Search

Purpose: This paper aims to identify the barriers for implementing Reverse Logistics in the construction sector and to rank the barriers between the barrier and the stakeholder, the phase in the project life cycle, and the relevant issues on the emergence of barriers in implementing reverse logistics Design/methodology/approach: This research began by identifying barriers re-verse logistics through a systematic literature review. The method used in the systematic literature review was the PRISMA method. The identification of barriers was assessed for their influence on reverse logistics' successful implementation by the expert using a questionnaire instrument. The rating scale used was a Likert scale of 1 (greatly hinder the implementation of reverse logistics) to 5 (not greatly hinder the implementation of reverse logistics). The results of the expert assessment were used to rank barriers using TOPSIS. Findings: There were 38 barriers in this study, classified as: markets and competitor's issues, policy issue, supply chain process, economic issue, knowledge-related issue, government support issue, and operational issue. This study's results indicated that the lack of governmental support for the implementation of RL (GS1) was the barrier with the highest ranking. This barrier was related to governmental support issues and appeared in the project life cycle approach's green initiation phase. The stakeholder who was responsible to improve the GS1 barrier is the government. In this case, the government played a vital role as a regulator and a project owner, who encouraged reverse logistics implementation. Research limitations/implications: The limitation in the scope of this research is specific to the construction sector in developing countries, particularly Indonesia. The object of construction in this study is the case of highway construction. Further research that examines barriers based on the project life cycle by entering the company scale, or study about the relationship between barriers can also be done. Practical implications: This study provides an understanding to stakeholders about the barriers in implementing reverse logistics. The ranking results become a reference for relevant stakeholders in developing a successful strategy for implementing reverse logistics and the PLC approach phases as a guideline for implementing the established strategy. Social implications: The stakeholder of the construction project has to learn with reverse logistics barriers in order to improve reverse logistics performance. Originality/value: This study tries to map reverse logistics implementation barriers in the construction sector in developing countries. The majority of research on reverse logistics implementation barriers examined the manufacturing sector in developed countries. This study also identifies barriers that show the relationship between barrier emergence in terms of the project life cycle approach and stakeholders responsibility for addressing barriers and associated problems. Previous researchers only identified barriers in terms of stakeholder linkages with related issues, so it was challenging to improve efforts based on identifying barriers because they were not guided by a process-based approach such as the project life cycle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the performance evaluation of reverse logistics (RL) practices in the construction sector is crucial, it is seemingly limited compared to that in the manufacturing sector. As the project life cycle in the construction sector is typically long, effective coordination among the stakeholders is needed to integrate RL into each phase of the project life cycle. This paper proposes a new model of RL for the construction industry, incorporating the dimensions, elements, and, most importantly, indicators needed for the evaluation of RL performance. The model was initially derived from the extant literature. It was then refined through (1) focus group discussion, by which suggestions pertinent to the proposed model were collated from academics and practitioners, and (2) judgments by academics and practitioners to validate the model. The validated model includes 21 indicators to measure RL performance, spanned throughout the green initiation, green design, green material management, green construction, and green operation and maintenance phases. The paper offers a new method for how RL can be adopted in the construction industry by proposing an innovative model that will benefit stakeholders in the construction industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]