Next Article in Journal
Study on Anchoring Characteristics and Freeze–Thaw Degradation Law of the Cement-Based Early-Strength Anchor in Freeze–Thaw Regions
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of Spatial-Temporal Variation of Soil Loss and Best Conservation Measures in an East Africa Catchment
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 10
10.3390/su15107777
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Representations of the Smart Green Concept and the Intention to Implement IoT in Romanian Real Estate Development

by
Lavinia Denisia Cuc
1,
Dana Rad
2,*,
Daniel Manațe
1,*,
Silviu Gabriel Szentesi
1,
Anca Dicu
3,
Mioara Florina Pantea
1,
Vanina Adoriana Trifan
1,
Cosmin Silviu Raul Joldeș
4 and
Graziella Corina Bâtcă-Dumitru
5
1
Faculty of Economics, Aurel Vlaicu University of Arad, 310025 Arad, Romania
2
Faculty of Educational Sciences Psychology and Social Sciences, Aurel Vlaicu University of Arad, 310025 Arad, Romania
3
Faculty of Food Engineering, Aurel Vlaicu University of Arad, 310025 Arad, Romania
4
Faculty of International Business and Economics, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania
5
Faculty of Accounting and Management Informatics, Department of Accounting and Audit, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(10), 7777; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107777
Submission received: 20 March 2023 / Revised: 5 May 2023 / Accepted: 8 May 2023 / Published: 9 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Innovation in Social and Economics Perception)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Sustainable urban development has come to play an essential role in establishing and growing future sustainable cities, or smart cities, which are urban areas that have an optimum carbon footprint, are nature-friendly, and are smart enough to enhance energy efficiency. This study is based on qualitative research in which data were collected from interviews with real estate development specialists. The interviews were addressed to a total of 30 real estate developers from Romania between July and December 2022 and were conducted using the Zoom interface. The aim of this research was to analyze whether familiarity with the smart green concept influences the decision to implement the IoT on a large scale at the organizational level through the perception of specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects considering the operational costs. The results revealed a significant indirect effect of green building knowledge on large-scale IoT implementation through the mediator of the perception of operating cost factors, supporting our hypothesis. The direct effect in the presence of the mediator was not found to be significant anymore. Hence, there is full complementary mediation by the perception of operating cost factors on the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation.

1. Introduction

Within the last 30 years, the concept of sustainability has gradually become a megatrend of the uttermost importance [1]. Scientists, authorities, and finally the public at large tend to use it as a starting point to derive concepts such as “sustainable or green architecture”, up to the notion of “green buildings”, largely adopted in today’s urban jargon. Dedicated researchers have explained the concepts of green architecture or green buildings (GBs) as organized endeavors to decrease the volume of supplies consumed during the manufacture, utilization, and recycling of buildings, with this aim being followed through environmentally friendly design, material selection, and construction technologies with a minimal carbon footprint [2].
It is no wonder why an immense volume of academic and scientific research is targeted towards the sustainable development (SD) of the social and economic environment, approaching the subject from the point of view of technological innovation up to eco-innovation [3]. As far as sustainable development is a broad concept, we need to be more specific regarding what must be sustained [4]. Conscious consumption entails participating in the economy while being aware of the influence of individual consumption on society and the environment as a whole [5,6]. We address life support systems in our work rather than nature or community, those being related to the topic of construction in SD [7].
Sustainable urban development has come to play an essential role in establishing and growing future sustainable cities, or smart cities, urban areas that have an optimum carbon footprint, are nature-friendly, and are smart enough to enhance energy efficiency [8,9,10].
Green building practices have become increasingly popular in recent years as a means of reducing energy consumption and promoting sustainability in the built environment. In parallel, the Internet of Things (IoT) has also emerged as a powerful technology for optimizing building operations and reducing energy consumption. There is growing interest in exploring how green building knowledge can increase the implementation of IoT in the real estate development industry.
Research has shown that green building knowledge can significantly influence the implementation of the IoT in real estate development. For example, in a study by Nadeem [11], it was found that developers with higher levels of green building knowledge were more likely to adopt IoT technologies in their buildings. This is because green building knowledge can help developers identify the benefits of the IoT and understand how to effectively integrate these technologies into their buildings.
Furthermore, research has also shown that the operational costs of buildings can play an important role in the decision to implement IoT technologies. For example, in a study by Jia [12], it was found that the perception of operating costs was a significant mediator of the relationship between green building knowledge and the implementation of IoT technologies in buildings. This suggests that developers who are knowledgeable about green building practices are more likely to implement IoT technologies when they perceive that these technologies will result in cost savings.
Overall, the research [13] suggests that green building knowledge can play an important role in increasing the implementation of IoT technologies in real estate development. Developers who are knowledgeable about green building practices are more likely to understand the benefits of IoT technologies and how to effectively integrate these technologies into their buildings [14]. Furthermore, the perception of operating costs can also play an important role in the decision to implement IoT technologies. As such, it is important for real estate developers to prioritize green building education and training in order to fully realize the potential benefits of the IoT in their buildings.
The integration of Internet of Things (IoT) devices in real estate development has gained increasing attention in recent years due to its potential to improve energy efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance the tenant experience. Real estate developers are increasingly recognizing the benefits of the IoT and are integrating these technologies into their buildings to optimize their operations.
One of the primary benefits of the IoT in real estate development is its ability to improve energy efficiency. By automating and optimizing heating, cooling, lighting, and other systems, IoT devices can help reduce energy consumption in buildings. This not only leads to cost savings for real estate developers, but also promotes environmental sustainability by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In addition to energy efficiency, IoT devices can also enhance the tenant experience. By being provided with amenities such as smart locks, smart thermostats, and smart lighting that can be controlled remotely, tenants can have greater control over their living environment. This can lead to increased tenant satisfaction and improved retention rates. IoT devices can also improve building management by providing real-time data on building performance. These data can be used by property managers to identify and address issues more quickly and efficiently. This can lead to cost savings and improved tenant satisfaction by addressing issues before they become major problems.
Overall, the integration of the IoT in real estate development has significant potential to improve energy efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance the tenant experience. By promoting environmental sustainability and improving building management, the IoT can help real estate developers create buildings that are both more sustainable and more attractive to tenants. As such, the integration of the IoT in real estate development is likely to continue to grow in importance in the coming years.
In this respect, factors such as lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge) at the level of Romanian real estate developers became crucial for our study.
To test how the latest knowledge from social and economic technology innovation, going from the Internet of Things (IoT) to smart green houses or offices, is known, accepted, and implemented in the Romanian real estate area, we conducted a battery of 30 interviews with real estate developers, consultants in the green building field, and bank financers.
The aim of this paper is to analyze the influence of familiarity with the smart green concept on the decision to implement the IoT on a large scale in real estate development organizations. This study aims to identify specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects and their relationship with operational costs, using qualitative research methods and data collected from interviews with 30 real estate development specialists in Romania.
The fresh look on this issue debated in this study consists of investigating a hypothetical link between green building knowledge and the intention to implement and grow the IoT within the organizations analyzed through the interviews. This research tested whether familiarity with the smart green concept influences the decision to implement the IoT on a large scale at the organizational level through the perception of the specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects considering the operational costs: lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge) at the level of Romanian real estate developers.

2. Literature Review

The idea of sustainability has grown in attention and use across many academic fields. The accomplishments of sustainable development are the cause of its popularity [2]. The terms “green architecture” or “green building” refer to the idea, science, and fashion of designing and constructing structures in line with ecological principles. Green design aims to reduce the number of resources used in a building’s construction, usage, and operation as well as the harm to the environment caused by emissions, pollution, and component waste [2]. Buildings need energy, water, and fresh materials throughout their design, construction, operation, and maintenance, as well as large amounts of trash that have a detrimental impact on human health and the environment. It is necessary to clarify, comprehend, and put into practice “green building systems” in order to reduce these consequences and create green and resource-efficient structures [2].
An approach to the building as a whole that minimizes negative impacts on the environment and human health is embodied in green buildings and green architecture. By using ecologically friendly architectural materials and construction techniques, the “green” architect or designer aims to conserve air, water, and land [15]. Green architecture has a considerable level of universal agreement on the notion and defines a knowledge of ecological architecture in all classes [16].
Sustainable urban development has come to play a key role in establishing and growing future sustainable cities, or smart cities, which are urban areas that have an optimal carbon footprint, are nature-friendly, and are smart enough to enhance energy efficiency [17].
An important concern in the present day is the saving of energy; for that reason, many respondents in the conducted interviews mentioned this as a main reason to enhance green building development, with this aspect mainly being studied in China [18]. The authors of this research remark that, similar to Romania, China adopted the concept of ecological building later than developed Western nations did, and the energy issues brought on by continuous urbanization first surfaced over time in China. China evaluated 4500 different green building projects at the end of 2016, totaling more than 500 million m2 of green structures. In 2020, the planned goal was for 50% of new residential structures to adhere to the ecological construction standard [18]. A deeper comprehension of the major factors driving the adoption of GB technologies (GBTs) is essential if they are to continue to prosper and gain popularity. While many studies have looked at the factors that affect how green technologies are adopted generally, few have explicitly done so in the context of GBT. A few studies [19] looked at the fundamentals of GBT adoption in the areas of (1) significant impediments to GBT adoption, (2) key drivers of GBT adoption, and (3) crucial tactics for fostering GBT adoption. The main obstacles were resistance to change, a lack of information and awareness, and higher prices. Greater energy and water efficiency, as well as brand and reputation management, are key factors in GBT adoption. The review’s findings also suggest that financial and extra market-based incentives, greater information on the costs and advantages of GBT, ecolabeling, and information distribution are the most crucial tactics for encouraging the use of GBTs [19].
As mentioned in the interviews conducted with Romanian developers, an essential aspect in stimulating the realization of greenfield developments is the involvement of government and local policies to support these projects. In countries such as China, the Ministry of Finance has issued normative acts and other policies to stimulate the development of green buildings and guide their more accelerated development [18].
Although eco-innovations have many benefits that respect the needs of human health and ecologically sustainable development, there are still difficulties with market penetration and scale-up, and there are various implementation-related problems. What obstacles are standing in the way of the GB market’s growth and expansion? To develop ways and means to overcome them, it is necessary to better understand the obstacles to the adoption of green innovations. The obstacles that impede the application of green technology in buildings have been looked into by a number of scholars and practitioners. For instance, the expenses, length of implementation, and lack of understanding and awareness of GB are well documented in prior studies. Cost is a major obstacle to the implementation of green innovations [20,21,22,23,24]. Cost was generally cited [23] as the largest obstacle to the development of green buildings and sustainable construction in the US. According to a survey [20] from Hong Kong, the biggest obstacle to integrating green building criteria was cost. The authors of [22] replicated research on the adoption of green buildings in China using the same parameters looked at by [20] and found that cost is the most significant obstacle there, as it is in Romania. A questionnaire survey study with Singaporean and Hong Kong building designers revealed that increased prices are an unavoidable obstacle prohibiting GB from surviving in the construction sector [21].
The greater cost of GB buildings was identified by [25] as the main impediment to the adoption of GB norms in India. Cost is listed as one of the potential obstacles because it is well acknowledged in the literature. Cost and time are strongly associated in the construction industry since both are crucial to gauging the performance and success of a project [26]. In several research works, higher costs were shown to be the biggest deterrent to adopting green technologies, followed by lengthier implementation times. While a project was delayed, Ref. [22] showed that the additional time required to achieve green criteria was an impervious barrier to decision making by contractors, clients, consultants, and subcontractors. The lengthier time required during the preconstruction phase was identified as a major problem encountered by project managers in Singapore, according to another work [27]. The drawn-out approval procedure for new GBTs inside a corporation [28] is another time-related problem. Several experts have also emphasized that a significant obstacle to the implementation of the invention is a lack of understanding and awareness of GB and its related advantages. The key obstacles to sustainable building, in addition to costs, were emphasized by [23] as being lengthy payback periods, the propensity to stick with present methods and oppose change, and a lack of information and understanding.
The biggest impediment, according to other experts [29], is a lack of understanding and awareness of GB. This lack of understanding and awareness is related to informational gaps in the business and in GB research. According to the findings of [30], the largest obstacle to the adoption of green innovations is generally a lack of knowledge. Research was undertaken by [31] to determine what challenges Malaysia has in implementing GB initiatives. The lack of knowledge, education, and information on the advantages of GB was shown to be a major impediment. Researchers have also noted the dearth of trustworthy GB research as a significant hurdle [32,33]. Moreover, there are social and psychological constraints that impede GB acceptability and development, such as stakeholder attitudes and behaviors and buying intentions [34,35].
A significant obstacle to the adoption of green requirements is the unwillingness to adapt the conventional approach to construction, as noted by [36]. This was discovered at the same time as a Chinese study revealed the main obstacle to environmentally friendly building practices to be deeply ingrained non-green beliefs [37]. According to recent research [38], the biggest obstacle to the adoption of energy-saving technology in the Chinese construction sector is stakeholders’ resistance to change. According to [39], the requirement for process modifications, which are associated with the perception of potential hazards and unplanned costs, is what causes opposition to sustainable building. Effective collaboration and working relationships between the numerous stakeholders within a given project are necessary for successful innovation uptake. As a result, poor communication and lack of motivation among project team members might prevent green technologies from being adopted [27,29,33].
Researchers have also identified a number of other obstacles, such as the following: lack of interest and market demand [33]; lack of government incentives and regulations [40]; distrust in GB products [41]; unfamiliarity with green technologies [28]; lack of training and education [40]; unavailability of approved green materials and technologies; lack of GB expertise/skilled labor [28]; lack of importance given to GB by leaders [38]; lack of promotion [42]; lack of funding schemes [40]; lack of availability of demonstration projects [25]; and the lack of available and reliable green suppliers [22,43].
The research of [19] examined the elements that function as a roadblock to reaching GB. Increased GBT prices, a lack of GBT databases and information, a shortage of GB expertise and trained labor, a lack of understanding and awareness of GBT and its advantages, and a lack of government incentives or support for the deployment of GBTs were the impediments found. There are not many trustworthy sources for research and education on green building technologies (GBTs), and there are not many GB guidelines and rules to choose from. Problems include inadequate GB grading systems and labeling initiatives; lack of experience with GBT; strong mistrust of GBT; conflicts of interest among the numerous parties involved in the adoption of GBT; lack of commercial demand and interest; the installation of GBT taking time and resulting in project delays; opposition to change in the application of conventional technology; lack of promotions; the difficulty and strict restrictions associated with implementing GBT; lack of respect for GBT among leaders; risks and ambiguities associated with the use of new technology; difficulties in providing project workers with adequate technology training; the absence of readily available and reputable GBT providers; lack of technical standard operating procedures for ecological builds; the absence of funding options (such as bank loans); high market costs; high rental costs; lengthy GBT payback terms; the absence of demonstration projects; limited practical knowledge of unconventional procurement techniques; and the lack of trustworthy and validated GBTs.
To persuade or urge potential adopters to accept and keep using green technologies, a deeper knowledge of the factors that influence GB implementation is required. A review of the GB drivers covered by earlier research is presented in this section. For instance, Ref. [44] identified six important elements or explanations for the client’s decision to adopt cutting-edge green technology in Western Australia’s first six-star Green Star commercial office complex. These explanations include the building’s enhancement for the inhabitants’ health and wellbeing, marketing techniques, lowering of the building’s environmental effect, cutting of expenses during its lifetime, marketing and landmark development, and luring of high-end clients and rental returns. The authors of [43] assessed Hong Kong developers’ readiness for GB adoption and discovered that the following factors encouraged developers to adopt GB voluntarily: low operating energy costs, environmentally friendly technology, the reduction of greenhouse gases, the ability to stand out in the market, lower vacancy rates, ease of resale, higher rent and/or sales prices, and improved comfort, health, and productivity. The elements of success and drivers for greening new and existing buildings in Singapore were investigated by [45]. Return on investment, domestic and international competitiveness, rising energy costs, corporate social responsibility, and marketing/branding reasons were among the significant causes identified. The top six elements for sustainable design and construction, according to [23], were energy conservation, enhanced indoor environment quality, conservation of the environment/resources, waste reduction, and water conservation. According to [21], reduced operational expenses, better building value, lower lifespan cost, increased marketability, and higher profitability for huge investments were the most significant business factors influencing the GB market. The literature also considers the possibility of employment development linked to the adoption of GB [46]. Investment in GB helps practically every participant in the sector since it opens a wide range of economic prospects, not only for consumers or purchasers. The authors also suggested that new job possibilities would materialize as a result of the new green products’ expanded marketability. A huge number of factors that affect the adoption of ecological innovations have been found and categorized by [19], and from this list, a list of factors that have garnered relatively significant attention in the literature has been compiled.
The following have been listed as potential drivers of GBT adoption in the literature: decreased expenses over the course of the project’s life cycle; increased energy and water efficiency; improved occupant health, comfort, and happiness; increased productivity; low environmental effect; improved working conditions; thermal comfort (better internal temperature); a higher rental yield, and more space to be rented; better interior environment quality; business image and reputation/marketing plan; luring high-end clients and raising the building’s worth; reducing trash from building and destruction; protecting the environment and nonrenewable fuels/energy sources; establishing guidelines for future architecture and development; less construction-related material utilization; attracting top talent and decreasing staff churn; a dedication to social responsibility; the promotion of a culture of best practice sharing; efficiency in management and construction procedures; and improved national economic performance and employment creation.
Green building practices and the Internet of Things (IoT) have both gained popularity in recent years due to their potential for reducing energy consumption and promoting sustainability in the built environment. There is increasing interest in understanding how green building knowledge can increase the implementation of IoT technologies in real estate development.
Research has shown that developers with higher levels of green building knowledge are more likely to adopt IoT technologies in their buildings [11,12,13,14]. This is because green building knowledge helps developers identify the benefits of the IoT and understand how to effectively integrate these technologies into their buildings. Additionally, the perception of operating costs is a significant mediator of the relationship between green building knowledge and the implementation of IoT technologies in buildings, suggesting that developers who perceive that these technologies will result in cost savings are more likely to implement them. Thus, green building knowledge plays an important role in increasing the implementation of IoT technologies in real estate development. Developers who are knowledgeable about green building practices are more likely to understand the benefits of IoT technologies and how to effectively integrate them into their buildings. Therefore, prioritizing green building education and training is crucial for realizing the potential benefits of the IoT in buildings.
In recent years, both green building practices and the Internet of Things (IoT) have emerged as important technologies for reducing energy consumption and promoting sustainability in the built environment. As a result, there is growing interest in exploring the relationship between green building knowledge and the implementation of IoT technologies in real estate development.
Research has shown that green building knowledge can significantly influence the adoption of IoT technologies in buildings. Developers with higher levels of green building knowledge are more likely to identify the benefits of the IoT and understand how to effectively integrate these technologies into their buildings. This is because green building knowledge provides a framework for understanding the importance of sustainability and energy efficiency in building design and operation, which is closely aligned with the goals of the IoT.
Additionally, research has shown that the perception of operating costs plays an important role in the decision to implement IoT technologies. Developers who perceive that these technologies will result in cost savings are more likely to adopt them. Green building knowledge can help developers understand the potential cost savings associated with IoT technologies and how to effectively integrate them into building operations to maximize these savings.
Moreover, green building knowledge can help developers identify areas where IoT technologies can be most effective. For example, sensors and automated controls can be used to optimize heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, lighting, and other building systems to reduce energy consumption and improve occupant comfort. Green building knowledge can help developers understand how to select the most appropriate IoT technologies for their specific building type and use case, and how to effectively integrate them into existing building systems.
In conclusion, green building knowledge is a crucial factor in increasing the adoption of IoT technologies in real estate development. Developers who are knowledgeable about green building practices are more likely to understand the benefits of IoT technologies and how to effectively integrate them into their buildings. Therefore, green building education and training should be prioritized in order to fully realize the potential benefits of the IoT in buildings.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design and Methodology

This study is based on qualitative research in which the data were collected through interviews with construction specialists. The interviews were addressed to a total of 30 people from Romania between July and December 2022 and were conducted using the Zoom interface. To carry out this study, a mediation analysis was used, which was performed in PSS V.26 with Process Macro model 4.
The structured interview approach as a data collection method is suitable for testing familiarity with the smart green concept and verifying the intention to implement IoT by Romanian real estate developers, through the perception of the operational factors determined in the choice of developing green building projects: reduced maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service tax) at the level of Romanian real estate developers.
There are several reasons why interviews were chosen as the research method in the above study. First, interviews allowed for in-depth exploration of the participants’ perceptions, attitudes, and experiences related to green business models and the circular economy. This qualitative approach was appropriate for the study’s research questions, as the researchers aimed to gain a deeper understanding of the complex relationships between green business models and the components of the circular economy in the construction industry.
Second, interviews allowed for flexibility in the data collection process, as the researchers could adapt their questions and probes based on the participants’ responses. This approach ensured that the data collected were relevant to the research questions and allowed the researchers to clarify any ambiguities or misunderstandings that may have arisen during the interviews.
Overall, interviews were a suitable research method for the above study, as they provided an opportunity to explore complex and context-specific issues related to green business models and the circular economy in the construction industry.
We carried out an analysis of the specialized literature, after which we created a questionnaire that was used in the interviews. The respondents (real estate specialists) gave professional assessments of the operational factors determined in choosing to develop green building projects using a five-point scale, with one being the least important and five being the most important. We used the five-point Likert scale because it provides clear conclusions.
A pilot test was carried out to check the clarity and applicability of the questions before data were collected using the structured interview. Following some small adjustments after conducting and collecting the conclusions of the pilot test, the structured interview was completed.
The target group of the present research is represented by businesspeople and professionals active in real estate development and consulting. A total of 13 large companies, 10 medium-sized companies, and 7 small companies agreed to be part of this study.
The main objective of the present research was to test whether familiarity with the smart green concept influences the decision to implement IoT on a large scale at the organizational level through the perception of specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects considering the operational costs: lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge) at the level of Romanian real estate developers.
Thus, the hypothesis of our research is H1: familiarity with the smart green concept influences the decision to implement IoT on a large scale at the organizational level through the perception of the specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects considering the operational costs: lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge) at the level of Romanian real estate developers. This was explored through qualitative research based on structured interviews.

3.2. Instrument

This research followed a qualitative research approach, and the interview structure envisaged several items. Three of the items that this research is focused on are described further. The items were adapted from previously published qualitative research on the topic of green buildings and large-scale IoT implementation by cross-national real estate developers [43,47,48].
The first item, referring to the respondent’s knowledge about the concept of green building, was as follows: 1. How familiar are you with the notion/concept of green buildings? Respondents had to offer a rating on a one-to-five scale, from not familiar at all to very familiar, and further explain their rating and reasoning.
The second item, referring to respondents’ perceptions regarding specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects considering the operational costs (lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge)), was as follows: 2. What do you think are the specific factors determined in choosing the development of Green buildings type projects considering the operational costs (maintenance and additional services) of the green project? Respondents had to rate on a one-to-five scale (one standing for less important to five standing for very important), based on their associated importance, each of the four specific factors related to operational costs: (a) lower maintenance costs, (b) better energy efficiency, (c) less need for renovation in the future, and (d) a lower service charge rate. Each of the four ratings had to be further explained during the interview.
The third item, referring to the intention to implement the IoT concept on a larger scale, was as follows: 3. On a scale of 1 to 100 (percentage), how confident are you in the future development or large-scale implementation of the Internet of Things—IoT system in your company/organization? The answer had to be given in percentages, from 0% to 100%.

4. Results

4.1. Preliminary Investigation

In terms of descriptive statistics, for Item 1, referring to green building knowledge, 6.7% of the respondents declared that they were not familiar with the concept, 13.3% declared that they were somewhat familiar, 60% declared that they were familiar with the concept, and 20% declared that they were very familiar.
In terms of future intention to implement the IoT on a larger scale, real estate developers declared a minimum value of 10% and a maximum value of 100%, with a mean value of 57%, a percentage that reflects a median general intention of Romanian real estate developers to further invest in large-scale IoT infrastructure.
In relation to the perception of the four operational factors, for the first factor (lower maintenance costs), the results show a mean of 4.43 and a standard deviation of 0.77; for the second factor (better energy efficiency), we obtained a mean of 4.70 and a standard deviation of 0.46; for the third factor (less need for renovation in the future), we obtained a mean of 3.40 and a standard deviation of 1.10; and for the fourth factor (a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge)), we obtained a mean of 4.00 and a standard deviation of 1.05.
We further employed a correlation analysis to identify the relationship between the research variables. The results are presented in Table 1.
The results presented in Table 1 reveal significant positive correlations between the variables of the operational factors, green building knowledge, and large-scale IoT implementation intention. Specifically, the operational factors variable, which was computed by averaging four specific factors, was found to be positively correlated with both green building knowledge (r = 0.788, p < 0.001) and large-scale IoT implementation intention (r = 0.660, p < 0.001). Similarly, there was a significant positive correlation between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation intention (r = 0.491, p < 0.001). These findings align with our initial expectations and suggest that greater operational efficiency, knowledge of green building practices, and the intention to implement IoT technology on a large scale are interrelated factors in promoting sustainability and circularity in the construction industry. The significance levels of p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001 indicate the degree of statistical significance of the observed correlations.
The results show that firms that are more operationally efficient are also likely to have higher levels of green building knowledge and greater intention to implement IoT technology on a large scale. Similarly, firms with greater green building knowledge are more likely to have higher levels of intention to implement IoT technology on a large scale. These findings suggest that promoting operational efficiency, knowledge of green building practices, and the intention to implement IoT technology on a large scale could be important strategies to promote sustainability and circularity in the construction industry. The significance levels of p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001 indicate the degree of statistical significance of the observed correlations, implying that the results are unlikely to be due to chance or random variation. Overall, the findings support the importance of considering these interrelated factors in developing effective strategies for promoting sustainability and circularity in the construction industry.

4.2. Mediation Analysis Results

In order to test our hypothesis, we employed a mediation analysis in SPSS V.26, using Process Macro model 4. The dependent variable was represented by large-scale IoT implementation intention, the independent variable was represented by green building knowledge, and the mediator variable was represented by the mean value of the four operational factors.
The results revealed a significant indirect effect of green building knowledge on large-scale IoT implementation through the mediator of the perception of operational factors, supporting our hypothesis. Furthermore, the direct effect of green building knowledge on large-scale IoT implementation in the presence of the mediator of the perception of operational factors was not found significant anymore (b = −2.4940, t = −0.3228, p > 0.05). Hence, there was full complementary mediation by the perception of operational factors on the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation. The mediation summary is presented in Table 2.
The mediation model explained an overall value of 43% of large-scale IoT implementation, a result that represents a very high percentage. This result is supported by results reported in the scientific literature in reference to the relationship between knowledge and IoT implementation. Overall, the mediator of the perception of operational factors fully and compliantly mediated the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation (IE = 18.6694, 95% CI: LL = 3.6774 to UL = 32.227), indicating that real estate developers with strong knowledge about green buildings and who highly prioritize operational factors (lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for future renovations, and a lower service charge) were more likely to have the intention to implement IoT projects on larger scales.
The above results suggest that green building knowledge has an indirect effect on large-scale IoT implementation, which is mediated by the perception of operational factors. This means that the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation is not direct, but it is mediated by the perception of operational factors. The mediator of the perception of operational factors plays an important role in this relationship, which supports our hypothesis.
Furthermore, the direct effect of green building knowledge on large-scale IoT implementation was not significant in the presence of the mediator of the perception of operational factors. This suggests that the mediator of the perception of operational factors fully mediates the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation.
Overall, the mediation summary in Table 2 confirms that the mediator of the perception of operational factors fully mediates the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation. These results suggest that the perception of operational factors is an important mediator in the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation.

5. Discussion

In term of real estate developers’ general knowledge about green buildings, similar findings were revealed by research which gave decision makers useful information to assist them in creating strategies to enhance the adoption of green building techniques among construction enterprises [49], and by two recent meta-analyses that revealed that although being crucial to mitigating climate change, green buildings face a significant funding gap and knowledge management [50,51]. The findings of the research demonstrate that the adoption of green building techniques in the built environment is influenced by improved economic returns, clear laws, and awareness raising.
Regarding the perception of the four operational factors, lower maintenance costs in green building development also represented an important factor in Lambourne’s [52] research. In addition, energy consumption in buildings is a critical issue, with one of the greatest operating demands among all other sectors of an economy. Moving toward more energy-efficient buildings is critical to achieving sustainability [53,54,55,56].
One of the benefits of green building that has been scientifically proven is its ability to incorporate techniques from all phases of a building’s life cycle, including siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation, and deconstruction, to lessen its negative effects on energy, water, materials, and other natural resources. In addition, it can lessen environmental pollution caused by noise, heat islands, stormwater runoff, trash, air and water pollution, interior pollution, and more [57,58,59].
In relation to the lower service charge operational factor assessed by our research, other studies also found this aspect as a significant factor in future investment in the green building market [60,61,62].
Regarding the future intention to implement the IoT at a larger scale by real estate developers, similar findings were reported by Jia [63]. The IoT has been heavily incorporated into a number of industry sectors. Building construction, operation, and management are some of the sectors where the IoT would have a big influence by enabling high-class services, offering effective features, and advancing sustainable development goals. There are currently few studies concentrating on the use of the IoT in the construction sector, and the IoT itself has reached an unclear phase for industrial exploitation. The study by Jia [63] examines cutting-edge initiatives and IoT adoptions for the development of smart buildings in light of the promising future influence of IoT technologies on buildings and the growing interest in interdisciplinary research among academics. The broad principles of the IoT are offered, including the essential depth and pertinent topic breadth that are directly related to smart buildings. Current technologies enabling the Internet of Things (IoT), particularly those used in buildings and related fields, are outlined. The study makes the case that the construction sector has not yet fully embraced IoT technology. As a result, it urges academics in the pertinent domains to give this issue greater consideration from an application standpoint. Thus, as the results of our research show, the most prevalent trend in building a coherent environment is smart cities [64].
The findings of this study support the hypothesized indirect effect of green building knowledge on large-scale IoT implementation through the mediator of the perception of operational factors. The results reveal that the perception of operational factors plays a crucial role in the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation in the construction industry.
This significant indirect effect suggests that increasing green building knowledge in the construction industry can lead to a better understanding of the perception of operational factors, which in turn can lead to a greater intention to implement the IoT on a large scale. This finding is in line with previous studies that have emphasized the importance of understanding the perception of operational factors to promote sustainable practices in the construction industry.
Furthermore, the absence of a direct effect between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation in the presence of the mediator of the perception of operational factors highlights the importance of considering the role of the perception of operational factors as a mediator in the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation.
The full complementary mediation by the perception of operational factors suggests that without the mediator, the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation would be significantly weaker. This finding emphasizes the importance of considering the perception of operational factors as a mediator when developing strategies to promote large-scale IoT implementation in the construction industry.
Overall, the results of this study have important implications for policymakers, construction firms, and other stakeholders involved in promoting sustainable practices in the construction industry. The findings suggest that increasing green building knowledge and understanding the perception of operational factors can lead to a greater intention to implement the IoT on a large scale, which can ultimately contribute to reducing the environmental impact of the construction industry.

6. Conclusions

Sustainable urban development has come to play an essential role in establishing and growing future sustainable cities, or smart cities, which are urban areas that have an optimum carbon footprint, are nature-friendly, and are smart enough to enhance energy efficiency. This study is based on qualitative research in which the data were collected after interviewing real estate development specialists. The interviews were addressed to a total of 30 real estate developers from Romania between July and December 2022 and were conducted using the Zoom interface.
The aim of this research was to analyze whether familiarity with the smart green concept influences the decision to implement the IoT on a large scale at the organizational level through the perception of specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects considering the operational costs—lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge) at the level of Romanian real estate developers—through qualitative research based on structured interviews. The designing of the interviews benefited from previous Romanian qualitative research about the factors able to impact IoT integration in the activities of local businesses, and the expectations of implementing the IoT within the business processes.
The results revealed a significant indirect effect of green building knowledge on large-scale IoT implementation through the mediator of the perception of operating cost factors, supporting our hypothesis. Furthermore, the direct effect of green building knowledge on large-scale IoT implementation in the presence of the mediator of the perception of the specific determining factors in choosing the development of green building projects considering the operational costs (lower maintenance costs, better energy efficiency, less need for renovation in the future, and a lower rate of additional expenses (lower service charge)) was not found to be significant anymore (b = −2.4940, t = −0.3228, p > 0.05). Hence, there is full complementary mediation by the perception of operating cost factors on the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation. Having been gained through a qualitative research approach, these results might be less representative for worldwide real estate developers, but from a regional East European point of view, our results are significant. Further research should assess real estate developers’ satisfaction with large investment in IoT strategy for green building development, in order to further depict hindering factors of future smart city development. In addition, further empirical studies are necessary to investigate the relationship between green building knowledge and large-scale IoT implementation in the construction industry using a quantitative approach, as this paper has mostly utilized a qualitative approach to understand this relationship.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.D.C., D.M. and S.G.S.; methodology, A.D., M.F.P. and V.A.T.; software, D.R.; validation, C.S.R.J. and G.C.B.-D.; formal analysis, L.D.C., D.M., S.G.S., A.D., M.F.P. and V.A.T.; investigation, L.D.C., D.M., S.G.S., A.D., M.F.P. and V.A.T.; resources, D.R., C.S.R.J. and G.C.B.-D.; data curation, C.S.R.J. and G.C.B.-D.; writing—original draft preparation, L.D.C., D.M., S.G.S. and D.R.; writing—review and editing, A.D., M.F.P., V.A.T., C.S.R.J. and G.C.B.-D.; visualization, A.D., M.F.P. and V.A.T.; supervision, L.D.C., D.M. and S.G.S.; project administration, L.D.C., D.M. and S.G.S.; funding acquisition, A.D. All authors have equally contributed to this research. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Center of Research Development and Innovation in Psychology from Aurel Vlaicu University of Arad (ID no. 9/01.07.2022).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The authors will make the raw data supporting the conclusion of this study available without restriction.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Glogovețan, A.I.; Dabija, D.C.; Fiore, M.; Pocol, C.B. Consumer perception and understanding of European Union quality schemes: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ragheb, A.; El-Shimy, H.; Ragheb, G. Green architecture: A concept of sustainability. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 216, 778–781. [Google Scholar]
  3. Cicea, C.; Marinescu, C.; Popa, I.; Dobrin, C. Environmental efficiency of investments in renewable energy: Comparative analysis at macroeconomic level. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 30, 555–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ogrean, C.; Herciu, M. Business Models Addressing Sustainability Challenges—Towards a New Research Agenda. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Pop, R.A.; Dabija, D.C.; Pelău, C.; Dinu, V. Usage intentions, attitudes, and behaviors towards energy-efficient applications during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 2022, 23, 668–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Cuc, L.D.; Pelau, C.; Szentesi, S.G.; Sanda, G. The impact of green marketing on the consumers’ intention to buy green products in the context of the green deal. Amfiteatru Econ. 2022, 24, 330–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Parris, T.M.; Kates, R.W. Characterizing and measuring sustainable development. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2003, 28, 559–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Catalano, C.; Meslec, M.; Boileau, J.; Guarino, R.; Aurich, I.; Baumann, N.; Chartier, F.; Dalix, P.; Deramond, S.; Laube, P.; et al. Smart sustainable cities of the new millennium: Towards design for nature. Circ. Econ. Sustain. 2021, 1, 1053–1086. [Google Scholar]
  9. Balas, M.M.; Nikolic, J.; Lile, R.; Popa, M.; Beiu, R.M. Intelligent rooftop greenhouses and green skyline cities. SWS J. Earth Planet. Sci. 2019, 1, 15–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Istudor, N.; Ursacescu, M.; Sendroiu, C.; Radu, I. Theoretical framework of organizational intelligence: A managerial approach to promote renewable energy in rural economies. Energies 2016, 9, 639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Nadeem, M.W.; Goh, H.G.; Hussain, M.; Hussain, M.; Khan, M.A. Internet of Things for Green Building Management: A Survey. In Role of IoT in Green Energy Systems; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2021; pp. 156–170. [Google Scholar]
  12. Magruk, A. The most important aspects of uncertainty in the Internet of Things field–context of smart buildings. Procedia Eng. 2015, 122, 220–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cao, Y.; Xu, C.; Kamaruzzaman, S.N.; Aziz, N.M. A Systematic Review of Green Building Development in China: Advantages, Challenges and Future Directions. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dachyar, M.; Zagloel, T.Y.M.; Saragih, L.R. Knowledge growth and development: Internet of things (IoT) research, 2006–2018. Heliyon 2019, 5, e02264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Roy, M. Importance of green architecture today. Dept. Archit. 2008. Available online: https://www.scribd.com/doc/135701599/5-Importance-of-Green-Architecture-today-Ms-Madhumita-Roy-pdf (accessed on 19 March 2023).
  16. Burcu, G. Sustainability Education by Sustainable School Design. Turk. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 186, 868–873. [Google Scholar]
  17. Yigitcanlar, T.; Kamruzzaman, M.; Teriman, S. Neighborhood sustainability assessment: Evaluating residential development sustainability in a developing country context. Sustainability 2015, 7, 2570–2602. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhang, Y.; Kang, J.; Jin, H. A Review of Green Building Development in China from the Perspective of Energy Saving. Energies 2018, 11, 334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Darko, A.; Chan, A.P.C.; Ameyaw, E.E.; He, B.J.; Olanipekun, A.O. Examining issues influencing green building technologies adoption: The United States green building experts’ perspectives. Energy Build. 2017, 144, 320–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lam, P.T.; Chan, E.H.; Chau, C.K.; Poon, C.S.; Chun, K.P. Integrating green specifications in construction and overcoming barriers in their use. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 2009, 135, 142–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chan, E.H.; Qian, Q.K.; Lam, P.T. The market for green building in developed Asian cities—The perspectives of building designers. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 3061–3070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Shi, Q.; Zuo, J.; Huang, R.; Huang, J.; Pullen, S. Identifying the critical factors for green construction—An empirical study in China. Habitat Int. 2013, 40, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ahn, Y.H.; Pearce, A.R.; Wang, Y.; Wang, G. Drivers and barriers of sustainable design and construction: The perception of green building experience. Int. J. Sustain. Build. Technol. Urban Dev. 2013, 4, 35–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Dwaikat, L.N.; Ali, K.N. Green buildings cost premium: A review of empirical evidence. Energy Build. 2016, 110, 396–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Potbhare, V.; Syal, M.; Korkmaz, S. Adoption of green building guidelines in developing countries based on US and India experiences. J. Green Build. 2009, 4, 158–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chan, D.W.; Kumaraswamy, M.M. Compressing construction durations: Lessons learned from Hong Kong building projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2002, 20, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hwang, B.G.; Ng, W.J. Project management knowledge and skills for green construction: Overcoming challenges. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2013, 31, 272–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tagaza, E.; Wilson, J.L. Green buildings: Drivers and barriers-lessons learned from five Melbourne developments. Rep. Prep. Build. Comm. By Univ. Melb. Bus. Outlook Eval. 2004. Available online: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=28.%09Tagaza%2C+E.%3B+Wilson%2C+J.L.+Green+buildings%3A+Drivers+and+barriers-lessons+learned+from+five+Melbourne+developments.+Rep.+Prep.+Build.+Comm.+By+Univ.+Melb.+Bus.+Outlook+Eval.+2004+&btnG= (accessed on 19 March 2023).
  29. Williams, K.; Dair, C. What is stopping sustainable building in England? Barriers experienced by stakeholders in delivering sustainable developments. Sustainability 2007, 15, 135–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rodriguez-Nikl, T.; Kelley, J.; Xiao, Q.; Hammer, K.; Tilt, B. Structural engineers and sustainability: An opinion survey. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 2015, 141, 04014011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bin Esa, M.R.; Marhani, M.A.; Yaman, R.; Noor, A.A.; Rashid, H.A. Obstacles in implementing green building projects in Malaysia. Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2011, 5, 1806–1812. [Google Scholar]
  32. U.S. Green Building Council. Building Momentum: National Trends and Prospects for High-Performance Green Buildings: Based on the April 2002 Green Building Roundtable and Prepared for the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works; U.S. Green Building Council: Washington, DC, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  33. Hwang, B.G.; Tan, J.S. Green building project management: Obstacles and solutions for sustainable development. Sustainability 2012, 20, 335–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hoffman, A.J.; Henn, R. Overcoming the social and psychological barriers to green building. Organ. Environ. 2008, 21, 390–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhao, D.X.; He, B.J.; Johnson, C.; Mou, B. Social problems of green buildings: From the humanistic needs to social acceptance. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 1594–1609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Meryman, H.; Silman, R. Sustainable engineering—Using specifications to make it happen. Struct. Eng. Int. 2004, 14, 216–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chen, J.J.; Chambers, D. Sustainability and the impact of Chinese policy initiatives upon construction. Construct. Manag. Econ. 1999, 17, 679–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Du, P.; Zheng, L.Q.; Xie, B.C.; Mahalingam, A. Barriers to the adoption of energy-saving technologies in the building sector: A survey study of Jing-Jin-Tang China. Energy Policy 2014, 75, 206–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Häkkinen, T.; Belloni, K. Barriers and drivers for sustainable building. Build. Res. Inf. 2011, 39, 239–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gan, X.; Zuo, J.; Skitmore, K.; Ye, M.; Xiong, B. Why sustainable construction? Why not? An owner’s perspective. Habitat Int. 2015, 47, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Winston, N. Regeneration for sustainable communities? Barriers to implementing sustainable housing in urban areas. Sustainability 2010, 18, 319–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Djokoto, S.D.; Dadzie, J.; Ohemeng-Ababio, E. Barriers to sustainable construction in the Ghanaian construction industry: Consultants’ perspectives. Sustainability 2014, 7, 134–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Gou, Z.; Lau, S.S.Y.; Prasad, D. Market readiness and policy implications for green buildings: Case study from Hong Kong. J. Green Build. 2013, 8, 162–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Love, P.E.; Niedzweicki, M.; Bullen, P.A.; Edwards, D.J. Achieving the green building council of Australia’s world leadership rating in an office building in Perth. J. Construct. Eng. Manag. 2012, 138, 652–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Low, S.P.; Gao, S.; Tay, W.L. Comparative study of project management and critical success factors of greening new and existing buildings in Singapore. Struct. Surv. 2014, 32, 413–433. [Google Scholar]
  46. Comstock, M. Importance of Green Buildings Stressed by Business and Industry at UN Climate Negotiations; U.S. Green Building Council: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  47. Windapo, A.O. Examination of green building drivers in the South African construction industry: Economics versus ecology. Sustainability 2014, 6, 6088–6106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Albino, V.; Berardi, U. Green buildings and organizational changes in Italian case studies. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2012, 21, 387–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Saleh, R.M.; Anuar, M.M.; Al-Swidi, A.K.; Omar, K. The effect of awareness, knowledge and cost on intention to adopt green building practices. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 19, 33–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Debrah, C.; Chan, A.P.C.; Darko, A. Green finance gap in green buildings: A scoping review and future research needs. Build. Environ. 2022, 207, 108443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Akomea-Frimpong, I.; Kukah, A.S.; Jin, X.; Osei-Kyei, R.; Pariafsai, F. Green finance for green buildings: A systematic review and conceptual foundation. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 356, 131869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lambourne, T. Valuing sustainability in real estate: A case study of the United Arab Emirates. J. Prop. Investig. Financ. 2022, 40, 335–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Darko, A.; Chan, A.P.; Huo, X.; Owusu-Manu, D.G. A scientometric analysis and visualization of global green building research. Build. Environ. 2019, 149, 501–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Najjar, M.; Figueiredo, K.; Hammad, A.W.; Haddad, A. Integrated optimization with building information modeling and life cycle assessment for generating energy efficient buildings. Appl. Energy 2019, 250, 1366–1382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Mehta, D.P.; Thumann, A. Handbook of Energy Engineering; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  56. Belussi, L.; Barozzi, B.; Bellazzi, A.; Danza, L.; Devitofrancesco, A.; Fanciulli, C.; Ghellere, M.; Guazzi, G.; Meroni, I.; Salamone, F.; et al. A review of performance of zero energy buildings and energy efficiency solutions. J. Build. Eng. 2019, 25, 100772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zhang, Y.; Wang, H.; Gao, W.; Wang, F.; Zhou, N.; Kammen, D.M.; Ying, X. A survey of the status and challenges of green building development in various countries. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Lu, W.; Chi, B.; Bao, Z.; Zetkulic, A. Evaluating the effects of green building on construction waste management: A comparative study of three green building rating systems. Build. Environ. 2019, 155, 247–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Shan, M.; Liu, W.Q.; Hwang, B.G.; Lye, J.M. Critical success factors for small contractors to conduct green building construction projects in Singapore: Identification and comparison with large contractors. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 8310–8322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Hossain, M.U.; Ng, S.T.; Antwi-Afari, P.; Amor, B. Circular economy and the construction industry: Existing trends, challenges and prospective framework for sustainable construction. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 130, 109948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zhao, X.; Zuo, J.; Wu, G.; Huang, C. A bibliometric review of green building research 2000–2016. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2019, 62, 74–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Adabre, M.A.; Chan, A.P. Critical success factors (CSFs) for sustainable affordable housing. Build. Environ. 2019, 156, 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Jia, M.; Komeily, A.; Wang, Y.; Srinivasan, R.S. Adopting Internet of Things for the development of smart buildings: A review of enabling technologies and applications. Autom. Constr. 2019, 101, 111–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Apanaviciene, R.; Vanagas, A.; Fokaides, P.A. Smart building integration into a smart city (SBISC): Development of a new evaluation framework. Energies 2020, 13, 2190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Pearson Correlations.
Table 1. Pearson Correlations.
Variable 123
1. Operational factorsPearson’s r—
2. Green building
knowledge		Pearson’s r0.788***—
3. Large-scale IoT
implementation intention		Pearson’s r0.660***0.491**—
** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Table
Table 2. Mediation Summary.
Table 2. Mediation Summary.
Total Effect
(Green Building Knowledge → IoT Intention)		Direct Effect
(Green Building Knowledge → IoT
Intention)		RelationshipIndirect EffectConfidence IntervalsT =
Indirect Effect/SE		Conclusion
Lower BoundUpper Bound
16.1754
p < 0.01		−2.4940
p > 0.05		H1: Green
building knowledge
→Factors
→IoT intention		18.66943.677432.2272.4784Full complementary
mediation
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cuc, L.D.; Rad, D.; Manațe, D.; Szentesi, S.G.; Dicu, A.; Pantea, M.F.; Trifan, V.A.; Joldeș, C.S.R.; Bâtcă-Dumitru, G.C. Representations of the Smart Green Concept and the Intention to Implement IoT in Romanian Real Estate Development. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7777. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107777

AMA Style

Cuc LD, Rad D, Manațe D, Szentesi SG, Dicu A, Pantea MF, Trifan VA, Joldeș CSR, Bâtcă-Dumitru GC. Representations of the Smart Green Concept and the Intention to Implement IoT in Romanian Real Estate Development. Sustainability. 2023; 15(10):7777. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107777

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cuc, Lavinia Denisia, Dana Rad, Daniel Manațe, Silviu Gabriel Szentesi, Anca Dicu, Mioara Florina Pantea, Vanina Adoriana Trifan, Cosmin Silviu Raul Joldeș, and Graziella Corina Bâtcă-Dumitru. 2023. "Representations of the Smart Green Concept and the Intention to Implement IoT in Romanian Real Estate Development" Sustainability 15, no. 10: 7777. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107777

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop