“Analysis of Barriers and Enablers In Application Of Green

Procurement in Government Construction Projects”

Abdulhamid Bin Siradj M. Abantas1,a), Sheena O. Abuiza2,b), and Jonathan

Kenneth I. Baltazar 3,4,c)

1
Quezon City Hall Department of Engineering – 6th floor Civic center b, Quezon City Hall Compound, Brgy.
Central, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
2
Quezon City Hall Parks development and administration Department– 4th floor Civic center b, Quezon City Hall
Compound, Brgy. Central, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
3
United Architects of the Philippines- Manila Atelier Chapter- 2/F Beato Angelico Building, University of Santo
Tomas campus, Espana, Manila, Philippines
4
DOTr- Railways MMSP PMO- 2/F ARCA North Building, ARCA North Compound, Mc Arthur Highway
Karuhatan, Valenzuela City, Philippines
a)
absabantas01@gmail.com
b)
sheena_abuiza@yahoo.com
c)
ar.kennethbaltazar@gmail.com

Abstract. The construction industry is considered as the Construction projects are seen as major causes of
environmental problems throughout their life cycles, ranging from the use of nonrenewable resources to the
influence on biodiversity to the consequences on global warming [1]. According to the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP), buildings consume 30-40% of all primary energy worldwide [2]. Construction project
completion and exploitation account for half of total extracted materials and one-third of total water usage in the
European Union [3-4]. The construction industry accounts for one-third of overall waste generation in the European
Union (EU) [3]. Residential construction projects in emerging nations are to blame for rising CO2 emissions [5]. In
2015, the industrial sector gives around 29% of biggest shares in energy consumption in the Philippines [6] and
building energy consumption accounts for around 15 to 20% of total national electric power consumption [7]. Due
to the significant environmental impact of construction projects in the European Union, there are concerns about
their environmental performance and the establishment of a set of specialized indicators, primarily connected to
resource acquisition and usage [8]. Green procurement has been acknowledged as one of the most effective ways to
improve the environmental performance of construction projects. Previous study has shown that using energy
efficient materials and solutions in building restoration can results in savings of about 25% in household energy
consumption [9]. It is therefore critical that future buildings be planned in accordance with energy conservation
concepts in order to contribute to the nationwide effort to avert or at least alleviate the worst effects of an energy
crisis. The review of previously published studies revealed that there have been no previous studies and research
related to green procurement in government construction projects in the Philippines, or even green procurement in
other areas of the Philippines, despite the fact that public procurement legislation includes specific provisions and
criteria for green procurements. The absence of studies and research on green procurement in Philippine government
building projects, as well as the focus of prior research, served as the beginning point for this study.

Index Terms — Barriers and Enablers, Construction, Government, Green Procurement

 INTRODUCTION
Green procurement comprises the purchasing of ecologically preferred or green items and is thought to
contribute significantly to environmental sustainability. Green goods are products made or produced from renewable
resources or recycled materials, having recyclable components at the end of their useful life. Green products may
also include biodegradable materials to reduce waste even further. Environmental characteristics of equipment,
machinery, and technology may include efficiency in energy consumption and water usage, as well as minimal
pollution of the environment during manufacture and operation [10]. As previously stated, several preferences can
be used to encourage the purchase of green items. The most essential are mandated purchases of green goods and the
creation of specifications and tender assessment criteria that take the green features of items into account.
Preferences may be given to items that have energy-saving features in addition to the fundamental
requirements for accreditation and labeling, through the use of supplementary specifications and tender evaluation
criteria. This is related to the recent establishment of a unique category in the government's classification of
excellent items comprised of the most energy efficient products. Companies who provide these products are given
bonus points in the evaluation score. Another preference is to provide a 10% subsidy to procurement companies that
purchase the most energy-efficient goods, which is similar to a preferential margin [11].
Eco-friendly construction in public works projects is another facet of green procurement. As part of eco-
friendly or sustainable construction, the design suggestions, equipment to be installed, and building materials to be
used must result in energy and water savings, improved lighting and air quality, and reduced noise levels. To further
encourage environmentally sustainable construction, the materials and equipment utilized should be long-lasting,
renewable, and made from recycled materials such as crushed glass for sand in cement or scrap steel for steel rods in
concrete reinforcement [14-16].
Green Procurement Practices in the Philippines
There has been minimal progress in green purchasing by procurement entities in the Philippines as well.
There is no mention of any obligation to purchase green goods in either the 2009 Implementing Rules and
Regulations of the Government Procurement Reform Act of 2003 or the handbook for procuring goods. There is no
provision for certifying such items, and procurement entities are under no need to include environmental
requirements in tender specifications and bid award criteria. Furthermore, a company's eligibility to tender is not
contingent on its environmental credentials [12,13].
However, in the region's emerging countries, eco-friendly building in public works projects has not yet
reached its full potential. In the Philippines, for example, according to procurement regulations and the manual
governing infrastructure projects, environmental sustainability attributes are not mandatory criteria to be adopted in
drafting design specifications and bid evaluation criteria, as well as in project contractor evaluation at the end. There
is no no environmental certification of a facility once it has been built, nor is there an environmental award system
for contractors [17].
There are numerous ways and definitions of the idea of green procurement in the literature, as well as an
evolution of this term over time [18]. In 2000, Nagel defined green procurement as "eco-labels, the avoidance of
ecologically harmful substances, energy use, the use of recycled materials, the mass, the re-usability of some parts,
the recyclability" [19]. Green procurement was defined in 2001 as "the set of purchasing policies held, activities
executed, and relationships developed in response to concerns about the natural environment." These concerns are
about raw material procurement, including supplier selection, evaluation, and development; supplier operations;
inbound distribution; packaging; recycling; reuse; resource reduction; and final disposal of the firm's products" [20].
Green procurement was defined in 2011 as "the incorporation of environmental factors into purchasing policies,
programs, and actions." [21] Green procurement incorporates special environmental performance requirements into
standard procurement methods [22]. Green procurement, according to more current definitions, is "the procurement
of items or services having a lower environmental impact relative to other products or services that serve the same
function, or products that meet particular predetermined environmental standards" [23].
Shifting from traditional procurement methods to green procurement at the organizational or building
project level, while considered as a goal, is not always simple. It entails a number of technological challenges, the
reconfiguration of stakeholder relationships, creative design techniques, and the likelihood of increasing
construction costs. On the organizational or project level, any of these can be possible impediments to green
procurement. Furthermore, the organization's environmental performance criteria and current legislation might
operate as accelerators of green procurement. As a result, there have been a number of past studies undertaken in
various countries on the impediments that may exist in the process of implementing green procurement in the
specific situation of construction projects.
 Factors Affecting Green Procurement in Organizations
The most significant barriers to the adoption and implementation of green procurement within projects are
government policies, the characteristics of materials and products used in construction projects, organizational or
project-level attitudes toward adopting and implementing green procurement, the construction market, the real estate
market, and the building materials market [24].
Adoption and execution of green procurement at the project or organizational level in the construction
industry are linked to certain government policies [25]. The presence or absence of these policies might be viewed
as boosters or impediments to green procurement adoption [26]. Governments can utilize their purchasing power to
promote green procurement in the public sector. Environmentally preferable procurement rules have been developed
in the public sector in the United States and the European Union [27]. Specific procurement guidelines should have
been incorporated into public procurement law based on the practice of the United States, the European Union, and
the Philippines.
Several prior research believe that the most significant hurdle at the organizational level to adopting green
procurement techniques is an increase in product, service, and labor costs [28–33]. Changing the specifications of
the materials, goods, and technologies utilized in construction projects necessitates additional charges, which may
result in an increase in execution costs. When it comes to adopting and implementing green procurement, the
attitude of the business or project team is critical. A positive organizational attitude toward environmental issues, as
well as the existence of specific organizational strategies/policies/responsibilities, will encourage managers to use
green procurement [34]. If construction organizations lack explicit environmental policies/responsibilities,
managers, particularly at the operational level, will be less inclined to pursue green procurement. Green procurement
in building projects necessitates an interdisciplinary approach and the cooperation of multiple departments within
the collaborating organizations in their execution [35]. The positive management mindset stems from the firms'
desire for long-term competitiveness [36]. Adoption and execution of green procurement is part of the
organizational process of achieving long-term competitiveness.
Previous study has found a variety of potential impediments to green procurement implementation. Shen et
al. [24] summarized 13 potential hurdles that can occur in real estate projects and discovered that the majority of real
estate developers in the investigated area have no or little experience in the field of green procurement. The most
significant barriers to adopting and implementing green procurement in real estate projects are a lack of consumer
appeal for green building materials, a lack of government incentives, technical concerns with using green building
materials, a lack of green building materials in the local market, and cost increases [24]. Wong et al. [37]
investigated 35 green procurement enablers in construction projects, categorizing them as follows: green principles
and techniques for reducing environmental impact; efforts or initiatives undertaken by industry or society;
requirements assumed by company managers; collaboration between stakeholders; establishment of databases for
green procurement; the existence of regulations and standards adopted by the government in the field of green
procurement. A number of recommendations for green procurement at various phases of the construction project's
life cycle were offered in the same study.
Other experts have developed a preliminary green procurement model for construction projects based on
three major aspects that determine an organization's green orientation: green policies and guidelines, environmental
evaluation, and the utilization of green products [38]. This methodology is built on the concept that green
procurement has an impact on a project's green performance [38]. Based on a systematic review of the studies
published on the topic of green procurement, Apolloni et al. [31] observed that they come from four areas:
production, operations, and supply chain management; sustainability, environment, and quality; general
management; and marketing. According to the study's authors, implementing green procurement in the private sector
contains both barriers and enablers. These may originate within or outside of the organization. The cost and lack of
legitimacy were deemed to be the most important types of internal organizational barriers. Outside of the company,
the most major forms of hurdles include regulation, weak supplier commitment, and industry-specific restrictions
[31]. The research conducted on the topic of green procurement enablers quantitatively outperforms that conducted
on the hurdles that may develop in the path of adopting green procurement at the project and/or organizational
levels. Organizational factors are the most important internal drivers of green procurement. Customers, competition,
and society are the three most important forms of green procurement drivers [31].
 METHODOLOGY
This research is the systematic review of the literature on Enablers and Barriers in Application of Green
Procurement in Government Construction Projects. To summarize the studies related to the research, a systematic
review method called the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) was
used. According to the online site the BMJ (2021), PRISMA was designed to help systematic reviewers
transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did and what they found. This research used the
PRISMA statements, which have three categories: literature search, screening and selection of qualified
publications. To find out related publications to the research, the search was first performed on the use of relevant
keywords such as green procurement, enablers and barriers of green procurement, green procurement in the
Philippines, green procurement in public sector and etc. The literature includes research not only on the theme of
barriers and enablers, but also on the topic of green procurement performance or the consequences of green
Identification

Publications found through

online base searching
n= 50

Removed publications for

duplication
n= 21
Screening

Excluded publications after

screening of title and abstract
n= 29

Evaluated publications aimed

for eligibility
n=20 Excluded articles with reason
n=5
Eligibility

Removed articles in qualitative

analysis
n=15 Identified publications in
references
n=5
Included articles for meta-
analysis
n=20
Included

Green Procurement (n=8) Green Procurement in the Philippines (n=2)

(n=18)
10 Enablers and Barriers in Application of Green Procurement in Government Construction Projects related
publications have been selected from 20 publications
n=10

FIGURE 1. Flowchart of the research based on PRISMA statement

procurement on the performance of construction projects or organizations [31,38]. Studies in the literature focus on
either green procurement hurdles or green procurement enablers. Even if they employed a uniform, homogeneous
grouping of barriers and green procurement enablers, relatively few research have been concerned with both barriers
and green procurement enablers.
Based on the initial search conducted, 50 publications related on the research were found. The next step
was eliminating publications with unnecessary data; thus 21 publications were removed due to irrelevancy.
Eventually, 20 publications have been identified and reviewed based on the criteria of this research. Finally, 10
related publications have been selected to be used in this research. The summary of these papers includes the
author/s, publication year, title of the publication, methodology used and findings.

Title of the
Author of the Methodology Used Findings/Conclusions or Recommendations of the
Paper/Journal
Paper Cited in the Study Cited Paper Cited
/Publication Cited
Green Public
Some of the challenges in Green Public Procurement
APEC Procurement in the
in the Philippines are the legal framework and
Committee on Asia Pacific Region:
environment criteria, political and institutional
Trade and Challenges and Qualitative Research
support, environmental criteria, monitoring, training,
Investment Opportunities for
communication of benefits, trade barriers &
(2013) Green Growth and
promotion of trade and the market
Trade
Green Procurement
Implementing green procurement gives
in Construction
Muhammad environmental, social, economic and political
Industry: A
Waris Ali benefits. It is also associated with barriers such as
Theoretical Qualitative Research
Khan et al. lack of enforcement, lack of knowledge, higher cost,
Perspective of
(2018) passive culture, insufficient guidance and tools and
Enablers and
lack of corporate commitments
Barriers
The drivers of green procurement adoption are
environmental legislations, enterprise’s
environmental mission, cost of environmentally
friendly goods, requirements by organizations
Green Procurement supplied to, supplier advances in developing
Practices in the environmentally friendly goods, possibility of future
Joel Nabiswa
Public Sector: The Qualitative Research environmental regulations and operational cost
Khisa (2011)
Case of Parastatals savings from adopting green procurement practices.
in Kenya The challenges are insufficient knowledge on
concept of green procurement, lack of legal
enforcement, short term planning over long term
planning, lack of information, lack of internal
communication and lack of support
The GPP challenges are weak implementation of
Green Public EO301, lack of GPP technical knowledge and skills
Procurement Policy while National Ecolabelling Programme Green
June M.
and the National Choice Philippines as mandated by EO301 has
Alvarez Qualitative Research
Ecolabelling limited capacity in its operation, perceived conflict
(2014)
Programme Green with a higher law (R.A 9184, Government
Choice Philippines Procurement Reform Act) and lack of green products
in the market and its suppliers
Government
The Philippine The issues and concerns of green public procurement
Procurement
Green Public in the Philippines are prudent spending, costs versus
Policy Board- Qualitative Research
Procurement value for money, readiness of suppliers, capacity &
Technical
Roadmap awareness and verification of green supplies
Support
Office (2017)
The possible challenges of green procurement are
lack of knowledge & practical tools, lack of training,
lack of awareness, lack of enforcement, insufficient
policies & regulation, lack of proper guidelines, lack
The Possible
of top management commitment, poor market
S.L.A Rais et Challenges of Green Intensive Literature
demand for recyclable materials, insufficient
al. (2018) Procurement Review
integration and link up in the industry, procedure to
Implementation
implement green procurement are time consuming,
lack of incentive for companies. High cost of green
products and services and limited supply for green
product
The advantages of GPP are it is very flexible and
dynamic compared to other regulatory instruments, it
works on market conditions which is much better
accepted by industry, not irreversible, it can work
outside the national borders, specific requirements
Ida Bode et Benefits of Green can be made in tenders and for complex products and
Qualitative Research
al. (2009) Public Procurement services, it might be the only viable method. The
challenges are the relative magnitude of public
procurement is often too small, higher procurement
costs for green products, leadership are required at
all levels and it requires and it requires special
competencies by public procurement offices
The Effects and
Yeong-jun
Implication of The impacts of GPP are climate change mitigation
Yeo, Ki-yoon
Green Public with environmental benefits, triggering innovations
Shin & Qualitative Research
Procurement with with the demand articulation and increase in
Jeong-dong
Economy-wide government purchases’ efficiency & social benefits
Lee (2021)
Perspective
The barriers of GPP are lack of choice of
environmental friendly products and services, lack of
An Analysis of the
government support, lack of methods to compare
Barriers to and
environmental credentials of greener goods and
Myles Drivers of Green
services, slow return of investment, lack of training,
Keaveney & Public Procurement
Qualitative Research greener products or services has higher cost and the
Paul Butler in Achieving a More
resistance to change procurement procedures. The
(2014) Sustainable
drivers of GPP are legislations/regulations, increased
Construction
availability of greener products and services,
Industry
simplification of green criteria, internal staff and
increased cooperation
The challenges of the implementation of green
procurement are high upfront price, unavailability of
Challenges and green policies and guidelines, lack of knowledge,
Zafikha Aida Drivers of Green lack of commitment from top management and lack
Bidin et al. Procurement among Qualitative Research of awareness and readiness. The drivers of green
(2020) Construction procurement are integration of green practices, green
Projects in Malaysia policies and guidelines, constant assessment, carrot
and stick approach, management commitment and
stakeholder values
TABLE 1. Comprehensive Overview of the Key Aspects of Application of Green Procurement in Government
Construction Projects.
 CONCLUSION
The Application of Green Procurement is beneficial in the Government Construction Industry. As
discussed by APEC Committee on Trade and Investment [39], the challenges of Green Public Procurement (GPP) in
the Philippines are defining clear specification for a list of goods and services, integrating of life cycle approach in
environmental considerations, training about the application of guidelines for green purchasing, communication of
GPP scheme and environmental standards, developing of monitoring system of GPP to estimate the effects of the
policy on the market and the environment, the lack of framework regulations and environmental criteria to promote
trade in green products and framework policies to extend the establishment of GPP initiative giving incentives to the
producers and suppliers to change to a cleaner product. As also discussed by Alvarez, J.M [42], other challenges of
GPP in the Philippines are weak implementation of EO301 or the Decentralizing Actions on Government Negotiated
Contracts, perceived with higher law in reference of R.A. 9184 or Government Procurement Reform Act and the
limited capacity in its operation of National Ecolabelling Programme Green Choice Philippines. The issues and
concerns of GPP in the Philippines according to Government Procurement Policy Board-Technical Support Office
[53] are prudent spending, costs versus value for money, readiness of suppliers, capacity & awareness and
verification of green supplies
Implementing green procurement in construction projects gives environmental, social, economic and
political benefits according to Khan, M.W.A et al. [40]. As stated by UNEP [49], the building sector has the biggest
potential for lessening greenhouse gas emissions by purchasing of green and renewable materials. By implementing
green procurement in the start of the project, it is avoiding any air, water and even soil pollution in the construction
industry. With the knowledge on green procurement, stakeholders will know how to control the chemicals and
handle hazardous substances. This will motivate the contractor to follow environmental laws and regulations. Green
building can lessen the energy consumption to less than half of what a typical building does, with similar reductions
in potable water consumption, run-off to sewer and solid waste. The implementation of green procurement lessens
the negative impact to the environment, which minimizes the accidents, lessening liability, safety and health costs.
Contractors can minimize the use of toxic chemicals to give a healthier working environment. Green procurement is
a way to promote the environmental caring concept to human beings. According to CEA [50], by implementing
green building saves the majority of funds in utility costs and maintenance part. It will motivate the contractors to
choose their purchases more efficiently and used renewable raw materials and green equipment. The government
plays a major role to promote and provide awareness to the public sector to protect the environment and has the
responsibility to give the perception to the citizens about the significance of green procurement in the construction
projects. In addition, the advantages of GPP according to Rais, S.L.A et al. [44] are it is very adaptable and dynamic
compared to other regulatory instruments, it works on market conditions, not irreversible, it can work outside the
national borders, specific requirements can be made in tenders so the result is known and it might be the only viable
method for complex products and services.
The drivers of GPP according to Bidin, Z.A et al. [48] are green policies and guidelines which is supported
by the study of Butler, P. et al. [47] and Khisa, J.N. [41]. The guidelines and policies are crucial to make sure that
the industry will implement green procurement procedures; integration of green practices where the government
should establish a clear concept and urge for industry players to implement green procurement in construction
projects; constant assessment in terms of stakeholder certification and contract terms; management commitment
where the politicians, ministry, government, private sector shareholders and stakeholders have significant roles
which can influence the organization’s decision in the implementation of green procurement; and stakeholder values
that have a huge impact on green performance based on the commitment of stakeholders. Other drivers according to
Butler, P. et al. [47] are increased availability of greener products and services, simplification of green criteria,
internal staff and increased cooperation and according to Khisa, J.N. [41] are enterprise’s environmental mission,
cost of environmentally friendly goods, requirements by organizations supplied to, supplier advances in developing
environmentally friendly goods, and operational cost savings from adopting green procurement practices.
Application of Green Procurement in Government Construction Projects is also associated with its barriers.
According to Khan, M.W.A et al. [40], it is believed that many practitioners have lack of education and experience
about the significance and concept of green procurement in the construction industry which is supported by the
study of Khisa, J.N. [41], Rais, S.L.A et al. [44] and Bidin, Z.A. et al. [48]. There is a low level of awareness and
understanding regarding green procurement. It can be attributed to the lack of training which is supported by the
study of Butler, P. et al. [47] and Bidin, Z.A et al. [48]. The government plays a significant role in promoting green
procurement in construction. It can be implemented with the support of laws and regulations. There have been
several acts that focus on the environment but unsuccessful due to the lack of enforcement and monitoring which is
supported by the study of Butler, P. et al. [47], Khisa, J.N. [41] and Rais, S.L.A et al. [44]. Financial constraints are
a prominent consideration for contractors and developers to implement green procurement. It is perceived to be
more expensive because the building approach and materials are different from a typical building which is supported
by the study of Rais, S.L.A et al. [44], Bode, I. et al. [45]; Butler, P. et al. [47] and Bidin, Z.A et al. [48]. Change
resistance to the adoption of green procurement results in a lack of demand of clients and stakeholders players in the
construction projects. It is difficult for people to change their mentality because they get used in doing their work in
same ways which is supported by the study of Butler, P. et al. [47]. All organization levels, not only from the top
management but also purchasing agents must have a commitment on the implementation of green procurement.
Some of the organizations are lacking of in corporate processes and their structures complicate the ability to address
problems which is supported by the study of Rais, S.L.A et al. [44]; Bode, I et al. [7]; and Bidin, Z.A et al. [48].
According to Yeo, Y. et al. [46], the impacts of GPP are climate change mitigation with environmental benefits,
triggering innovations with the demand articulation and increase in government purchases’ efficiency & social
benefits.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, we would like to acknowledge our Almighty God and Allah for the sustenance and
protection as we undertake this research study. His faithfulness never failed us in times of great tribulation and
challenges. We are grateful for all the provision of life and strength in order to complete this research.
To our parents, we could not express enough our gratitude. We would have not made it if not because of
your understanding and patience in guiding us every step of the way. Thank you for all of the sacrifices and support
that you bestowed on us, making this research journey worthwhile. Even though our parents didn’t understand our
undertaking, they are always present to boost our morale.
Also, we would like to recognize our professional colleagues and fellow countrymen that stood by us when
there are times that the journey seems impossible. Thank you for believing in us and supported our cause. Your faith
in us and in our study fueled our motivation to pursue and finish our research. This proves that our endeavor is
worthy.
Finally, we would want to acknowledge the institution that housed our community and platform for our
profession, The Polytechnic University- Open University, which enabled us to pursue higher knowledge and
education even in these trying times. We are thankful for creating the MSCM program. Through the institution’s
effort, academic opportunities like this would not exist and for that we are truly and forever be grateful.
 REFERENCES
1. Onat, N.C.; Egilmez, G.; Tatari, O. Towards greening the US residential building stock: A system dynamics
approach. Build. Environ. 2014, 78, 68–80
2. UNEP (2007) Annual Report [online] Available from:
https://www.iri.edu.ar/publicaciones_iri/anuario/CD%20Anuario%202008/Mayd/PNUMA.pdf
3. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Resource Efficiency Opportunities
in the Building Sector; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2014.
4. Copenhagen Resource Institute. Resource Efficiency in the Building Sector—Final Report; DG Environment:
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2014.
5. De Boeck, L.; Audenaert, A.; De Mesmaeker, L. Improving the Energy Performance of Residential Buildings:
A Literature Review; Research Paper; Ku Leuven Hub: Brussels, Belgium, 2013.
6. Asia Development Bank. PHILIPPINES ENERGY SECTOR ASSESSMENT, STRATEGY, AND ROAD
MAP, 2018.
7. Department of Energy (DOE). Guidelines For Energy Conserving Design of Buildings and Utility Systems.
Available from: https://www.doe.gov.ph/guidelines-energy-conserving-design-buildings-and-utility-systems
8. European Commission Joint Research Centre. Identifying Indicators for the Life Cycle Environmental
Performance, Quality and Value of EU Office and Residential Buildings; Working Paper 2; European Commission:
Brussels, Belgium, 2016
9. Galante, A.; Pasetti, G. A methodology for evaluating the potential energy savings of retrofitting residential
building stocks. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2012, 4, 12–21.10
10. Kunzlik, P. (1998). "Environmental Issues in International Procurement." In S. Arrowsmith & A. Davies (Eds.),
Public Procurement: Global Revolution (pp. 199-218), London, UK: Kluwer Law International.
11. Koo, J. H. & Lim, J. S. (2010). "Policy Measures for Low-Carbon Green Growth." Paper Presented at the 4th
International Public Procurement Conference, 26-28 August, Seoul, South Korea. [Online]. Available at
www.ippa.org.
12. Government Procurement Policy Board (2009a). Procurement Manual, (Vol. 1: Guidelines on the
Establishment of Procurement Systems and Organizations. Manila, Philippines: Author.
13. Government Procurement Policy Board (2009b). Procurement Manual, Vol. 2: Procedures for the Procurement
of Goods and Services. Manila, Philippines: Author.
14. Gavinich, T. (2008). Contractor's Guide to Green Building Construction: Management Project Delivery,
Documentation and Risk Reduction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
15. Kibert, C. J. (2008). Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons.
16. Kunzlik, P. (2009). "The Procurement of 'Green' Energy." In S. Arrowsmith, & P. Kunzlik (Eds.), Social and
Environmental Policies in EC Procurement Law: New Directives and New Directions (pp. 369-408). Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. Government Procurement Policy Board (2009c). Procurement Manual (Vol. 3: Procurement of Infrastructure
Projects). Manila, Philippines: Author.
18. Akadiri, P.O. Understanding barriers affecting the selection of sustainable materials in building projects.J.
Build. Eng. 2015, 4, 86–93
19. Nagel, M. Environmental supply-chain management versus green procurement in the scope of a business and
leadership perspective. In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Symposium, ISEE 2000, San Francisco,CA,
USA, 10 May 2000
20. Zsidisin, G.A.; Siferd, S.P. Environmental purchasing: A framework for theory development. Eur. J.
Purch.Supply Manag. 2001, 7, 61–73.
21. Large, R.O.; Thomsen, C.G. Drivers of green supply management performance: Evidence from Germany.J.
Purch. Supply Manag. 2011, 17, 176–184.
22. Giudice, F.; La Rosa, G.; Risitano, A. Product Design for the Environment a Life Cycle Approach; Taylor &
Francis:Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2006.
23. Mosgaard, M.A. Improving the practices of green procurement of minor items. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 90, 264–
274.
24. Shen, L.; Zhang, Z.; Long, Z. Significant barriers to green procurement in real estate development, Resources.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 116, 116,160–168
25. Zhang, X. Green real estate development in China: State of art and prospect agenda—A review. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 47, 1–13
26. Commission of the European Communities. Public Procurement for a Better Environment, Communication
from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions; Commission of the European Communities: Brussels, Belgium, 2008.
27. Simcoe, T.; Toffel, M.W. Government green procurement spillovers: Evidence from municipal building
policies in California. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2014, 68, 411–434.
28. Min, H.; Galle, W.P. Green purchasing strategies: Trends and implications. Int. J. Purch. Mater. Manag. 1997,
33, 10–17.
29. Orsato, R.J. When does it pay to be green? Calif. Manag. Rev. 2006, 48, 127–143.
30. Ageron, B.; Gunasekaran, A.; Spalanzani, A. Sustainable supply management:an empirical study. Int. J. Prod.
Econ. 2012, 140, 168–182.
31. Appolloni, A.; Sun, H.; Jia, F.; Li, X. Green Procurement in the private sector: A state of the art review
between 1996 and 2013. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 85, 122–133.
32. Genovese, A.; Koh, S.C.L.; Bruno, G.; Esposito, E. Greener supplier selection: State of the art and some
empirical evidence. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2013, 51, 2868–2886.
33. Mathiyazhagan, K.; Govindan, K.; Noorul Haq, A.; Geng, Y. An ISM approach for the barrier analysis in
implementing green supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 283–297
34. Guo, L.; Xu, Y.; Liu, G.; Wang, T. Understanding Firm Performance on Green Sustainable Practices through
Managers’ Ascribed Responsibility and Waste Management: Green Self-Efficacy as Moderator. Sustainability 2019,
11, 4976.
35. Bansal, P.; Roth, K. Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Acad. Manag. J. 2000,
43, 717–736.
36. Stefan, S.; Popa, I.; Dobrin, C. Towards a Model of Sustainable Competitiveness of Health Organizations.
Sustainability 2016, 8, 464
37. Wong, J.K.W.; Jackson, K.S.C.; Waduc, M.J. Facilitating effective green procurement in construction projects:
An empirical study of the enablers. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 859–871.
38. Bohari, A.A.M.; Skitmore, M.; Xia, B.; Teo, M. Green oriented procurement for building projects: Preliminary
findings from Malaysia. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 148, 690–700.
39. APEC Committee on Trade and Investment. Green Public Procurement in the Asia Pacific Region: Challenges
and Opportunities for Green Growth and Trade. Committee on Trade and Investment. 2013.
40. Khan, Muhammad Waris Ali et al. Green Procurement in Construction Industry: A Theoretical Perspective of
Enablers and Barriers. MATEC Web of Conference. 2018.
41. Khisa, Joel Nabiswa. Green Procurement Practices in the Public Sector: The Case of Parastatals in Kenya.
2011.
42. Alvarez, June M. Green Public Procurement Policy and the National Ecolabelling Programme Green Choice
Philippines. Green Choice Philippines. 2014.
43. Government Procurement Policy Board- Technical Support Office. The Philippine Green Public Procurement
Roadmap. Government Procurement Policy Board- Technical Support Office. Philippines. 2017
44. Rais, S.L.A et al. The Possible Challenges of Green Procurement Implementation. International Conference on
Advanced Manufacturing and Industry Applications. International Conference on Advanced Manufacturing and
Industry Applications. Volume 429. 15-17. 2018.
45. Bode, Ida et al. Benefits of Green Public Procurement. Nordic Council of Ministers. Denmark. 2009.
46. Yeo, Yeong-jun, Shin, Ki-yoon and Lee, Jeong-dong. The Effects and Implication of Green Public Procurement
with Economy-wide Perspective. Korea. 2021.
47. Keaveney, M. and Butler P. An Analysis of the Barriers to and Drivers of Green Public Procurement in
Achieving a More Sustainable Construction Industry. International Virtual Conference. University of Zilina,
Slovakia, 24-28. 2014.
48. Bidin, Zafikha Aida et al. Challenges and Drivers of Green Procurement among Construction Projects in
Malaysia. International Journal of Service Management and Sustainability. Volume 5. No. 1. 2020.
49. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Annual Report Seizing the Green Opportunity. 2009.
50. Capital E Analysis. Green Building, redirecting our campus toward environmental sustainability. 2011.