Exploring Indicators for Sustainable Shovel-Ready Projects: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

This paper presents a rapid systematic review of the indicators and taxonomies of the best practices and governance for construction professionals within small and medium enterprises (SMEs) concerning the management of the sustainability goals of shovel-ready projects and infrastructure stimulus packages. The literature in this field is voluminous and reasonable evidence supports its importance. However, many unknowns exist concerning the association between the sustainability agenda and indicators that are linked to stimulus objectives during the current economic slowdown. This research employed a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed articles. It analysed 660 articles and found that 186 met the study criteria. The research focused on two thematic indicators of sustainability goals in shovel-ready projects, i.e., job creation and environmental aspects. The study primarily examined practices and indicators related to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) addressing sustainability and shovel-ready project objectives. The results suggest that SMEs are more vulnerable during economic downturns and financial crises than larger enterprises. The study also argues that engaging in sustainability objectives or aspects is a competitive strategy for SMEs. Due to time constraints, the article search was limited to peer-reviewed journals published in two academic databases from 2000 to 2021, i.e., Scopus and EBSCO, and considered aspects of job creation and environmental sustainability. Important areas for further research are highlighted as part of the study outcomes. The developed indicators can be tested and verified for construction SMEs to improve sustainability practices concerning shovel-ready project goals and their implementation.

1. Introduction

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a unique crisis that has caused a severe economic slowdown worldwide. Several countries and governments have launched stimulus measures to help rapidly restore their economies as a result. The governments of developed countries, such as Australia, the primary context of this study, are using economic responses based on Keynesian economic principles, where a significant portion of government spending and investment during the COVID-19 pandemic has primarily been allocated to road and infrastructure projects, which are primarily regarded as “shovel-ready” ventures.

In Australia, according to the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (DITRDC), the Australian government has allocated an infrastructure stimulus package with funding amounting to AUD 1.5 billion in response to COVID-19 [1]. This includes AUD 1 billion for shovel-ready projects that can commence within six months and AUD 500 million for a road safety programme to be completed within 12 months. This scheme mainly aimed to increase employment and job opportunities while strengthening transport services. In many ways, such a focus (or goal) is understandable (in Australia and beyond), given the recent economic struggles and funding that has been readily allocated for a 10-year rolling infrastructure pipeline.

The construction industry (a sector that includes engineering construction work, infrastructure and non-residential and residential buildings) plays a significant economic role in Australia, where it generates more than AUD 360 billion in revenue, producing approximately 9% of Australia’s gross domestic product. Based on the ongoing interest and steady rise in employment within the industry, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) projected that, as of February 2021, approximately 1.2 million people were being employed in the construction industry [2]. However, investing in infrastructure alone to provide efficient and safe transportation services, in line with the “funding available in the pipeline”, can be seen as somewhat of a “quick-fix” and lacking scope and prioritisation in the context of a comprehensive project feasibility valuation exercise. The government might only consider tangible and monetary benefits, as the intangible benefits are not observable, and thus may not be realised or may not even have been considered. In particular, this includes issues and benefits pertaining to social and environmental aspects, such as health, well-being, satisfactory working conditions, waste generation, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

This paper argues that, beyond investing in physical infrastructure, assurances must be made that a construction company awarded a shovel-ready project can manage pressing sustainability challenges [3,4,5]. This paper aims to define a more precise range of indicators related to social and environmental aspects that play a distinct role in the selection, prioritisation and implementation of shovel-ready projects and, accordingly, the governance of the nation’s infrastructure assets. In addition, the aim is to uncover current practices and address the gap in the existing research by systematically reviewing the existing literature and defining the relevant indicators for assessing the readiness and capacity of construction organisations to address the sustainability agenda within shovel-ready projects in the Australian context. A rapid review was conducted to answer two research questions as follows: (1) What challenges do construction SMEs in Australia face within shovel-ready projects during a pandemic? (2) What are the relevant and meaningful indicators for assessing the readiness and/or capacity of SMEs to address the sustainability agenda within shovel-ready projects?

2. Background

What is a shovel-ready project, and what is meant by “shovel-ready” in the context of sustainability or sustainable development goals (SDGs)? There is no specific definition to date, but the term “shovel-ready” refers to (and has been widely used to describe) projects that are ready to begin construction immediately. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) broadly defines a shovel-ready project as one type of public investment and a stimulus package that can be kick-started within a few months, can be delivered within two years, and can be initiated from existing infrastructure that is appraised and prioritised based on its strategic relevance to boost the economy and jobs [6] (ch. 2, p. 36). In Australia, for example, in 2020, the New South Wales (NSW) Department of Planning, Industry and Environment assessed and created shovel-ready projects based on three essential criteria, i.e., creating ongoing jobs, timing (rapid approval and can commence within six months under existing planning processes), and public benefits (a project that provides significant impacts and supported by communities, such as housing, green infrastructure, public space, social infrastructure and environmental benefits) [7].

Post-pandemic, there is a need for such projects to help stimulate the economy and to create jobs [4,6,8]. These projects have already undergone the necessary planning and permitting processes, making them ideal candidates for investment. By investing in shovel-ready projects, governments can help jumpstart their economy and support local communities. Overall, the concept of the shovel-ready project post-pandemic is a positive step towards economic recovery, and is occasionally discussed or is interchangeable with green stimulus and green recovery.

There is a growing focus on incorporating the sustainability agenda in all aspects of shovel-ready projects, e.g., strategies, processes and operations, project life cycle, and integration and communication, which are not currently systematically or adequately considered within the knowledge or frameworks of project management bodies, such as A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge guide, PRINCE2 and the APM Body of Knowledge. Even though the stimulus policies aim to achieve job security and economic prosperity, an exact relationship with SDGs has yet to be defined. Hence, it is vital to understand what sustainability objectives should be accomplished to achieve SDGs within any stimulus projects. A disconnect exists between the triple-bottom-line perspective of sustainability (economic, social, environmental), its strategic objectives and the specific actions that must be included for projects. Agrawala et al. [3], Hanna et al. [4], O’Callaghan et al. [5] and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) [8] recommend tailoring a “green stimulus package” where SDGs are applied as a framework to guide the stimulus policymaking process during COVID-19 when developing short-term responses to maintain the efforts of long-term sustainability.

Green stimulus is not a new notion in the construction sector. Strand and Toman [9] (p. 10) defined it as “the application of policies and measures to stimulate short-run economic activity while at the same time preserving, protecting and enhancing environmental and natural resource quality both near-term and long-term”. For example, countries implementing infrastructure stimulus projects such as road and transport can integrate green components in recovery packages, e.g., renewable energy work packages, clean technology, low-carbon materials, green transport infrastructure and green procurement. The economic activities generated from these will have a positive employment effect on the infrastructure sector and the expansion of employment opportunities within the green energy and other sectors. Moreover, although shovel-ready projects are aimed at economic activity and recovery in the short term, their targeted actions may directly or indirectly affect an environmental aspect. Therefore, it is worthwhile and practical to consider that these projects can be rapidly implemented while also delivering environmental and social benefits.

In a project management context, there are two types of relationships between a project and sustainability, i.e., the sustainability of the project’s product and the sustainability of the project’s process of delivering and managing the project, while also considering the impacts on people, the planet and economic prosperities [10,11]. Figure 1, adapted from Green Project Management (GPM) and named the “P5 ontology”, provides an input for integrating sustainability requirements and considering the impacts of product and process on the content-related aspects of the project, such as the product lifecycle, lifespan and servicing, as well as effectiveness, effects and fairness of the project process. The GPM P5 Standard for Sustainability in Project Management Version 2.0 is a tool that was developed in 2011 by GPM, an international peak body in project management, to define and measure the sustainability-related potential impacts of a project’s activities, results and outcomes.

For project organisations, the GPM P5 Standard provides a micro-setting that recognises a broad definition of SDGs, which integrates economic, environmental and social aspects and is operationalised at the project operation level. At this level, as shown in Figure 1, the social sustainability of a project refers to or measures the relevant labour practices and satisfactory working conditions, and aspects related to human rights and society and customer and ethical behaviour. As a whole, it focuses on internal (employees) and external (society at large) communities and indicates that the project organisation provides equal opportunities, encourages diversity and promotes connectivity within and outside the community to ensure the well-being of everyone involved. Conversely, planet or environmental aspects refer to considering the impacts related to consumption, energy and transport, and land, air and water sources. Moreover, project organisation can measure impacts based on positive financial gains by considering sustainability during the preparation and review of business strategies and local economic stimulation packages.

3. Research Methods

To achieve the aims of this study and answer all of the proposed research questions, as well as limit potential bias, the study used a rapid review approach [12] and blended the key principles of PRISMA [13], which are well-known in the medical sciences discipline, to guide the execution process and reporting. There is no widely accepted definition or fixed approach to conducting a rapid review [14]; however, scholars agree that rapid reviews are an accelerated evidence synthesis approach, and that they are reliable and aligned with the fundamental principles used for the systematic review process [12,15]. The rapid review is a “shortcut” version of a systematic review that allows researchers who have limited time and resources to explore and evaluate studies [16] (p. 6). However, Lagisz et al. [16,17] recommended slightly adjusting the checklist, framework, criteria, protocol, comprehensiveness of search, data extraction and synthesis methods to make the process relevant and suitable to the context of the built environment and construction-related disciplines. This can provide evidence that may be effective for decision making and urgent policy/strategy changes in times of pandemics, and also offer rigorous syntheses of evidence in areas that are highly critical to academics.

3.1. Eligibility Criteria

Studies and articles were considered eligible based on (1) topics focused on the SDGs and GPM P5 subcategory as shown in

Table 1. The theme, matrix and keywords for critical analysis of the papers included in the literature review.

Green Stimulus Objectives	SGDs	GPM P5 Subcategory	GPM P5 Sustainability Objectives
Job creation and social procurement	Goal 8: Decent working conditions and economic growth	Employment and staffing	Enhanced employment standards More productive and energised team members. An engaged and motivated workforce committed to personal and organisational success. Enhanced career opportunities for project team members. Decreased recruiting and retention costs.
	Goal 4: Quality education	Training and education Local competence development
	Goal 3: Health and well-being	Project health and safety	A safe, secure and healthy workplace for the project team, which, in turn, results in more engaged and committed staff. Minimal lost time and costs from workplace illness and injuries. Avoidance of fines and penalties for breaches of health and safety laws and regulations.
Environmental sustainability	Goal 12: Consumption and production Goal 13: Climate action	Waste generation, recycling and reuse GHG Emissions	Reduced project costs. Reduced impact on the environment. Reduced disposal costs by minimising waste.

; (2) peer-reviewed books and full conference papers published in English from 2000 to 2021. Publications in the form of editorials, chapters, theses and abstract-only conference proceedings were excluded.

3.2. Search Strategy

Scopus and EBSCO were selected as databases as they are commonly used in systematic review research in the construction project management, engineering and built environment disciplines. The search words and texts used in this review were “small-medium enterprise”, “Australian construction”, “shovel-ready”, “infrastructure project”, “work health and safety” (WHS), “environmental management system” (EMS), “environment”, “sustainability”, “employment”, “partnership”, “training”, “apprenticeship”, “emission”, “greenhouse gas emissions” and “removals and waste management”. It was also necessary to include “SME construction sector in Australia” in the search criteria, as the intended context/scope of the study was to identify the challenges and practices specific to Australian construction SMEs, as any stimulus programs are often dependent on geographic area, knowledge, culture, regulations and technology, and are in most instances specific or unique to the country. The search was conducted in July 2021.

3.3. Study Selection

The search results were screened (abstract and keyword provided by the author) according to the eligibility criteria, and the full text of potentially highly relevant articles was downloaded for closer examination. All full texts were downloaded to EndNote before importing them into NVivo (v. 12) for thematic analysis. The inclusion criteria were then applied against full texts to remove irrelevant articles, such as studies that are too broad and do not discuss the topics/keywords in-depth, and studies conducted in the medical field or outside the construction and engineering-specific literature.

3.4. Data Extraction, Synthesis and Analysis

Relevant articles were analysed using a thematic analysis technique, and data were extracted into a matrix table. The thematic analysis followed the approach based on three classes of themes presented by Attride-Stirling [18] (pp. 388–402), i.e., the basic, organising and global themes. This process adopted Attride-Stirling’s three-stage process, i.e., the reduction/breakdown of text and coding, exploration of the text, and the integration and interpretation of any patterns that arose. Additionally, it is recommended by Hamel et al. [12], Moher et al. [13] and Lagisz et al. [16] that when reporting results, a discussion and conclusion should present appropriate evidence, such as descriptive information, appropriate tables, matrixes or graphics, and issues related to bias and generalisability. The review outcomes were categorised according to Table 1 and developed from the broad definition or criteria of shovel-ready projects, and the literature on green stimulus objectives, SGDs and GPM P5 sub-category objectives.

4. Results

4.1. Search Results

As shown in Figure 2 and

Table 2. Number of articles identified for analysis.

Keywords or Topics Based on the SDGs and GPM P5 Subcategory (as in Table 1)	Database	Number of Articles Found	Number of Relevant Articles Downloaded and Analysed
Project health and safety	Scopus	177	42
	EBSCO	111	47
Employment and training	Scopus	210	19
	EBSCO	17	25
Environment sustainability	Scopus	94	36
	EBSCO	51	17
Total		660	186

, in total, the rapid review search yielded 660 articles. The search of Scopus identified 442 results and EBSCO had about 218 results. About 275 articles and abstracts were screened, removing 89 articles that were classified subjectively as being not relevant. Then, 186 full texts were downloaded and included in the analysis.

The findings of the study are summarised in a matrix format, as shown in Table 3, which provides an overview of the existing body of knowledge related to this research. The rapid review identifies three green stimulus objectives as follows: (1) employment practices and education, (2) project work health and safety and (3) environmental practices. The studies included in this overview highlight the best evidence currently available of the challenges faced by SMEs, as well as the best practices for implementation. Based on studies by Tansey [19] and Brunello [20], sustainable job creation should result in improved employment standards, career enhancement, and an energised and motivated workforce that contributes to subsequent success. However, sustainable job creation in construction SMEs can be challenging due to the strategies initiated by firms to endure during a recession. The cost of maintaining leadership is critical within the construction industry during a recession and can be hampered by budget cuts, employee layoffs and reduction in overhead costs. Reducing budgets and overhead costs can also affect company recruitment practices. For example, employing low-skilled or unskilled labour may not be possible for some firms as an additional budget will be required for training compared to recruiting skilled labour. Hence, understanding the SME challenges and practices concerning the achievement of suitable objectives relating to job creation is necessary to ensure best practices; a more detailed discussion is provided in Section 5.

Numerous studies have shown that environmental sustainability should be equally addressed. It should be the driver of stimulus programmes during a pandemic and economic recession. Shovel-ready programmes should focus on climate change and address current environmental risks through relevant projects, including weather extremes of heat, rain or inclement weather, rather than mitigation actions targeting climate change [21,22]. Hurlimann et al. [21] argued that the Australian construction industry, in particular, showed readiness in terms of adapting to climate change risks. However, there has been a lack of real action and translation in this regard into project processes, which are limited by systemic obstacles, red tape, outdated regulations, stakeholder motivations and costs. Graafland and Smid [23], among others, argued that SMEs could be considered as more embedded within a local environment and, accordingly, can better comply with environmental impact regulations and management. This is based on trustworthy relationships and employee workflow processes using relatively simple but formal tools, such as a systematic framework, for tracking impacts and communicating issues. Graafland and Smid [23] suggested that SMEs could practically implement simple voluntary initiatives focusing on waste management and energy and water consumption, rather than costly management systems or environmental management systems such as the ISO 140001 standard.

Table 3. An overview of studies included in the systematic search and a summary of the subsequent findings.

Green Stimulus Objectives	Challenges of Current Practices	Best Practices	Authors/Sources
Employment practices and education	Cost leadership. Employee redundancy. Labour intensive and discrimination. Unequal opportunities and employment benefits. Low pay and poor working conditions for apprentices Skilled labour shortage.	Cross-sector collaboration.	Barraket and Loosemore [24] Denny-Smith et al. [25] Galea [26] Loosemore and Reid [27] Raiden et al. [28] Raiden and King [29] Tansey et al. [19]
		Adult apprenticeship using a fast-tracked approach and recognition of prior learning (RPL).	Bednarz [30] Brunello [20] McCormack et al. [31] Raiden et al. [28] Riggal et al. [32] Sparks et al. [33] Wagner and Kulwiec [34]
		Flexible work, attractive working conditions and retention.	Gurmu [35] Healy et al. [36] Lingard et al. [37] Plumb et al. [38] Zuo et al. [39]
Project work health and safety	Lack of vision, management commitment and employee attitudes towards WHS. Lack of resources and the high cost of WHS project implementation. Extensive pyramid contracting and competitiveness force low-bid selection criteria (cost-cutting to win the bid).	Leadership commitment and a culture of safety.	Bogna et al. [40] Bahn and Barratt-Pugh [41] Daniel [42] Dale et al. [43] Godfrey and Lingard [44] Gurmu [35] Barret et al. [45] Lingard et al. [46] Mills and Lin [47]
		Toolbox meetings.	Choudhry et al. [48] Gervais [49] Kaskutas et al. [50] Raheem and Issa [51]
		Tailored safety training.	Belayutham et al. [52] Gurmu [35] Loosemore and Malouf [53]
		Project WHS cost as part of the bidding and tendering process.	Bryan et al. [54] Gillen et al. [55] Matthews and Rowlinson [56] Loosemore and Andonakis [57]
Environmental practices	Lack of awareness and reliance on financial incentives. Inadequate interpretation of climate change demands in project activities. Lack of commitment to site waste management.	Voluntary project-based waste management system.	Balasubramanian et al. [58] Chavan [59] Gadenne et al. [60] Hurlimann et al. [21] Lingard et al. [61] Graafland and Smid [23] Raar [22] Udawatta et al. [62] Walker et al. [63]
		Implementing an elementary environmental management system (EMS).	Chavan [59] Graafland and Smid [23] Halila [64] Lewis et al. [65] Teriö and Kähkönen [66]

Table 3. An overview of studies included in the systematic search and a summary of the subsequent findings.

Green Stimulus Objectives	Challenges of Current Practices	Best Practices	Authors/Sources
Employment practices and education	Cost leadership. Employee redundancy. Labour intensive and discrimination. Unequal opportunities and employment benefits. Low pay and poor working conditions for apprentices Skilled labour shortage.	Cross-sector collaboration.	Barraket and Loosemore [24] Denny-Smith et al. [25] Galea [26] Loosemore and Reid [27] Raiden et al. [28] Raiden and King [29] Tansey et al. [19]
		Adult apprenticeship using a fast-tracked approach and recognition of prior learning (RPL).	Bednarz [30] Brunello [20] McCormack et al. [31] Raiden et al. [28] Riggal et al. [32] Sparks et al. [33] Wagner and Kulwiec [34]
		Flexible work, attractive working conditions and retention.	Gurmu [35] Healy et al. [36] Lingard et al. [37] Plumb et al. [38] Zuo et al. [39]
Project work health and safety	Lack of vision, management commitment and employee attitudes towards WHS. Lack of resources and the high cost of WHS project implementation. Extensive pyramid contracting and competitiveness force low-bid selection criteria (cost-cutting to win the bid).	Leadership commitment and a culture of safety.	Bogna et al. [40] Bahn and Barratt-Pugh [41] Daniel [42] Dale et al. [43] Godfrey and Lingard [44] Gurmu [35] Barret et al. [45] Lingard et al. [46] Mills and Lin [47]
		Toolbox meetings.	Choudhry et al. [48] Gervais [49] Kaskutas et al. [50] Raheem and Issa [51]
		Tailored safety training.	Belayutham et al. [52] Gurmu [35] Loosemore and Malouf [53]
		Project WHS cost as part of the bidding and tendering process.	Bryan et al. [54] Gillen et al. [55] Matthews and Rowlinson [56] Loosemore and Andonakis [57]
Environmental practices	Lack of awareness and reliance on financial incentives. Inadequate interpretation of climate change demands in project activities. Lack of commitment to site waste management.	Voluntary project-based waste management system.	Balasubramanian et al. [58] Chavan [59] Gadenne et al. [60] Hurlimann et al. [21] Lingard et al. [61] Graafland and Smid [23] Raar [22] Udawatta et al. [62] Walker et al. [63]
		Implementing an elementary environmental management system (EMS).	Chavan [59] Graafland and Smid [23] Halila [64] Lewis et al. [65] Teriö and Kähkönen [66]

4.2. Limitations and Bias

The strength of this rapid review is the theoretical and conceptual background we discussed in Section 2 Background and Table 1, the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and the extensive keywords created before the initial search. However, it must be noted that the limitation of the rapid review conducted in this study is that we included all types of study design conducted in Australia. They were not grouped according to study type, setting, duration, measurement type or methodological design. We searched on Scopus and EBSCO for only English-language peer-reviewed articles, and we might have missed other relevant publications in other languages/countries. Despite this limitation, this review shows that the indicators and taxonomies of the best practices for assessing the readiness and capacity of construction organisations to address the sustainability agenda within shovel-ready projects in the Australian context can be improved.

5. Discussion

5.1. Employment Practices and Employee Competencies

5.1.1. Cost Leadership

This research argues that understanding the reasons for the challenges faced by SMEs is important for creating a framework of best practices. It has been argued that the cost of human resources (HR) within construction SMEs is crucial due to a shift in focus and priorities established by the organisations to endure and be competitive during a recession. According to the literature, one key challenge is the cost of HR. To lower HR costs and overheads, the priorities and strategies that are primarily implemented by construction organisations impacted by a recession were labelled “cost leadership” by Tansey et al. [19], and include salary and bonus cuts, project-based casual hiring, and staff retrenchment. Organisations tend to employ “high-skilled project-based” employees to reduce project risks, and at the same time lower the HR budget and funds required for training and upskilling programmes [20]. Construction organisations may adopt both informal and formal HR practices, where the former aim to source people from known networks. This practice is commonly and widely adopted among SMEs as it is more cost-effective [26]. However, the drawbacks (a lack of formal HR processes) of this approach can lead to illegal practices when recruiting people for projects, notably for disadvantaged groups, during a recession or pandemic.

5.1.2. Labour Intensity and Discrimination

The construction industry is well-known for being a labour-intensive, project-based business environment and a highly skill-oriented sector. Employing unskilled individuals has high risk, not only to the employees but also to the project’s success, time, cost, quality and safety performance [67,68]. Barraket and Loosemore [24] and Loosemore and Reid [27] noted that subcontractors operating at the lower end of the supply chain, in particular, were less likely to engage in “social procurement”, which can provide employment opportunities for disadvantaged and marginalised groups such as disabled, indigenous, migrant, refugee and ex-offender workers. Employing individuals from these groups, as well as those who have lost their jobs in other industries, women and unskilled youth, can be costly and time consuming, and introduce added risk to a business. Accordingly, it is often viewed as representing a liability rather than an asset [27].

5.1.3. Unequal Opportunities and Employment Benefits

According to a report published by the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility [69], the construction industry is heavily reliant on hiring labour and subcontracting to manage short-term and seasonal work fluctuations. According to Hepworth’s findings, illegal practices are evident in the Australian construction industry, and create a two-tier workforce in which labour-hire or contracted employees do not receive the same employment benefits as direct employees. Intensified pyramid subcontracting in large construction projects has resulted in the establishment of several layers of subcontractors, temporary workers and individual contractors working on construction sites on a contractual basis. This creates an environment that is vulnerable to illegal recruitment practices (e.g., sham contracting), illegal activities and subcontracting to unlicensed tradespeople, posing significant risks to achieving project quality and safety performance requirements [54].

5.1.4. Skilled Labour Shortage

The skilled labour shortage is a critical issue faced by the construction industry [36]. To overcome this, organisations primarily implement apprentice, graduate and internship programmes. However, according to a report published by the OECD and International Labour Organization [70] (p. 119), the completion rate of apprentice traineeship contracts in Australia is only approximately 50% due to challenges in the training contract and employment conditions. In addition, research undertaken by the National Centre for Vocational Education revealed that the reasons for not completing apprenticeships were related to low pay, issues with employers/work colleagues [30] (p. 7) and a wide range of negative behaviours, including bullying [31,32]. According to Bednarz [30], training and apprenticeship completion rates are high in large organisations and low in SMEs, as the former implement rigorous recruitment processes, formal work plans and mentoring support services. The labour shortage in the industry has created pressure on the existing workforce in the form of long working hours, overtime and less flexibility due to high demand. These aspects have come to be considered industry norms and are not only affecting work–life balance but also employment retention in the construction industry [36,37].

5.1.5. Cross-Sector Collaboration

A common best practice/mechanism for addressing the cost of leadership, labour intensiveness, skill shortages and retention issues in the construction industry is to become accustomed to and adopt cross-sector collaboration [28]. Raidén et al. [28], Denny-Smith et al. [25] and Raiden and King [29] note that the SME industry is more versatile in terms of creating social value as these businesses tend to be better embedded within the community, with good community roots and knowledge. Based on their informal practices, SMEs can engage with local social groups, not-for-profit social organisations and cross-sector labour-hire organisations to provide employment to disadvantaged people in the local community via informal networking. This approach can help organisations establish goodwill within the local community. However, formal engagement will still be needed to achieve sustainable employment practices that can improve business standards to support a broader community. According to the studies noted above, cross-sector collaboration is a best practice for providing employment to disadvantaged groups and includes non-construction industry agencies and social enterprises (or recruitments solutions) that specialise in supporting these groups. An effective formal approach to cross-sector collaboration can help to enhance the employment standards in SMEs while supporting the achievement of shovel-ready project objectives, e.g., adopting employment policies that are largely compliance driven and considering incorporating contract clauses to employ, train and support disadvantaged or marginalised project workers.

5.1.6. Apprenticeship

Raidén et al. [28] recognised that providing training and apprentice opportunities within the local community is one way in which organisations can create social value through specifically targeted programmes. The Australian government also provided additional incentives for employers and training organisations to help boost apprenticeship commencements via support for economic activities during the COVID-19 pandemic, making these organisations eligible to receive wage subsidies of up to 50% [71]. While the literature on construction apprenticeships is extremely limited, a study by Sparks et al. [33] on adults entering into advanced apprenticeship training schemes provided evidence that this reflected a practical approach for construction SMEs to overcome challenges finding the right employees for projects. According to the study’s findings, adult apprenticeships may be an effective solution to skills shortages, as well as a faster qualification pathway for people who have prior construction industry work experience. Additionally, compared to the traditional apprenticeship programme, which typically lasts four years and requires sequential training delivery in accordance with a structured training plan, adult apprenticeship programmes can be accelerated through RPL to produce a fully certified tradesperson within a shorter time. It is also believed that adult apprentices with existing experience are more productive and loyal to organisations.

5.1.7. Attraction and Retention Strategies

During a general economic downturn or recession, it has been a common strategy for organisations to implement workforce downsizing and staff retrenchments as an approach to controlling and reducing operational costs. In the construction sector, however, a lack of understanding of labour market dynamics and supply and demand could see decision makers engage in misinformed workforce downsizing that may often be too extensive to reverse. In the aftereffects of an economic downturn, the cost of attracting talent or re-instituting employees may at times outweigh the costs saved. Effective organisational strategies must support the construction industry workforce by creating attractive and sustainable practices, which may help it to retain employees at a manageable cost by, as suggested by Zuo et al. [39], upskilling and providing flexible working arrangements to keep employees engaged. Furthermore, as suggested by Plumb et al. [38], based on the 2008–2009 economic downturn scenario, employees should be given the flexibility to negotiate work and pay arrangements, as this can enable firms to preserve staff during a period of recession, partly by reducing the average hours worked; firms can also provide employees with internal promotions, rather than engaging in external recruitment, thereby using their existing knowledge and experience of the industry, and upskilling them to improve their competencies.

5.2. Project Work Health and Safety

5.2.1. Challenges for Maintaining Work Health and Safety Standards

Although enterprises in Australia operate under legislation and within a framework that prescribes responsibilities for maintaining the health and safety of employees and other persons who may be at risk and affected by projects or operations, a vast group of studies acknowledge the critical challenges that SMEs often face, i.e., operating with limited expertise and management commitment, employee attitudes, and a lack of physical and financial resources to facilitate and support the implementation of a work health and safety management system [43,47]. For example, employee attitudes, such as risk-taking behaviour, are often related to stress concerning production expectations.

A large number of the construction SMEs operating in Australia are owner–manager firms and, as such, their perceptions and attitudes towards risk define their organisational safety behaviour [45]. The leader/manager plays a critical role in this regard because of their personal beliefs about safety and their empathy for workers to ensure that they remain safe at all times; these aspects significantly correlate with their commitment to establishing effective WHS practices in the workplace [42,47]. In this context, daily site meetings, for example, could be more focused on restoring the progress of work and give lower priority to discussing the project’s health and safety-related issues [37].

The construction sector significantly involves project and contractual-based business and, as such, the WHS approaches developed by large construction companies can sometimes be too generic, making it impossible to replicate and scale them for adoption by SMEs. In addition, these approaches also do not suit the wide range of services and business environments [45,57]. Sub-contracting and procurement are also recognised as hindrances associated with implementing effective WHS. According to Loosemore and Andonakis [57] “pyramid structure contracting”, which denotes a highly competitive environment of subcontracting practice, creates financial and time pressures on construction SMEs. Project owners will often relocate risks to prime contractors, who then transfer a significant degree of risk and WHS commitments to sub-contractors or individual workers, based on obligations represented in contractual liability and subcontract agreements [54]. The prime contractor, who is supposed to be responsible for guiding SMEs about complying with WHS regulations, instead ends up doing as little as possible, leaving SMEs to explore regulations themselves, and the required WHS standards are subsequently not achieved.

Lingard et al. [72] claimed that projects with smaller budgets undertaken by SMEs may be more vulnerable to safety incidents due to the insufficient allocation of funds for WHS-related activities. During the recession, when SMEs implemented cost-cutting, and limited expenditures and priorities concerning budgeting for operations and resources (e.g., reducing the labour force, administrative controls and provisioning of personal protective equipment [PPE]), this significantly influenced the safety performance within SMEs [73]. Jenke et al. [73] stated, based on a report produced by the Queensland government, that there had been a significant increase in construction worker compensation in Queensland at the time of the economic stimulus in Australia following the 2009–2010 global financial crisis, during which the highest growth in construction jobs occurred in Queensland. The report further revealed that the increased number of unskilled labourers entering the construction job market due to the strong workforce demand had been the largest contributing factor to an increased number of WHS incidents.

5.2.2. Leadership Commitment and a Culture of Safety

Concerning the stimulus projects provided during the recession, business undertakings may have been more competitive, and companies may have underperformed in terms of WHS or neglected its risks and importance for cost-based reasons. Creating a safe work environment, however, should be a top priority. This can be achieved by implementing both strategic business and organisational culture changes. It has been long recognised that in the construction industry and the SME business sector, WHS is a priority area of concern in which work-related safety performance must be addressed alongside other top-priority business risks to improve management and performance.

Leaders are key agents in WHS performance and can influence a positive safety culture and employee behaviour through their leadership styles and communication, as they have the authority to make decisions resulting in preventive actions [40,46]. Furthermore, leaders who are committed to WHS and consider it an integral part of their business practice will ensure that it is a priority aspect of projects, along with work performance and team productivity. The literature shows that safety performance and productivity must co-exist. Gurmu [35] stated that effective health and safety practices are crucial for enhancing labour productivity in construction projects. The productivity gain is mainly due to significant reductions in lost days attributed to workplace accidents [41]. For example, Daniel [42] noted that one of the best ways to influence safety as a leader was by “being in the field”. Godfrey and Lingard [44] suggested senior management “safety walks”, regular site inspections, and consultation and talking about safety with leaders who can actively engage with and subsequently monitor such activities. By completing site visits, employee behaviour changes can be achieved and leaders can actively engage in monitoring to check, for example, whether employees are using the provided PPE and following the right procedures during site visits [47].

5.2.3. Toolbox Meetings

Several studies mentioned “toolbox meetings” or “toolbox talks” as an effective practice used by construction organisations to improve health and safety practices [35,48,49,51]. Toolbox or safety meetings refer to gatherings that involve all construction workers and provide an opportunity to discuss WHS matters [50]. Studies suggested the toolbox meeting as a tool with which to positively influence the workforce through communication, empowerment and active participation to improve safety performance and prevent work-related injuries; it enables bottom-up communication through employee participation, where employees can discuss and communicate their daily health and safety concerns, and help to identify risks and hazards in the work site for the employer, to better facilitate timely responses related to risk management and resource allocation to establish a safe workplace. The literature suggests that toolbox meetings are effective when they are tailored to address site-specific safety hazards and employee feedback [50] (p. 37). According to Kaskutas et al. [50], the active participation of both leaders and employees in daily toolbox meetings can assist in improving awareness, knowledge, skills and behaviours for achieving better safety performance. Choudhry et al. [48] found toolbox meetings enabled policy updates using worker opinions, as well as providing an opportunity to update workers on relevant safety revisions.

5.2.4. Tailored Safety Training

Several studies stated that safety training can serve as a solution for promoting individual compliance with the WHS requirements. In Australia, safety training has been delivered within a nationally regulated system and standards. Despite this, Loosemore and Malouf [53] found that a variety of professionals and labourers in the construction industry believed that mandatory site safety training was insufficient, based on changing safety attitudes. This is because the training provided is not specific to individual needs and pure cognitive exercises. Due to the temporary nature of construction projects, Gurmu [35], Belayutham et al. [52] and Loosemore and Malouf [53] suggested that training should be tailored to the specific scope of a project’s risk, participants’ age and gender, and demographics, and should adopt a “learner-centric” approach.

5.2.5. Project WHS Cost as Part of the Bidding and Tendering Process

Infrastructure and construction projects acquired under the stimulus programmes may currently no longer be economically profitable, but construction SMEs will nonetheless have to complete the work to break even. Some studies suggested including WHS costs in the tendering and bidding process to make sure that SMEs can prioritise and fund WHS activities and, accordingly, maintain compliance. Matthews and Rowlinson [56] suggested including a fixed sum in the bill of quantities to cover the safety-related expenses of a project, an approach that has been successful in the Hong Kong construction industry. Gillen et al. [55] recommended SME firms set aside a small percentage of labour costs in all of their bids to cover the cost of safety and health programmes, which could be used to purchase safety equipment and develop training programmes without jeopardising their ability to bid competitively on projects.

5.3. Environmental Practices

5.3.1. Lack of Awareness and Reliance on Financial Incentives

Several studies revealed an awareness gap in the perceived importance and significance of environmental management practice as a barrier to SMEs; accordingly, these businesses have not implemented effective initiatives compared to large organisations [23,58,60,63]. Environmental management practices are also constrained by the construction industry’s competitive and “sub-contracting” nature, as investment in an initiative relies heavily on financial incentives and budget allocations by the primary contractors and/or clients [62].

5.3.2. Inadequate Interpretation of Climate Change Demand

A growing scope of literature suggests that the construction industry sector should be setting project objectives and deliverables that contribute towards climate change adaptation and mitigation [21,22]. Hurlimann et al. [21] state that a project’s success in future should be determined by a high correlation to future climate change risk mitigation; however, they also revealed that barriers to focusing on mitigation activities exist because of the inadequate consideration of climate change risk demands and costs as early as the initiation stage of a project.

5.3.3. Lack of Commitment to Site Waste Management

According to the National Waste Report 2018 [74], the Australian construction industry accounts for 38% of the total core waste generated in construction sites and demolition processes. This is a significant percentage. Although a reduction in construction waste is widely acknowledged as a main priority, there has been a lack of commitment and action by organisations, as they are mainly prompted by regulatory compliance and not by voluntary practices [22]. Udawatta et al. [62] indicated human and technical factors were the barriers to construction industry waste management. Among the human factors, a lack of managerial commitment to site waste management was dominant, as also denoted in Lingard et al. [61]. Graafland and Smid [23] suggested that SMEs implement simple voluntary initiatives focused on project-based waste management and energy or water consumption, rather than formal environmental management systems, which are costly.

5.3.4. Voluntary Project-Based Waste Management System

It can be concluded that, regardless of the size and scale of construction projects, SMEs contribute to waste generation; however, they appear to be less committed to waste management practices than larger organisations. Raar [22] suggested that a waste strategy must provide significant financial benefits to SMEs and serve as a tool for profit maximisation. A case study was analysed and reported by Chavan [59] regarding a pilot waste management project implemented by a family-owned construction firm in New South Wales, which achieved a 6.1% net profit gain from a construction project. According to the study, the contract value of the project was AUD 1.3 million, and the forecasted profit without the waste minimisation technique was only 3.7%, which increased to 9.8% following waste management practices being implemented at the construction site. Chavan’s [59] study provides further evidence that straightforward practices, such as pre-existing waste identification, recycling and reusing techniques, are cost-effective practices that construction SMEs can use to maximise their profit.

5.3.5. Implementing an Elementary Environmental Management System

The ISO 14001 standard is a globally recognised environment management system (EMS), and adopting it reflects a commitment to best-practice environment management. The ISO 14000 series provides guidelines, principles and practices for environmental assessment, auditing, performance evaluations, life-cycle assessment and product design, and presents large advantages to SMEs [65]. The ISO 14001 standard is effective for large organisations, however, and may be too expensive for SMEs, as it requires structured implementation, specialists, financial resources, evaluation process, maintenance, monitoring and regular reporting [23,75]. Chavan [59], Halila [64], Campos [75] and Lewis et al. [65] suggested that even without a fully certified EMS (such as ISO 14000), construction SMEs can design a proactive and partially adapted EMS and commit to improving their environmental and business performance. An elementary approach to EMS also can be used to explore the environmental impacts of a project and the resulting information can be provided to other stakeholders or other formal environment management tools used in the project by different stakeholders [23,66]. Teriö and Kähkönen [66] showed that construction workers positively perceived a simplified EMS as being important and practical (e.g., a decision process model, forms, a checklist, guideline posters and signs, and an environmental risk index of the construction site), as it can help guide SMEs to identify and meet the requirements of local authorities, regulations, the correct handling of permits and methods for identifying environmental risk to a business or its projects.

6. Conclusions

Investment in new infrastructure and engineering projects has always been considered a central theme of economic stimulus policies that governments put in place for fast-tracking during economic downturns. Despite the broad range of literature delineating stimulus types and their benefits for supporting an economy, the associated risks to sustainability remain under-investigated, particularly in the context of SDGs. Several studies posited that sustainability and/or a green stimulus should be considered in the decision-making process, as well as in the implementation of any fast-tracked shovel-ready projects. While implementing such projects is often temporary and short-term, they can nonetheless introduce risks and adverse impacts to local communities and the environment that are irreversible.

This paper suggests that SMEs, which are most vulnerable and affected during an economic downturn, when awarded or contracted to complete shovel-ready projects, despite being constrained by available business profits and other significant challenges (such as leadership, employee redundancy, skilled labour shortage, poor working arrangement and safety, contractual competitiveness, lack of vision, commitment to and awareness of environmental issues, and project site waste management), can nonetheless contribute to different priority areas of sustainability and SDGs by adopting the best practices/principles outlined in this paper and discussed in terms of three broad categories, i.e., (1) employment practices and employee competencies, (2) project WHS and (3) environmental practices. These principles were grounded on regulations and taxonomies derived from a theoretical background and a rapid systematic review that focused on and reflected factors that positively influenced best practices in the construction- and engineering-specific literature. Only two primary databases were used in this study as sources of articles, which represents a limitation of this research. It can thus not be generalised and is not sufficiently exhaustive.

Future studies should explore other databases and use expert interview approaches to yield an in-depth understanding of the principles that have yet to be explored. We believe it is important to focus future research to extend the literature and look into the appropriation of other indicators (see Figure 1, the P5 ontology) such as protection for indigenous peoples, voluntary labour, local procurement, energy consumption, clean energy return, business agility and local economic impact. Moreover, cross-sectional methods can be used with large sample sizes to test and validate the rank, relationship and significance of the indicators and principles applied to shovel-ready projects, as discussed herein, to render them statistically generalisable.