details are
sent forward for fabrication and delivery.

Lean supply primarily focuses on the supply chain for lean
assembly. Prefabrication is an essential component of this
phase.

Lean assembly refers to the final execution, leading to the
product desired by the customer.
Use Phase The last phase of use includes the commissioning,
operation, and maintenance, where the facility is handed
over from the delivery team to the facilities management
team
sustainability are expanding into broader horizons. The vast
amount of research available since the year 2012 in this domain
reinforces the notion that lean construction complements envi-
ronmental sustainability. Therefore, in the following sections, the
effect of Lean Project Delivery System (LPDS) on environmental
parameters and the various interfaces between lean construction
practices and environmental aspects across different phases of the
lifecycle of a project is reviewed.
2.2.4.3. The lean project delivery system (LPDS). Similar to a pro-
ject’s lifecycle phases namely pre-construction, design, procure-
ment, and construction; the phases of Lean Project Delivery System
(LPDS) are outlined as project definition, lean design, lean supply,
lean assembly, and use phase. The different stages of LPDS and the
salient features of each phase are elucidated in Table 5 below along
with the linkages of each stage with the environment.
The LPDS provides insights into the need for lean construction
concepts to be a part of a project from the earliest stages and the
necessity of involvement of all the stakeholders at the beginning
itself from project planning through construction. Table 5 also de-
scribes the inherent environmental advantage of employing LPDS
for projects. However, the presence and influence of lean con-
struction is limited to the planning, design and construction phase
of a project primarily because it originated in a production-based
environment. Lean related literature in the use phase and the
deconstruction phases of a project’s life cycle is almost sparse
(Besser Freitag et al., 2017). Therefore, it offers an opportunity to
explore the possibility of extending lean philosophy into these
phases and theoretically exploring its potential in reducing envi-
ronmental impacts. The following section, therefore, aims to
explore the literature that highlights the expansion of the bound-
aries of lean construction into areas that have not been explored
customarily.
Environmental linkages
‘Environment’ can be introduced as a customer and hence it becomes
necessary to define value in terms of the ‘environment’ (Horman et al., 2004;
Lapinski et al., 2006; Ofori, 1992; Peng and Pheng, 2011). Hence, measures to
reduce the environmental impact by improving energy efficiency, reducing
waste and pollution are principal value determining elements in the project
definition stage
Integrated design a component of lean design has a prominent role in
sustainable facilities (Lapinski et al., 2006; Riley et al., 2005). Providing
significant importance to reducing energy consumption in the operation phase
is a critical aspect in design. Design for maintainability (DFM) is a design
approach focused on the reliability and easy maintainability of the built
facilities, by prioritizing the operation and maintenance phase (Dombrowski
et al., 2014), DFM is a be part of the lean design process.
The aspects of prefabrication are already discussed previously under the
section of lean tools. Hence, the linkage between prefabrication and
environmental aspects are discussed before.
Lean construction tools are primarily implemented during the construction
phase of a project. However, during the use and maintenance phase, the
influence of lean is not prominently recognized. Therefore, the environmental
advantages observed during the construction phase is not found to extend into
the use phase
3. Introducing energy waste under the ambit of Lean
construction
Energy is a critical resource as far as buildings are concerned.
Energy is consumed throughout the lifecycle of a building, and a
major share of energy consumption is during the building use
phase. The construction sector and the buildings account for about
36% of the global energy thereby resulting in 39% of CO2 emissions
resulting from energy use (UN Environment and International
Energy Agency, 2017). Hence, ensuring energy efficiency is an
important component of addressing environmental sustainability.
Though several measures are proposed for the same, the aspect of
identifying and preventing energy waste is not prominently
discussed.
Lean philosophy that has established itself as an important
practice in the construction phase inherently possesses the char-
acteristics to tackle energy waste as well. Traditionally, lean does
not directly identify opportunities for energy efficiency, but it is
instead, a happenstance of activities focused on eliminating wastes
and improving flow and process time. Arroyo and Gonzalez (2016)
suggest that the definition of waste under the frontier of lean
should be rethought to incorporate social and environmental im-
pacts also. Hence, it is found worthwhile to explore the potential of
lean practices in the context of tackling energy waste during the
building operation phase.
Evidence from the manufacturing environment shows that en-
ergy is recognized as a vital and costly input to the value stream and
hence, unnecessary energy usage is to be considered as a waste
(Sciortino et al., 2009). The study suggests that energy waste could
be identified by lean philosophy as the ninth waste, considering its
potential to save money and reduce harmful emissions. It also af-
firms that energy and environmental wastes are already embedded
in the concept of lean wastes. The US EPA (2013) developed a toolkit
 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
based on this called the ‘Lean Energy Climate’ toolkit. This toolkit is
based on lean principles and is designed for lean practitioners in
the manufacturing environment to assist in achieving energy effi-
ciency, reduction in environmental impact, and cost savings due to
energy savings. The toolkit describes the energy wastes associated
with the seven wastes identified by Ohno (1988) in the TPS, as
shown in Table 6. The toolkit encourages users to identify areas to
improve energy efficiency by implementing lean practices. For this
purpose, it proposes to organize energy treasure hunts for assess-
ment of opportunities to save energy in the manufacturing plants.
Further, it is recommended to use six-sigma for statistical analysis
to identify the causes of energy waste, emissions, and pollution in
the plants. The toolkit comprehensively covers the principles of
lean that can be suitably customized to use it for energy efficiency
and hence, climate protection and increased environmental per-
formance. The lean and energy toolkit motivates to look beyond
economic efficiency of lean initiatives and extend it to achieve
improved energy efficiency in the manufacturing and services
sector.
On similar lines, in the operation phase of the building’s life
cycle, it is observed that the level of energy efficiency planned for is
not accomplished (Shrubsole et al., 2019). There is a considerable
amount of energy wastage due to improper design, construction,
and maintenance of buildings. The researchers of the University of
Dayton propose a concept of ‘lean energy’ that propagates the
notion that energy wastage can be viewed under the purview of
lean (Seryak and Kissock, 2005). Their study focused on deriving
the optimum state of energy consumption with as little waste as
possible. Based on this concept, a methodology called ‘lean energy
analysis’ (LEA), adopts regression analysis to model the building
energy use is developed. The method facilitates in identifying
useful energy and reducing energy waste by exploring energy-
saving avenues. It was named LEA because it utilized a similar
principle as lean philosophy i.e., to eliminate energy use, which is
not adding value to the process. However, it should be noted that
this method is not derived from TPS but holds synergy with the
principles of lean philosophy. On similar lines, Donnelly et al. (2013)
propose the use of Lean Energy Analysis (LEAN), to identify energy
saving options and recommend the appropriate measures to assess
and predict the energy trends in buildings. The tool can be used to
benchmark energy consumption across a selected range of build-
ings to identify the projects with the highest energy performance.
Therefore, lean construction philosophy has the characteristics to
expand into the building use phase as a tool for eliminating energy
waste.
4. Discussions and future implications
The previous sections indicated that there exists an undeniable
linkage between lean construction and the environmental sus-
tainability. Further, it discussed different ways of looking into the
Table 6
Energy waste hidden in Lean wastes.
Waste Type Energy Use
Overproduction Excessive energy consumed in equipment operation to make unwanted products.
Inventory Excess energy consumed to heat/cool and light storage spaces
Transportation and Energy consumed for excessive transport. More space required for movement leading to higher energy consumption for space lighting and
Motion ventilation
Defects Energy used in producing defective products. Increased energy use for reprocessing and more space consumed for extra repair and rework leading to
more lighting and heating/cooling energy consumption
Over Processing Unnecessary processing often leads to unwanted energy consumption.
Waiting During production downtime, energy is wasted unnecessarily for heating, cooling, and lighting
Source US EPA-Lean, Energy and Climate Toolkit (US EPA, 2013).
11
benefits reaped through lean construction in the form of identi-
fying wastes, following lean principles, implementing lean tools or
executing LPDS in entirety towards environmental sustainability.
With a deeper understanding of the integration between lean
construction and environmental sustainability, it becomes neces-
sary to explore the future outlook of how this relationship would
influence the construction industry. According to Ballard and
Howell (1997), the development of the lean theory is important
for the development of a suitable policy environment for lean. A
strong need for regulatory mechanism and governance is necessi-
tated for the propagation of any new concept. However, environ-
mental sustainability seems to have a higher edge on the policy
level because it is increasingly becoming part of government pol-
icies and regulations (Ogunbiyi et al., 2014). Therefore, the under-
standing that lean construction practices could facilitate
sustainability paves the way for promoting the same through
adequate policies. Policies related to environmental sustainability
are bound to drive lean implementation in construction sites owing
to the positive implications of integrating lean construction and
sustainability. Therefore, the future of lean construction is depen-
dent on the policy structure associated with environmental con-
servation and overall sustainability.
However, if we examine standalone policies for lean imple-
mentation, it is difficult to find a sectoral level policy for lean
implementation in construction, worldwide. Even though, the ex-
istence of policies that mandate lean implementation is in the
nascent stage of development, advancements towards such policy
formulation and implementation can be found in contributory
realms such as BIM. For example, Denmark initiated the mandatory
use of BIM since 2007 for all the government projects. Similarly, UK
proposed mandatory BIM requirements since 2016 (Kurul et al.,
2013). Additionally, independent policies for lean implementation
could be initiated at an organization level by foreseeing revenue
growth and an increase in productivity. However, it is found to be
challenging according to a study by Picchi and Granja. (2004). Lean
construction should gradually evolve into an organizational culture
rather than just a method or practice. It should also be driven by the
organization’s vision of continuous improvement and functioning
in an environmentally responsible manner. Similarly, organizations
such as the lean construction institute and the IGLC have laid the
foundation for encouraging research and promoting industry
outreach to help various construction firms to practice lean con-
struction (Ballard and Howell, 2003). These organizations could
also lead the way to develop strong policy frameworks for imple-
mentation of lean construction.
Apart from a strong policy environment, it is essential to un-
derstand and quantify the environmental benefits due to lean
construction and vice versa. Though few empirical studies have
attempted to quantify these parameters, it has failed to holistically
evaluate the relationship and interdependencies between the pa-
rameters of lean construction and that of environmental
12 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
sustainability. Hence, future work needs to be focused on the use of
new computational modeling and simulation techniques for un-
derstanding the overall interaction between lean construction and
sustainability across all dimensions. Few studies have provided
insights into this by propagating the use of system dynamics
modeling approach for the same. Accordingly, Solaimani and
Sedighi (2019) propose the use of causal loop diagrams found in
system dynamics modeling to understand the interdependencies
between lean construction and sustainable construction, Further,
Francis and Thomas (2019) recommended a conceptual framework
for lean and sustainability integration based on systems thinking to
enable a better quantification of the benefits of both concepts.
Therefore, by using computational models and simulation, the
benefits of integrating lean construction and sustainability could be
forecasted enabling stakeholders to make better decisions
regarding new evolving practices.
In another recent study the importance of giving due attention
to the social dimension of sustainability along with economic and
environmental parameters while proposing lean implementation is
highlighted (Carvajal-Arango et al., 2019). The study reports that
the social dimension of sustainability lacks minimal attention on
the implementation of lean construction. It implies that the triple
bottom line approach that encompasses the social, economic and
environmental dimensions of sustainability should be focused
upon in a collective manner to achieve better efficiency. Future
research should direct ample efforts on the social dimension in the
context of lean implementation since it could lead to improved
safety and better working conditions in construction sites (Bae and
Kim, 2008; Nahmens and Ikuma, 2012).
Further, as discussed in section 3, extending the lean philosophy
to address energy waste and investigating the concept of ‘lean
energy’ to monitor the wastage of building operational energy are
potential areas where future work could be directed. The concept of
lean energy is promising but requires a robust research base to be
developed for it to be accepted as a recognized energy modeling
practice for buildings. Lean tools such as VSM can be employed to
identify energy waste in buildings. It can help in identifying areas of
improving energy efficiency and eventually cost-saving and envi-
ronmental benefits. By introducing energy waste under the ambit
of lean philosophy, its influence can be extended into the building
use phase which is a significant contributor to the GHG emissions
owing to the highest energy consumption occurring in this phase.
A conceptual representation of the expansion of lean construc-
tion as a tool to identify the various sources of energy waste in
buildings is shown in Fig. 4 below. It shows the different sources
through which energy wastage could occur in buildings. For
existing buildings, such a tool should estimate the current energy
consumption and areas of possible energy savings. For new con-
structions, energy efficiency should be given due importance in the
design phase itself, and the lean principles should be applied
Fig. 4. Various sources of energy waste in buildings that the lean energy tool could
identify.
through digital platforms to evaluate and achieve energy efficiency.
Ideally, the lean tool should model the complete building energy
use pattern and help in tracking down the points of energy loss
from the buildings and propose improvements. Therefore, future
research can be directed in developing a lean-based energy
modeling tool or toolkits such as those developed by the US EPA for
the building sector.
As Koskela et al. (2002) states, lean is majorly considered as
‘work-in-progress’, similarly, the relationship between lean and
environmental sustainability will keep evolving and improving.
Lean challenges conventional construction thinking and provides a
strong theoretical foundation for solutions to solve the problems of
the industry, even those that are related to the environment. This
review brings out the interaction between lean and environment
through the different dimensions of lean construction such as
principles, wastes and tools. The other modes reviewed in the study
include the influence of lean construction practices in the delivery
of green or sustainable facilities and the combination of lean con-
struction with BIM, DES and six-sigma to promote greener con-
struction. Further, the essence of LPDS and its inherent potential to
address environmental concerns is reviewed. The unique contri-
bution of the study is the attempt made to discuss the existing
domain knowledge to expand the horizons of lean construction
philosophy into the building use phase. Incorporating energy waste
into the boundaries of lean philosophy will enhance its overall
environmental contribution. The future research should focus on
expanding the existing horizons of lean construction to contribute
effectively to sustainable development.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
Abreu, M.F., Alves, A.C., Moreira, F., 2017. Lean-Green models for eco-efficient and
sustainable production. Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.016.
Ahuja, R., Sawhney, A., Arif, M., 2017. Driving lean and green project outcomes using
BIM: a qualitative comparative analysis. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 6, 69e80.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2016.10.006.
Arroyo, P., Gonzalez, V., 2016. Rethinking waste definition to account for environ-
mental and social impacts. In: IGLC 2016 - 24th Annu. Conf. Int. Gr. Lean Constr,
pp. 20e22.
Babalola, Oluwatosin, Ibem, E.O., Ezema, I.C., 2019c. Implementation of lean prac-
tices in the construction industry: a systematic review. Build. Environ. 148,
34e43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.10.051.
Babalola, O., Ibem, E.O., Ezema, I.C., 2019a. Lean construction: an approach to
achieving sustainable built environment in Nigeria. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1299
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1299/1/012007.
Babalola, O., Ibem, E.O., Ezema, I.C., Olanipekun, A.O., 2019b. Assessment of the role
of lean construction practices in environmental sustainability. J. Phys. Conf. Ser.
1299 https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1299/1/012002.
Bae, J.W., Kim, Y.W., 2008. Sustainable value on construction projects and lean
construction. J. Green Build. 3, 155e167. https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.3.1.156.
Bajjou, M.S., Chafi, A., Ennadi, A., El Hammoumi, M., 2017. The practical relation-
ships between lean construction tools and sustainable development: a litera-
ture review. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. Rev. 10, 170e177. https://doi.org/10.25103/
jestr.104.20.
Ballard, G., Howell, G., 2003. Lean project management. Build. Res. Inf. 31, 119e133.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210301997.
Ballard, G., Howell, G., 1997. Lean Construction, Lean Construction. Taylor & Francis,
Abingdon, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203345825.
Banawi, A., Bilec, M.M., 2014. A framework to improve construction processes:
integrating lean, green and six sigma. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 14, 45e55. https://
doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2013.875266.
Belayutham, S., Gonza lez, V.A., Yiu, T.W., 2017. Lean-based clean earthworks oper-
ation. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.060.
Besser Freitag, A.E., Anholon, R., Martins de Oliveira, V., Vivanco Larrain, T., 2017.
Integration of concepts about lean construction, sustainability and life cycle of
buildings: a literature review. Brazilian J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 14, 486. https://
doi.org/10.14488/bjopm.2017.v14.n4.a5.
 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
Bhattacharjee, S., Pishdad-Bozorgi, P., Ganapathy, R., 2016. Adoption of pre-
fabrication in construction to achieve sustainability goals: an empirical study.
In: Proc of the Construction Research Congress, pp. 1050e1060. https://doi.org/
10.1061/9780784479827.106.
Bidarianzadeh, G.R., Fortune, C.J., 2002. Lean thinking and the delivery of sustain-
able construction projects. Assoc. Res. Constr. Manag. 2, 2e4.
Carneiro, S.B.M., Campos, I.B., De Oliveira, D.M., Neto, J.P.B., 2012. LEAN and green: a
relationship matrix. In: IGLC 2012 - 20th Conf. Int. Gr. Lean Constr.
Carvajal-Arango, D., Bahamo n-Jaramillo, S., Aristizabal-Monsalve, P., V asquez-
Herna ndez, A., Botero, L.F.B., 2019. Relationships between lean and sustainable
construction: positive impacts of lean practices over sustainability during
construction phase. J. Clean. Prod. 234, 1322e1337. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2019.05.216.
Castro-Lacouture, D., Ospina-Alvarado, A.M., Roper, K.O., 2008. AECþPþF integra-
tion with green project delivery and lean focus. J. Green Build. https://doi.org/
10.3992/jgb.3.4.154.
Cherrafi, A., Elfezazi, S., Chiarini, A., Mokhlis, A., Benhida, K., 2016. The integration of
lean manufacturing, Six Sigma and sustainability: a literature review and future
research directions for developing a specific model. J. Clean. Prod. 139,
828e846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.101.
Cib, Unep-Ietc, 2002. Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing
Countries, a Discussion Document, WSSD edition. CSIR Building and
Construction.
Cusumano, M., 1994. The limits of" Lean. Sloan Manage. Rev. 35, 27.
de Carvalho, A.C.V., Granja, A.D., da Silva, V.G., 2017. A systematic literature review
on integrative lean and sustainability synergies over a building’s lifecycle.
Sustain 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071156.
Degani, C.M., Cardoso, F.F., 2002. Environmental performance and lean construction
concepts: can we talk about a clean construction?. In: Proc. 27th Annual Con-
ference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), pp. 1e13.
Dhingra, R., Kress, R., Upreti, G., 2014. Does lean mean green? J. Clean. Prod. 85, 1e7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.032.
Dombrowski, U., Schmidt, S., Schmidtchen, K., 2014. Analysis and integration of
design for X approaches in lean design as basis for a lifecycle optimized product
design. Procedia CIRP 15, 385e390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.06.023.
Donnelly, M., Krummer, J., Drees, K., 2013. LEAN Energy Analysis: Using Regression
Analysis to Assess Building Energy Performance (Washington, DC Johnson
Control).
Elsevier, 2016. Scopus. https://www.scopus.com/.SCOPUS.
Enache-Pommer, E., Horman, M.J., Messner, J.I., Riley, D., 2010. A unified process
approach to healthcare project delivery: synergies between greening strategies,
lean principles and BIM. In: Proc of the Construction Research Congress,
pp. 1376e1405. https://doi.org/10.1061/41109(373)138.
Erdil, N.O., Aktas, C.B., Arani, O.M., 2018. Embedding sustainability in lean six sigma
efforts. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.048.
Faulkner, W., Badurdeen, F., 2014. Sustainable value stream mapping (Sus-VSM):
methodology to visualize and assess manufacturing sustainability performance.
J. Clean. Prod. 85, 8e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.042.
Fliedner, G., 2008. Sustainability: a new Lean principle. In: Proc. 39th Annu. Meet.
Decis. Sci. Inst., pp. 3321e3326.
Florida, R., 1996. Lean and green: the move to environmentally conscious
manufacturing. Calif. Manag. Rev. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165877.
Found, P., 2009. Lean and low environmental impact manufacturing. In: POMS 20th
Annual Conference. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
Francis, A., Mahalingam, A., 2012. The impact of the lean technique of value stream
mapping in Indian construction sites on reducing carbon emissions. NICMAR-J.
Constr. Manag. XXVII, 5e19.
Francis, A., Thomas, A., 2019. Integrating lean construction and sustainability via a
system dynamics framework. In: Proc. 27th Annual Conference of the Inter-
national Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), pp. 1187e1196. https://doi.org/
10.24928/2019/0187.
Ghosh, S., Bhattacharjee, S., Pishdad-Bozorgi, P., Ganapathy, R., 2014. A case study to
examine environmental benefits of lean construction. In: Proc. 22nd Annual
Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), 1,
pp. 133e144.
Global_Construction, 2015. A Global Forecast for the Construction Industry to 2030.
Oxford Econ. Glob. Constr. Perspect, London.
Golzarpoor, H., Gonza lez, V., Shahbazpour, M., O’Sullivan, M., 2017. An input-output
simulation model for assessing production and environmental waste in con-
struction. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.010.
Horman, M.J., Riley, D., Lapinski, A.R., Korkmaz, S., Pulaski, M.H., Magent, C.S.,
Luo, Y., Harding, N., Dahl, P.K., 2006. Delivering green buildings: process im-
provements for sustainable construction. J. Green Build. 1, 123e140. https://
doi.org/10.3992/jgb.1.1.123.
Horman, M.J., Riley, D.R., Pulaski, M.H., Leyenberger, C., 2004. Lean and green:
integrating sustainability and lean construction. In: CIB World Building
Congress. International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and
construction, pp. 2e7.
Horvath, A., 2004. Construction materials and the environment. Annu. Rev. Environ.
Resour. 29, 181e204. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.29.062403.102215.
Hosseini, S.A.A., Nikakhtar, A., Wong, K.Y., Zavichi, A., 2012. Implementing lean
construction theory into construction processes’ waste management. In: Proc.
Of the International Conference on Sustainable Design and Construction 2011.
https://doi.org/10.1061/41204(426)52.
Huovila, P., Koskela, L., 1998. Contribution of the principles of lean construction to
13
meet the challenges of. Sustain. Dev. 13e15.
Hussin, J.M., Abdul Rahman, I., Memon, A.H., 2013. The way forward in sustainable
construction: issues and challenges. Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. https://doi.org/
10.11591/ijaas.v2i1.1321.
J. Kibert, C., 2013. Sustainable development and sustainable construction. In: Sus-
tainable Construction - Green Building Design and Delivery. Wiley and Sons.
Jamil, A.H.A., Fathi, M.S., 2016. The integration of lean construction and sustainable
construction: a stakeholder perspective in analyzing sustainable lean con-
struction strategies in Malaysia. Procedia Comput. Sci. 100, 634e643. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.205.
Johnsen, C.A., Drevland, F., 2016. Lean and sustainability: three pillar thinking in the
production process. In: Proc. 24th Annual Conference of the International
Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), pp. 23e32.
Khodeir, L.M., Othman, R., 2018. Examining the interaction between lean and sus-
tainability principles in the management process of AEC industry. Ain Shams
Eng. J. 9, 1627e1634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2016.12.005.
Kim, Y.W., Bae, J., 2010. Assessing the environmental impacts of a lean supply
system: case study of high-rise condominium construction in Korea. J. Archit.
Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000024.
King, A.A., Lenox, M.J., 2009. Lean and green? An empirical examination of the
relationship between lean production and environmental performance. Prod.
Oper. Manag. 10, 244e256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2001.tb00373.x.
Klotz, L., Horman, M., Bodenschatz, M., 2007. A lean modeling protocol for evalu-
ating green project delivery. Lean Constr. J. 3, 1e18.
Koranda, C., Chong, W.K., Kim, Changwan, Chou, J.S., Kim, Changmin, 2012. An
investigation of the applicability of sustainability and lean concepts to small
construction projects. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 16, 699e707. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12205-012-1460-5.
Koskela, L., 1992. Application of the New Production Philosophy to Construction.
Stanford university Stanford, CA.
Koskela, L., Ballard, G., Howell, G., Tommelein, I., 2002. The foundations of lean
construction. Des. Constr. Build. Value 211e226.
Koskela, L., Howell, G., Ballard, G., Tommelein, I., 2007. The foundations of lean
construction. Des. Constr. 211e226. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080491080.
Kurul, E., Abanda, H., Tah, J.H., Cheung, F., 2013. Rethinking the build process for BIM
adoption. In: CIB World Build. Congr, pp. 1e12.
Ladhad, A., Parrish, K., 2013. Phoenix’s first net-zero energy office retrofit: a green
and lean case study. J. Green Build. https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.8.4.3.
Lapinski, A.R., Horman, M.J., Riley, D.R., 2006. Lean processes for sustainable project
delivery. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 132, 1083e1091. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9364(2006)132:10(1083).
Larson, T., Greenwood, R., 2004. Perfect complements: synergies between lean
production and eco-sustainability initiatives. Environ. Qual. Manag. 13, 27e36.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.20013.
Luo, Y., Riley, D.R., Horman, M.J., 2005. Lean principles for prefabrication in green
design-build (GDB) projects. In: Proc. 13th Annual Conference of the Interna-
tional Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), pp. 539e548.
Maltese, S., Moretti, N., Re Cecconi, F., Ciribini, A.L.C., Kamara, J.M., 2017. Lean
approach to enable sustainability in the built environment through BIM. Techne
13, 278e286. https://doi.org/10.13128/Techne-19743.
Mao, X., Zhang, X., 2008. Construction process reengineering by integrating lean
principles and computer simulation techniques. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 134,
371e381. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2008)134:5(371).
Marhani, M.A., Jaapar, A., Bari, N.A.A., Zawawi, M., 2013. Sustainability through lean
construction approach: a literature review. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 101,
90e99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.182.
Maris, K., Parrish, K., 2016. The confluence of lean and green construction practices
in the commercial buildings market. In: Proc. 24th Annual Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), pp. 43e52.
Martínez, P., Gonz alez, V., Da Fonseca, E., 2011. Green-Lean conceptual integration
in the project design, planning and construction. Rev. Ing. Construccio  n 24,
5e32.
Maxwell, J., Rothenberg, S., Schenck, B., 1993. Does lean mean green: the implica-
tions of lean production for environmental management. In: International
Motor Vehicle Program. MIT, Cambridge.
Mossman, A., 2009. Creating value: a sufficient way to eliminate waste in lean
design and lean production. Lean Constr. J. 13e23, 2009.
Nahmens, I., 2009. From lean to green construction: a natural extension. In: Proc of
the Construction Research Congress. https://doi.org/10.1061/41020(339)107.
Nahmens, I., Ikuma, L.H., 2012. Effects of lean construction on sustainability of
modular homebuilding. J. Archit. Eng. 18, 155e163. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000054.
Nam, C.H., Tatum, C.B., 1988. Major characteristics of constructed products and
resulting limitations of construction technology. Constr. Manag. Econ. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01446198800000012.
Ofori, G., 1992. The environment: the fourth construction project objective? Constr.
Manag. Econ. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446199200000037.
Ogunbiyi, O., Oladapo, A., Goulding, J., 2014. An empirical study of the impact of
lean construction techniques on sustainable construction in the UK. Constr.
Innovat. 14, 88e107. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-08-2012-0045.
Ohno, T., 1988. Toyota Production System: beyond Large-Scale Production. Pro-
ductivity Press, NY.
Peng, W., Pheng, L.S., 2011. Lean production, value chain and sustainability in pre-
cast concrete factory e a case study in Singapore. Lean Constr. J. 2011 92e109.
Picchi, F.A., Granja, A.D., 2004. Construction Sites: using lean principles to seek
14 A. Francis, A. Thomas / Journal of Cleaner Production 252 (2020) 119913
broader implementations. In: Proc. 12th Annual Conference of the International
Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), pp. 1e12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-
0296(97)00065-5.
Puvanasvaran, P., 2012. Lean principles adoption in environmental management
system (EMS) - ISO 14001. J. Ind. Eng. Manag. 5, 406e430. https://doi.org/
10.3926/jiem.486.
Riley, D., Sanvido, V., Herman, M., McLaughlin, M., Kerr, D., 2005. Lean and green:
the role of design-build mechanical competencies in the design and construc-
tion of green buildings. In: Proc of the Construction Research Congress,
pp. 227e236. https://doi.org/10.1061/40754(183)23.
Rosenbaum, S., Toledo, M., Gonz alez, V., 2013. Improving environmental and pro-
duction performance in construction projects using value-stream mapping:
case study. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 140, 4013045.
Rothenberg, S., Pil, F.K., Maxwell, J., 2001. Lean, green, and the quest for superior
environmental performance. Prod. Oper. Manag. 10, 228e243. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1937-5956.2001.tb00372.x.
Rother, M., Shook, J., 2003. Learning to see value stream mapping to create value
and eliminate Muda. Lean Enterp. Inst. Brookline. https://doi.org/10.1109/
6.490058.
Sacks, R., Treckmann, M., Rozenfeld, O., 2009. Visualization of work flow to support
lean construction. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
CO.1943-7862.0000102.
Salem, O., Pirzadeh, S., Ghorai, S., Abdel-Rahim, A., 2014. Reducing environmental,
economic, and social impacts of work-zones by implementing lean construction
techniques. In: Proc. 22nd Annual Conference of the International Group for
Lean Construction (IGLC), 1, pp. 145e155.
Salem, O., Solomon, J., Genaidy, A., Minkarah, I., 2006. Lean construction: from
theory to implementation. J. Manag. Eng. 22, 168e175. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)0742-597X(2006)22:4(168).
Sciortino, M., Watson, S., Presnar, R., 2009. The importance of energy efficiency in
lean Manufacturing : declaring energy the ninth waste. In: Proc. ACEEE Summer
Study on Energy Efficiency in Industry, pp. 113e122.
Serpell, A., Venturi, A., Contreras, J., 1995. Characterization of waste in building
construction projects. Lean Constr 67e77.
Sertyesilisik, B., 2014. Lean and agile construction project management: as a way of
reducing environmental footprint of the construction industry. Intell. Syst.
Control Autom. Sci. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8044-5_11.
Seryak, J., Kissock, K., 2005. Lean energy analysis: guiding industrial energy
reduction efforts to the theoretical minimum energy use. In: Proc. ACEEE
Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Industry.
Seth, D., Seth, N., Dhariwal, P., 2017. Application of value stream mapping (VSM) for
lean and cycle time reduction in complex production environments: a case
study. Prod. Plan. Control 28, 398e419. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09537287.2017.1300352.
Shrubsole, C., Hamilton, I.G., Zimmermann, N., Papachristos, G., Broyd, T.,
Burman, E., Mumovic, D., Zhu, Y., Lin, B., Davies, M., 2019. Bridging the gap: the
need for a systems thinking approach in understanding and addressing energy
and environmental performance in buildings. Indoor Built Environ. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1420326X17753513.
Solaimani, S., Sedighi, M., 2019. Toward a holistic view on Lean sustainable con-
struction: a literature review. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcle-
pro.2019.119213, 119213.
Song, L., Liang, D., 2011. Lean construction implementation and its implication on
sustainability: a contractor’s case study. Can. J. Civ. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1139/
L11-005.
Stern, N., 2006. The Economics of Climate Change - the Stern Review: Summary of
Conclusions, Stern Review: the Economics of Climate Change. https://doi.org/
10.1257/jel.45.3.686.
UN Environment and International Energy Agency, 2017. Towards a Zero-Emission,
Efficient, and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector. Global Status Report
2017 (Global Status Report).
US EPA, 2013. The lean and energy toolkit. Energy. Available at: http://www.epa.
gov/innovation/lean/toolkit/LeanEnergyToolkit.pdf. Accessed in December
2018.
US EPA, 2007. The lean and environment toolkit. Prevention. Available at: http://
www.epa.gov/innovation/lean/toolkit/LeanEnviroToolkit.pdf. Accessed in
September 2018.
Valente, C.P., Mour~ ao, C.A.M.A., De Neto, J.P.B., 2013. Lean and green: how both
philosophies can interact on strategic, tactical and operational levels of a
company. In: Proc. 21st Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean
Construction (IGLC), pp. 885e894.
Vieira, A.R., Cachadinha, N., 2011. Lean construction and sustainability - comple-
mentary paradigms? A case study. In: Proc. 19th Annual Conference of the In-
ternational Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), pp. 584e594.
Vinodh, S., Arvind, K.R., Somanaathan, M., 2011. Tools and techniques for enabling
sustainability through lean initiatives. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 13,
469e479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-010-0329-x.
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., 1996. Lean Thinking. Simon and Schuster, New York.