International Journal of Construction Management

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/tjcm20

Barriers to sustainable procurement in the

Nigerian construction industry: an exploratory
factor analysis

Oluwabukunmi A. Ogunsanya, Clinton O. Aigbavboa, Didibhuku W. Thwala &

David J. Edwards

To cite this article: Oluwabukunmi A. Ogunsanya, Clinton O. Aigbavboa, Didibhuku W. Thwala

& David J. Edwards (2022) Barriers to sustainable procurement in the Nigerian construction
industry: an exploratory factor analysis, International Journal of Construction Management,
22:5, 861-872, DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2019.1658697

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1658697

© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as

Taylor & Francis Group

Published online: 06 Sep 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5924

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 39 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tjcm20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
2022, VOL. 22, NO. 5, 861–872
https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1658697

Barriers to sustainable procurement in the Nigerian construction industry:

an exploratory factor analysis
Oluwabukunmi A. Ogunsanyaa, Clinton O. Aigbavboaa, Didibhuku W. Thwalaa and David J. Edwardsa,b
a
Department of Construction Management and Quantity Surveying, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa;
b
Department of Built Environment, Birmingham City University, UK

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Research into the application of sustainable procurement in construction projects is nascent Barriers; construction
with the few prominent studies carried out in the developed nations. Of particular interest is industry; factor analysis;
how developing nations are rising to the challenge of development and using their procure- procurement; sustainable
ments strategically. One way the construction industry helps to achieve sustainable develop-
ment is through its procurement activities. Previous studies show that Nigeria is embracing
sustainable procurement however the uptake is slow. Therefore, this research sets out to evalu-
ate the factors that constitute barriers to sustainable procurement of publicly funded construc-
tion projects in Nigeria. A questionnaire survey was used to evaluate construction industry
professionals’ perspective on the barriers to sustainable procurement in Nigeria. Three hundred
and twenty questionnaires were returned and used for analysis. Out of the nineteen variables
tested, factor analysis reveals four clusters named in other of significance as sustainability know-
ledge level, transparency and governance, mismatch of procurement strategy and national pol-
icy challenges, and construction industry related factors. This study recommends that mitigating
these challenges will require improving sustainability knowledge among project stakeholders,
ensuring transparency and good governance, adapting procurement laws with sustainability
clauses and construction industry development.

1. Introduction Adebayo (2015) contends empirically that there are

inadequate policy mechanisms to embed sustainability
Nations are using their position as volume buyers to
in public procurements in Nigeria. It is therefore per-
influence the thrust of their procurement policies to
encompass social and environmental dimensions tinent to unravel the causes of low uptake or lack of
(Renukappa et al. 2016, 19). Existing studies confirm implementation of sustainable procurement in the
that the construction industry plays a vital role in construction industry seeing that the government has
the adoption of sustainable procurement practices committed to the sustainable development agenda.
towards attaining the sustainable development goals The current study seeks to identify the barriers to sus-
(Rwelamila et al. 2000; PricewaterhouseCoopers 2009; tainable procurement of publicly funded construction
Varn€as, Balfors and Faith-Ell 2009; Kahlenborn et al. projects in Nigeria and see if the barrier factors can
2011; Renda et al. 2012). However, there is paucity of be further grouped into closely related components.
empirical research on how the construction sector is
addressing sustainable procurement issues (environ-
2. Sustainable procurement and the Nigerian
mental, social and economic) in their whole supply
construction industry
chain, most especially in a developing nation’s con-
text. Studies in Nigeria have attempted to give an Sustainable procurement (SP) was first muted as a
insight into how the public sector and the construc- concept in the United Nations World Summit on
tion industry, in particular, fairs as regards sustainable Sustainable Development in 2002 in Johannesburg.
procurement (Olanrewaju et al. 2014; Ogunsanya However, the idea has its footing in the mid-1990s as
et al. 2016; Faremi et al. 2017). These studies con- green procurement (United Nations 2016). The initial
clude that sustainability adoption is low. Furthermore, thrust of the green procurement movement entails

CONTACT Oluwabukunmi A. Ogunsanya [email protected], [email protected]

ß 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
862 O. A. OGUNSANYA ET AL.

coupling environmental criteria into product’s with legislation; technology and innovation; organisa-
requirements. This agenda has grown and widened to tional structure and processes; education and training;
include social performance and new economic goals. political willingness; adoption of global strategy;
The concept of sustainable procurement draws atten- knowledge of sustainable procurement; legal frame-
tion to the responsibility of a company for activities work; monitoring; market demand, government pol-
outside its boundaries (Meehan and Bryde 2011; icy, reputation, and customer requirements. While for
Association for Project Management 2016). According the construction industry, the drivers are: value for
to the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply money, reputation, market differentiation, capabilities
(2011), it entails socially and ethically responsible pur- and culture, category management and execution,
chasing, environmental impact minimization through structures and systems, and integration and align-
the supply chain, and adopting economically sound ment.to mention a few (Walker and Brammer, 2009;
solutions, all entrenched in a good business frame- Belfitt et al. 2011; United Nations Environmental
work. It is believed that sustainable procurement saves Programme, 2016) and Spiller, Reinecke, Ungerman
cost and reduces waste by questioning the need to and Teixeira, 2012).
buy, reducing quantities where necessary, saving Also, few studies have considered international var-
energy and water, promoting re-use and recycling, iations in the engagement of public bodies with sus-
minimizing packaging and increasing transport effi- tainable procurement. Considering the scale and
ciencies. Sustainable procurement actions in the importance of public procurement, and the capacity
United Kingdom (UK) are based on the Flexible for sustainable public procurement to bring about
Framework Model and the BS 8903: 2010 which social benefits directly and by modifying the activities
entails principles and framework for procuring of private sector organisations, it is necessary to
responsibly. Furthermore, Walker and Brammer explore how effective policy initiatives have been
(2009) argue that the concept of sustainable procure- encouraging public organisations to purchase sustain-
ment is consistent with the principles of sustainable ably (McCrudden, 2004; Weiss and Thurbon, 2006).
development, which imply ensuring that societies The construction industry generally comprises of
develop healthily with genuine concern for human organisations and persons concerned with the process
and plant life, considering environmental limits and by which building and civil engineering works are pro-
good governance, while achieving the former through cured, produced, altered, repaired, maintained and
purchasing and the supply process. demolished. These include companies, firms and indi-
Mensah and Ameyaw (2012, p. 872) assert that viduals working as consultants, contractors and subcon-
traditional procurement entails the quest for value for tractors, material producers, equipment suppliers and
money while sustainable procurement is about value builders’ merchants (Hillebrandt 2000; Construction
for money on a whole life cycle basis considering the Industry Development Board 2015). The industry
economic, social and environmental dimensions. works harmoniously with clients, financiers and other
Greener (2008) posits that sustainable procurement is stakeholders. The Nigerian construction industry has as
the application of sustainable development principles its main players construction firms ranging from the
to procurement and this is crucial in helping to small, medium and micro enterprises to the multi-
achieve a world that is habitable, affording people a national construction firms. Government is the largest
good quality of life. Taking a cue from the works of client of the industry, though in recent years there is
Berry and McCarthy (2011) and Roos (2012), the four increased patronage from private sector clients
cardinal aims of sustainable procurement can be (Mbamali and Okotie 2012). The Nigerian population
expressed as minimization of the impact of procured continues to increase faster than the rate at which pub-
items (goods, services and works) across the life cycle lic infrastructure is provided. This infrastructure deficit
by supply chains; reducing resource use through opti- has since continued. Consequently, some indigenous
mization of purchases, using resource-efficient prod- construction companies were established to tap into the
ucts, re-use and recycling of products; using fair emerging opportunities.
contract prices and terms while upholding utmost Furthermore, the construction sector has been a
ethical standards, human rights protection and contributor to the GDP of Nigeria (Omole, 2000).
employment standards; and promoting equality and This it has continued to do in a progressive manner
diversity through the supply chain (Berry and considering the level of infrastructure need in the
McCarthy, 2011; Roos 2012). Researchers identify the nation. The real GDP for the country for 2010 was
drivers of sustainable procurement are: compliance N54.612 trillion. The construction sector’s
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 863

contribution was N1.570 trillion. This implies a share Nigeria is lagging world developments associated with
of 2.88%. The construction sector grew by 21.30% to sustainability within the construction sector and
reach N1.905 trillion in 2011. A gradual reduction in beyond. There is currently no legislation requiring
the growth rate of the construction sector by 14.86% that a sustainable procurement policy should be
resulted in the sector closing at N2.188 trillion in applied to projects of particular magnitude and worth
2012 (National Bureau of Statistics 2015). The sector in Nigeria.
also serves as a current and potential employer of the
teaming unemployed youths in the country. The con-
3. Barriers to sustainable procurement
struction industry has provided over 6 million con-
struction-related employment opportunities to both Brammer and Walker (2011) identified the barriers to
Nigerian and non-Nigerian professionals. sustainable procurement as financial, informational,
Despite the success of the construction sector legal, managerial/structural, political/cultural and
through the Infrastructure Concession and Regulatory product quality priority. Similarly, despite the advan-
Commission (ICRC) reform policy, key industry play- tages for the adoption of sustainable procurement at
ers have mixed views on its wholesomeness in achiev- the organisational level, the following factors by
ing the intended goals (ICRC 2012; National Planning Meehan and Bryde, (2011) were considered critical
Commission 2015). For instance, Ozoigbo and barriers to its uptake. First is ‘inertia’ within the com-
Chukuezi (2011) and Idoro (2010) argue that there pany. Inertia develops from the institutionalisation of
are significant inequalities between economic growth a routine within an organisation. As firms try to
and subsequent development in the Nigerian con- maintain a sense of reliability, processes become rou-
struction sector. The reform policy is viewed to confer tine. Thus, the implementation of changes become
some privileges on multinationals through outsourc- more difficult, as it will be an upheaval to the existing
ing of materials and human resources with no due routine (Meehan and Bryde, 2011, Belfitt et al., 2011).
justifications. Critics of the practice are concerned Another is the conflict of incentives. The procurement
about the implications of continued marginalisation staff could feel pressured to make decisions that do
of local skills and manufacturing sectors. not align with sustainable procurement strategy. This
Furthermore, the clamour by stakeholders for could indicate that there is a conflict between the
sustainable development in Nigeria is relatively pressures on staff and the greater driving them
recent. The Nigerian Government took a giant step towards maintaining, the more traditional approach.
towards sustainability in 2007 when it established The third barrier relates to a meaningless formality.
Nigerian Environmental Standards and Regulatory Even though many companies are documenting sus-
Enforcement Act (NESREA Act) and the Agency tainable procurement strategies in their annual
(NESREA 2007). The agency has domesticated Agenda reports, it would be interesting to find out to what
21 Nigeria. The principal goal was to integrate envir- extent these policies influence the procurement deci-
onmental dimensions into development planning at sions within a company. Another possible barrier is
Federal, state and local government levels, to start the that those who are going to benefit from sustainable
transition to sustainable development while addressing procurement adoption on construction projects are
sectorial priorities, plans and strategies for implemen- not the persons bearing the cost. When the cost of
tation, and using the collaboration of regional and glo- maintenance is considered it may seem a bit far-
bal resources. The direct implications of this is that it fetched from the contractor that builds the facility,
has become mandatory for environmental impact except when build-operate-transfer or build-operate-
assessment to be undertaken before construction of own-transfer models are used. Likewise, some argue
public facilities, remedial measures are taken to reduce against the appropriateness of making the initial occu-
the impact of construction, and the initiation of post pants of a building pay for end of life costs that are
construction review audits (NESREA 2017). In the many years away from the initial occupants (Belfitt
same year, the Public Procurement Act (PPA 2007) et al., 2011).
was passed and the Bureau of Public Procurement was According to the Sustainable Development
established. This other agency focuses on the financial Commission (2004), the commonly cited hindrances
proprieties of acquisition of public goods, works and to sustainable procurement are: perception that it
services. Ensuring value for money, accountability, increases cost, lack of awareness of the need for sus-
transparency and respect for public thrust is main- tainable procurement and the processes entailed, lack
tained in transactions. Despite the aforementioned, of knowledge required, risk averseness on the part of
864 O. A. OGUNSANYA ET AL.

Table 1. Definition of potential barriers factors for sustainable procurement.

Variable no Variable Name
HSP01 Lack of awareness of sustainability concepts
HSP02 Reluctance of the contractor side to adopt sustainability practices in procurement
HSP03 Lack of motivation for the implementation staff
HSP04 Lack of capacity in required human resources
HSP05 Perceived high cost of adopting sustainable solutions
HSP06 Failure to match project needs to procurement options
HSP07 Failure of Government to establish National Council for Public Procurement
HSP08 Lack of commitment to National Development Plan
HSP09 Inadequate time for the pre-contract phase
HSP10 Lack of regulatory framework for sustainable construction procurement
HSP11 Lack of enforcement and implementation of relevant laws
HSP12 Lack of monitoring and control on projects
HSP13 Corruption
HSP14 Political interference
HSP15 Non availability of sustainable materials
HSP16 Failure to adhere to quality management processes
HSP17 Reluctance in embracing new knowledge
HSP18 Lack of confidence in local contractors
HSP19 Delays in payment of contractors
Sources: (Belfitt et al., 2011; Meehan and Bryde, 2011; Mensah and Ameyaw, 2012: 874; McMurray et al. 2013; Olanrewaju, et al.
2014; Ruparathna and Hewage, 2015; Ogunsanya, et al. 2016; Renukappa et al. 2016; Faremi, et al. 2017; United Nations, 2017).

clients, legal constraints, leadership challenges and Fien (2013) found that religion significantly influences
inertia. Similarly, Meehan and Bryde (2011), posits that the decision of procurement managers in the private
a major barrier to the adoption of sustainability in pro- sector and directors in the public sectors. They identi-
curement is the lack of engagement with suppliers. fied major barriers as lack of awareness, lack of
Another barrier is the fact that some of the supply resources, lack of a long-term view to procurement
chains are multinational while the laws regulating sus- decisions, lack of guidance and lack of political sup-
tainability or sustainable procurement are national or port when sustainable procurement practices were
locally formulated. This dichotomy is a challenge. compared between the public and private organiza-
Within a developing nation’s context, Mensah and tions. However, Ruparathna and Hewage (2015)
Ameyaw (2012: 874) argue that the following barriers established in a Canadian study that lack of consider-
must be surmounted to attain sustainable procure- ation of sustainability criteria in bid evaluation topped
ment in a developing nation using Ghana as a case the list when drawbacks to sustainable procurement
study. These are: the absence of internal management were considered. Others are the unavailability of
structures that support sustainable procurement; lack standard methods for procurement and lack of know-
of social drive from major stakeholders; low technical ledge of local conditions. According to the United
and management capacity; an inefficient approach to Nations (2016), barriers to sustainable procurements
stakeholders’ management; the high initial cost of are habit and the difficulty in changing procurement
green products; low stakeholders’ education; the behaviour; lack of suppliers of sustainable assets, sup-
absence of government interest; lack of political will; pliers or services; complexity of comparing costing/
corruption among procurement practitioners; lack of value for money assessments; the difficulty of includ-
capacity for small scale suppliers and contractors ing factors broader than environmental considera-
(Mensah and Ameyaw, 2012, p. 874). The main find- tions; and a perception that the process and outcomes
ings of the research is that the lack of understanding are costlier or time-consuming. Although there are
of sustainable procurements and the higher initial clear advantages for a company’s adopting sustainable
cost associated with sustainable procurement are the procurement procedures, these have not been largely
most significant hindrances to sustainable procure- realised. For instance, in the UK uptake of whole life
ments in Ghana. Ross (2012:53) found the barriers in costing in the private sector is still below 10%
another developing nation’s context as legal frame- (Renukappa et al. 2016). The identified barriers from
work that does not encourage sustainable public pro- the literature above and knowledge of the Nigerian
curement (SPP), donor guidelines that does not environment helped to form the critical mass of the
encourage SPP, lack of capacity, lack of guidance indicator variables tested further in the study. The
materials and practical tools, complexity of SPP, variables used in the study are listed is Table 1.
expectation of increased cost, and inflexible budgetary All the studies above have evaluated hindrances to
mechanism. In Malaysia, McMurray, Islam, Siwar and sustainable procurement within different national
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 865

Table 2. Respondents’ demographic characteristics. construction projects in Nigeria. Simple random

Demographic characteristics Percentage n sampling was used to identify professionals in three
Gender major states of the country (Lagos, Ogun and the
Male 79.7 255
Female 20.3 65 Federal Capital Territory – Abuja). The choice of the
Age locations was due to the volume of construction proj-
21–25 2.5 8
26–30 9.4 30 ects that are publicly funded in these locations (Lagos,
31–35 12.9 41 Abuja) while Ogun state represents an emerging busi-
36–40 13.5 43
41–45 22.3 71
ness hub. Out of the 602 questionnaires that were
46–50 18.2 58 administered which comprise personally administered
51–55 13.2 42 questionnaires and copies sent through electronic mail,
56–60 7.5 24
61–65 0.3 1 only 320 responses were useful for analysis at the close
Highest qualification of the survey (53.2%). From the total number of
National Diploma 1.9 6
Higher National Diploma 21.5 68 respondents (N ¼ 320), 35% (n ¼ 111) work in Abuja,
Bachelor’s degree 51.4 163 34.1% (n ¼ 108) work in Lagos State, 30.3% (n ¼ 96)
Master’s degree 24.3 77
Doctorate 0.9 3 work in Ogun State while the remaining 0.6% work
Professional qualification outside the main states of interest as shown in Table 2.
Architect 17.7 56
Builder 12.6 40 The main survey locations critical to the study were
Civil engineer 30.6 97 Abuja, Lagos, and the Ogun States. Other demographic
Electrical engineer 6.3 20
Mechanical engineer 5.0 16
details of the respondents are indicated in Table 2. The
Structural engineer 3.2 10 researcher obtained the consent of the participants
Procurement officer 5.0 16
Quantity surveyor 18.0 57
regarding their willingness to partake in the study and
Project manager 1.6 5 were informed it is part of ongoing doctoral research
Years of Experience in the Construction Industry aimed at developing a sustainable procurement model
1–5 16.5 52
6–10 21.2 67 for the Nigerian construction industry.
11–15 19.0 60
16–20 19.6 62
20–25 13.0 41
26–30 7.3 23
5. Data analysis
Above 30 3.5 11
Sector of the Construction Industry 5.1. Factor analysis
Government agency 53.6 171
Contractor 18.2 58 According to Pallant (2013:181), Factor analysis is a
Consultant 14.4 46 data reduction and analysis method. Also, Tabachnick
Other: private 13.8 44
and Fidell (2007) argue that factor analysis produces a
theoretical solution untainted by unique and error
contexts and industry sectors; it is, therefore, essential variability. Thus, there are two main approaches to
to identify the barriers to sustainable procurement of factor analysis (exploratory factor analysis and
publicly funded construction projects in Nigeria. This confirmatory factor analysis). The exploratory factor
study adopts a quantitative research approach as its analysis is used to elicit information regarding inter-
methodology which is explained hereafter. relationships among a set a variables while confirma-
tory factor analysis is used later in the research
process, entailing complex and more sophisticated
4. Methodology
techniques in testing specific hypotheses relating to
This study uses a quantitative approach to identify the the structural relationships of variables. However, this
most critical barriers/hindrances to sustainable pro- study makes use of exploratory factor analysis for
curement in the Nigerian construction industry. The this paper.
choice of research methodology was determined by the
ontological and epistemological basis of the investiga-
5.2. Stages in exploratory factor analysis
tion and position of literature (Creswell, 2009; Bryman,
2012). Therefore it uses a survey method to investigate There are 3 stages in conducting exploratory factor
the phenomenon of interest in the study population. analysis. These are;
The survey entails administering questionnaires to will- Assessment of suitability of data. The two promin-
ing participants carefully selected. The population of ent conditions that must be satisfied in terms of suit-
interest in this research are practitioners and professio- ability of data are sample size adequacy and strength
nals involved in the procurement of publicly funded of correlation amongst the variables. Several authors
866 O. A. OGUNSANYA ET AL.

hold different position as regards sample size to 0.70. According to Hair et al. (2010), Bartlett’s test
adequacy, though there is a consensus that the larger with a significance level of less than 0.05 substantiates
the sample size the better. Pallant (2013) holds that the appropriateness of the factor model. The import
the size should be at least 300 cases while Tabachnick of this is that there are potential correlations among
and Fidell (2007) support 150 cases. Also, on the the variables and thus indicative of a reasonable
strength of interrelationships of the variables, it is rec- potential cluster forming factors from the variables
ommended that the correlation matrix should be (Field 2009; Hair et al. 2013).
inspected for coefficient values greater than 0.3. If Furthermore, eigenvalues greater than 1 were con-
larger percentage is greater than 0.3 the sample is sidered significant and were used to explain the vari-
adequate but if there are very few correlation coeffi- ance obtained by a factor. According to Hair et al.
cients greater 0.3 the sample is inadequate. Two tests (2010), eigenvalues of less than 1 are considered
used to confirm for the conditions above are the insignificant: these were excluded accordingly in the
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling current study. Before conducting the principal com-
adequacy and the Bartlett’s test of sphericity. ponent analysis, communalities extracted on each
Factor extraction. This process entails identifying variable were assessed and presented. The communal-
minimum number of factors that can be used to rep- ities are critical and useful in deciding the variables
resent interrelationships of a set of variables. The that have to be finally extracted (Field 2009). This is
major techniques for factor extraction are principal because by connotation, the communalities typify the
component, principal factors, image factoring, max- total amount an original variable shares with all other
imum likelihood factoring, unweighted least squares, variables included in the factor analysis (Field 2009;
and generalized least squares. The commonly used Hair et al. 2013). According to Field (2009) and
technique is the principal component analysis. This Motulsky (2015), an average communality of the vari-
technique involves balancing the need for a simple ables after extraction should be above 0.60 to support
solution with the minimum factors needed to explain reliable results and interpretations in factor analysis.
so much variance in the original data set. The princi- Also, the conventional rule about communality values
pal component analysis can be effected as Kaiser’s cri- in factor analysis suggests that a potentially significant
terion, scree test or parallel analysis. The current variable must yield an extraction value (eigenvalues)
study uses a scree test which is generated by plotting greater than 0.50 at the initial iteration (Field 2009;
all the eigenvalues of the factors. Hair et al. 2013).
Factor rotation and interpretation. The process of Factor analysis was used to establish which of the
rotation helps in providing clearer picture of the com- variables could be measuring the same underlying
ponents generated without altering the underlying sol- effects so that they can be grouped together. The data
utions. Thus, SPSS present the components as clusters was screened for completeness and to ensure that
of variables which the researcher uses the base theory missing values and incomplete data sets did not affect
and past researches to interpret. There are more than the analysis. As will be observed, there are more than
one technique to effect factor rotations. These are 320 data set (i.e. >150 cases), which is sufficient for
varimax, quartimax and equamax used when orthog- factor analysis. The analysis, findings and the discus-
onal rotations are desired while oblique rotations are sion are as follows.
effected by direct oblium and promax techniques. The
current study used varimax technique.
5.4. Exploratory factor analysis of barriers to
sustainable procurement
5.3. Assumptions for exploratory factor analysis
Nineteen items evaluating hindrances to sustainable
Factor analysis is deemed appropriate when the procurement were subjected to principal component
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkine (KMO), the measure of sam- analysis using SPSS version 22. Before this, the suit-
pling adequacy test index, is higher than the satisfac- ability of data for analysis was assessed. Inspection of
tory minimum limit of 0.5 and a desirable limit of 0.8 the correlation matrix showed many of the coeffi-
or greater (Kaiser, 1970). Conventionally, a cients had values of 0.3 and above. The Kaiser-Meyer-
Cronbach’s alpha of 0.70 is considered reasonably Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy of 0.893
good for the scale reliability and internal consistency was obtained. This value is above the desirable value
of the instrument (Field, 2009; Hair et al. 2010). Also, of 0.8. From Table 3, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was
suggested a cut-off value KMO greater than or equal 2575.429 with an associated significance of 0.000.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 867

Also, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.913 was realized, sug- discussion section. Also, the scree plot for the factor
gesting an acceptable level of internal consistency and analysis is shown in figure 1.
reliability in the measures and the scale.
From Table 4, the average communality of the var-
6. Discussion of results
iables after extraction was 0.632. Hence, the commu-
nalities extracted support the use of factor analysis on 6.1. Component 1 – sustainability knowledge level
the variables. It can be observed that no item had
The five barrier factors extracted for component 1
extracted eigenvalues less than the 0.50 cut-off point,
were Lack of awareness of sustainability concepts
hence all the variables a qualified for further analysis
(80.2%), Lack of motivation for the implementation
(Field 2009; Hair et al. 2013). Similarly, the rotated
staff (77.0%), Lack of capacity in required human
component matrix in Table 5 showed four distinct
components as each variable dominantly belonged to resources (76.8%), Reluctance of the contractor side to
a unique factor (component). From this result, the adopt sustainability practices in procurement (76.1%),
components that emerged could be the dominant Inadequate time for pre-contract phase (50.1%). The
underlining factors determining barriers to sustainable numbers in parenthesis are the factor loadings. This
procurement. cluster accounted for 39.868% of the variance
From the result presented in Table 6, a four-factor (Table 6). This cluster shares in common the general
component solution which explained a total of link to sustainability knowledge and awareness and
64.076% of the variance was obtained. The first com- capacity on the contractor side. Olanrewaju et al.
ponent explained 39.868% of the variance; the second (2014) argue these are the bane of the Nigerian con-
component explained 9.496%; while the third compo- struction industry as regards sustainability. The
nent 8.484%; and the last component 6.226%. The authors claim that the awareness level of sustainable
total variance explained is above the recommended construction among industry practitioner is moderate
minimum of 50% (Field, 2009; Pallant, 2013; for the majority of the survey respondents. Also,
Motulsky, 2015). The four components were named Berry and McCarthy (2011) assert that there should
according to the factor with the highest loading in the be a sustainability agenda on every project, most espe-
cluster. These are explained in greater details in the cially public infrastructure that is well articulated.
Thus, procurement sustainability requirements must
be contractually enforceable where possible. Projects
Table 3. KMO and Bartlett’s test. must have established standards and measurements
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.893 such that non-compliance can be identified and cor-
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 2757.429
Df 171 rected in the course of execution. If this is not done,
Sig. 0.000 it will be difficult for the contractors to implement
a. Cronbach’s alpha ¼ 0.913.
sustainability in procurement. The design team must

Table 4. Communalities.
Communalities
Initial Extraction
HSP01 Lack of awareness of sustainability concepts 1.000 0.713
HSP02 Reluctance of the contractor side to adopt sustainability practices in procurement 1.000 0.712
HSP03 Lack of motivation for the implementation staff 1.000 0.680
HSP04 Lack of capacity in required human resources 1.000 0.684
HSP05 Perceived high cost of adopting sustainable solutions 1.000 0.564
HSP06 Failure to match project needs to procurement options 1.000 0.702
HSP07 Failure of government to establish National Council for Public Procurement 1.000 0.655
HSP08 Lack of commitment to the National Development Plan 1.000 0.609
HSP09 Inadequate time for the pre-contract phase 1.000 0.403
HSP10 Lack of regulatory framework for sustainable construction procurement 1.000 0.638
HSP11 Lack of enforcement and implementation of relevant laws 1.000 0.677
HSP12 Lack of monitoring and control of projects 1.000 0.685
HSP13 Corruption 1.000 0.768
HSP14 Political interference 1.000 0.572
HSP15 Non-availability of sustainable materials 1.000 0.606
HSP16 Failure to adhere to quality management processes 1.000 0.613
HSP17 Reluctance in embracing new knowledge 1.000 0.667
HSP18 Lack of confidence in local contractors 1.000 0.682
HSP19 Delays in payment of contractors 1.000 0.544
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
868 O. A. OGUNSANYA ET AL.

Table 5. Rotated component matrix.

Component
1 2 3 4
HSP01 Lack of awareness of sustainability concepts 0.802
HSP03 Lack of motivation for the implementation staff 0.770
HSP04 Lack of capacity in required human resources 0.768
HSP02 Reluctance of the contractor side to adopt sustainability practices in procurement 0.761
HSP09 Inadequate time for the pre-contract phase 0.501
HSP13 Corruption 0.833
HSP14 Political interference 0.704
HSP11 Lack of enforcement relevant laws 0.645
HSP12 Lack of monitoring and control of projects 0.641
HSP10 Lack of regulatory framework for sustainable construction procurement 0.559
HSP06 Failure to match project needs to procurement options 0.807
HSP07 Failure of government to establish National Council for Public Procurement 0.766
HSP05 Perceived high cost of adopting sustainable solutions 0.693
HSP08 Lack of commitment to the National Development Plan 0.621
HSP18 Lack of confidence in local contractors 0.790
HSP17 Reluctance in embracing new knowledge 0.753
HSP16 Failure to adhere to quality management processes 0.622
HSP15 Non-availability of sustainable materials 0.621
HSP19 Delays in payment of contractors 0.594
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Rotation converged in 7 iterations.

Table 6. Total variance explained.

Initial eigenvalues Extraction sums of squared loadings Rotation sums of squared loadings
Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 7.575 39.868 39.868 7.575 39.868 39.868 3.654 19.232 19.232
2 1.804 9.496 49.363 1.804 9.496 49.363 2.941 15.481 34.713
3 1.612 8.484 57.847 1.612 8.484 57.847 2.872 15.116 49.829
4 1.184 6.229 64.076 1.184 6.229 64.076 2.707 14.247 64.076
5 0.905 4.765 68.841
6 0.821 4.319 73.160
7 0.740 3.893 77.054
8 0.612 3.221 80.274
9 0.527 2.776 83.050
10 0.460 2.419 85.470
11 0.423 2.227 87.696
12 0.380 2.000 89.697
13 0.348 1.829 91.526
14 0.327 1.722 93.248
15 0.309 1.628 94.876
16 0.281 1.477 96.353
17 0.261 1.373 97.726
18 0.234 1.231 98.956
19 0.198 1.044 100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

work with this mindset and specify sustainable mate- shows the same deficiency and has started preliminary
rials (energy efficient, long-lasting, cost-effective and works in terms of pilot projects in 13 countries to foster
easily disposed at the end of life). Also, Meehan and the promotion of sustainable public procurement
Bryde (2011) advocate genuine engagement not only (UNEP 2012). The traditional position is that projects
with the contractor but the entire supply chain side are delivered the way the client wants it. Lately, contrac-
while Adebayo (2015) shows that there are inadequate tors have begun to offer sustainable solutions as value
policy mechanisms to embed sustainability in public offerings to the client. So, request for sustainability on
procurements in Nigeria. Similarly, the perspective of projects doesn’t have to be at the instance of the cli-
Ross (2012) is instructive, who contends that there is ent alone.
a general lack of competence in sustainability matters
in developing nations. This incompetence manifests
6.2. Component 2 – transparency and governance
as a lack of practical tools, information and training
noting that for several public entities, including environ- The five barrier factors extracted for Component 2
mental and social requirements into their procurement were Corruption (83.3%), Political interference (70.4),
functions is a new concept. Marrakech Taskforce report Lack of enforcement of relevant laws(64.5%), Lack of
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 869

Figure 1. Scree plot for factor analysis.

monitoring and control on projects (64.1%), Lack of procuring authorities regarding procurement decisions
regulatory framework for sustainable construction pro- which is subject to abuse, and does not mandate pro-
curement (55.9). This cluster accounts for 9.496% of curing authorities to inform unsuccessful bidders why
the variance (Table 6). The numbers in parenthesis they lost except an official inquiry is made. At
are the factor loadings. UNODC (2019) claims that the national level, Roos (2012, p. 51) contends that
up to 20-25% of the procurement budget is drained developing nations may need to modify their legisla-
through corruption globally. Eyo (2017) in a review tion to be able to incorporate sustainability criteria.
of the impact of corruption on sustainable public pro- Ogunsanya (2018) advocates for sustainable procure-
curement in Africa found that at the macro level, ment act that focuses on construction and infrastruc-
entrenched corruption depletes the limited funds ture projects considering the share of the national
available for public spending and proposes stronger budget that these constitute in Nigeria. Furthermore,
control systems at the micro/institutional levels to Gelderman, Semeijn and Bouma, (2015) argue that
mitigate the actions of corrupt public officials. The political leaders are less likely to promote sustainable
reorganization of the public procurement system in procurement just as this study affirms.
Nigeria and Public Procurement Act (PPA) promulga-
tion was to provide some of the controls that Eyo
6.3. Component 3 – mismatch of procurement
(2017) suggested. Also, anti-corruption agencies such
strategy and national policy challenges
as Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
(EFCC) and Independent Corrupt Practices and The 4 barrier factors extracted for Component 3 were
related Offences Commission (ICPC) were created to Failure to match project needs to procurement options
address issues arising from infractions of public pro- (80.7%), Failure of government to establish National
curement amongst others in Nigeria. Furthermore, Council for Public Procurement (76.6%), Perceived
when contract values are inflated to almost 4times the high cost of adopting sustainable solutions (69.3%),
cost of the project, value for money on a whole life and Lack of commitment to National Development
cycle basis is truncated. Also, the existing regulation Plan (62.1%). This cluster accounts for (8.484%) of
(PPA 2007) is generally for goods, works and services the variance (Table 6). The numbers in parenthesis
with no direct provisions for sustainability. However, are the factor loadings. At the project level, the inabil-
Williams-Elegbe (2012) argues that the PPA falls ity of the project sponsors to identify the most appro-
short in international best practices on transparency priate procurement method to use can frustrate
by not specifying which threshold performance bond project sustainability (Rwelamila, Talukhaba, and
is required, giving great discretionary powers to Ngowi, 2000). Several procurement methods exist
870 O. A. OGUNSANYA ET AL.

with newer ones being developed to correct some the financial institutions, creation of construction indus-
challenges of the past (Babatunde, Opawole and try development board (Chukwudi and Tobechukwu,
Ujaddugbe, 2010). Also, the perceived high cost of 2014; Ogunsanya, 2018).
implementing a sustainable solution is another bar-
rier. This is taking a short term view of the sustain-
able procurement benefit. If a long term perspective is 7. Conclusion and recommendation
considered and the present-future cost/benefits are The barriers to sustainable procurement are diverse as
balanced sustainable procurement is cheaper on the different factors are responsible. Though the benefits
long run. The reality is that sustainability and sustain- of sustainable procurement in the delivery of con-
able procurement goes beyond the environment, there struction projects are known. There is paucity of
are issues of health and safety of employees, appropri- knowledge as to the factors that are mitigating against
ateness of their wages and working conditions, use of sustainable procurements in the Nigerian construction
locally available substitutes among others and best industry. Hence, through a survey of construction
value for money. industry professionals, the barriers to sustainable pro-
curement were classified into 4 clusters. These are;
6.4. Component 4 – construction industry related sustainability knowledge factors, transparency and
governance factors, mismatch of procurement strategy
The 5 barrier factors extracted from Component 4
and national policy issues; and construction industry
were Lack of confidence in local contractors (79%),
development related factors. These findings lend sup-
Reluctance in embracing new knowledge (75.3%),
port and align with the findings of studies in Ghana.
Failure to adhere to quality management processes
It is therefore recommended that efforts should be
(62.2%), Non-availability of sustainable materials
intensified on awareness creation and capacity devel-
(62.1%) and Delays in payment of contractors (59.4%).
This cluster accounts for 6.226% of the variance. For opment of construction industry professionals on
the construction industry to fully engage with sustain- integrating sustainability in the procurement proc-
able procurement, there is industry readiness that is esses, thus leading to increase in adoption of sustain-
required, and the identified challenges have plagued able procurement. Currently, there is no law
the industry in the past. Ozoigbo and Chukuezi requiring that sustainable procurement should be
(2011) and Idoro (2010) raised questions about con- used to guide procurement of public assets in Nigeria.
tinual marginalisation of local skills and the manufac- There is a need to make such a law.
turing sector. Previous studies used the experiences in Future studies should focus on how the drivers of
Singapore, Malaysia and Australia to establish that the sustainable procurement can be used to overcome
participation of local contractors and small and these barriers. This study also provides input into
medium scale suppliers are crucial to construction requirements for developing a sustainable procure-
industry development. Further, Ofori (2016) justifies ment model for the Nigerian construction industry.
how project team integration, promotion of health
and safety, engagement with stakeholders, effective
Acknowledgements
project governance, effective post-project reviews and
the adaptation of novel ideas that have worked in The authors acknowledge the participants who took part in
other climes can positively impact on the growth of the survey and the panel of reviewers for this article in
ensuring that it comes out in its best form.
construction industry in developing nations. There is
a need for development in the construction industry
in Nigeria if the sector will effectively utilise and real- Disclosure statement
ise the benefits of sustainable procurement (Faremi
No conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
et al. 2017). Some of the new initiatives are contractor
development, contractors’ classification, construction
(SMEs) empowerment through subcontracts, financial References
assistance to contractors with valid contracts, middle Adebayo VO. 2015. Exploring the impact of procurement
level manpower skills development, materials supply policies, lifecycle analyses and supplier relationships on
chain management, research into alternative sustain- the integration of sustainable procurement in public sec-
able materials, collaboration between educational tor organisations: A sub-Saharan African country con-
institutions, professional bodies, government and text. Int J Sustain Energy Develop. 4(1):179–186.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 871

Association for Project Management 2016. Stakeholder Infrastructure Concession and Regulatory Commission
Management. http://knowledge.apm.org.uk/bok/stake- (ICRC). 2012. Infrastructure Concession and Regulatory
holder-management. Commission Regulations. www.icrc.org.gov.ng.
Babatunde SO, Opawole A, Ujaddugbe IC. 2010. A Review Kahlenborn W, Moser C, Frijdal J, Essing M. 2011.
of Project Procurement Methods in Nigerian Strategic use of public procurement in Europe. Final
Construction Industry. Civil Eng Dimension. 12:1–7. report to the European Commission. Berlin: Adelphi, .
Berry C, McCarthy S. 2011. Guide to sustainable procure- Mbamali I, Okotie AJ. 2012. An assessment of threats and
ment in construction. London: CIRIA, Classic House. opportunities of globalization on building practice in
Belfitt RJ, Sexton M, Schweber L, Handcock B. 2011. Nigeria. Am Int J Contemp Res. 2(4):143–150.
Sustainable procurement: challenges for construction Meehan J, Bryde D. 2011. Sustainable procurement practice.
practice. In: Proceedings of the Technologies for Bus Strat Env. 20(2):94–106.
Sustainable Built Environments Engineering Doctorate Mensah S, Ameyaw C. 2012. Sustainable procurement: The
Conference, 3 Jul Reading, UK. p. 1–9. challenges of practice in the Ghanaian construction
Brammer S, Walker H. 2011. Sustainable procurement in industry. In: Laryea, S., Agyepong, S.A., Leiringer, R. and
the public sector: an international comparative study. Int Hughes, W. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 4th West Africa
J Oper Res Prod Manage. 31:451–476. Built Environment Research (WABER) Conference,
Bryman A. 2012. Social research methods. 4th ed. Oxford: Abuja, Nigeria, p. 871–880.
Oxford University Press. McCrudden C. 2004. Using public procurement to achieve
Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply. 2011. CIPS social outcomes. Nat Resour. Forum. 28(4):257–267.
Sustainable procurement review, 2–3. McMurray AJ, Islam MM, Siwar C, Fien J. 2013.
Chukwudi US, Tobechukwu O. 2014. Participation of Sustainable procurement in Malaysian organizations:
Indigenous Contractors in Nigerian Public Sector practices, barriers and opportunities. J Purchas Supply
Construction Projects and their challenges in managing Manage. 20(2014):195–207.
working capital. Int J Civil Eng Construc Estate Manage. Motulsky HJ. 2015. Common misconception about data
1(1):1–21. analysis and statistics. http://www.graphpad.com/prism.
Construction Industry Development Board. 2015. National Bureau of Statistics. 2015. Nigerian gross domestic
product report. Abuja: National Bureau of Statistics. 4(4).
Construction industry indicators. Pretoria: Construction
nigerianstat.gov.ng.
Industry Development Board. www.cidb.org.za.
National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement
Creswell JW. 2009. Research design: Qualitative, quantita-
Act 2007. www.nesrea.gov.ng.
tive, and mixed methods approaches. London: SAGE
National Environmental Standards and Regulations
Publications.
Enforcement Agency 2017. Agenda 21 Nigeria, NESREA.
Eyo A. 2017. Corruption and the challenge to sustainable
www.nesrea.gov.ng.
public procurement (SPP): a perspective on Africa.
National Planning Commission. 2015. National Integrated
European Procurement and Public Private Partnership.(3): Infrastructure Master Plan (NIMP). http://www.niimp.
253–263. gov.ng/?page_id=997.
Faremi O, John IB, Nwokediuko C. 2017. Sustainable build- Ofori G. 2016. Construction in developing countries: cur-
ing construction practice in Lagos. In: Proceedings of rent imperatives and potential in creating built environ-
13th International Postgraduate Research Conference ment of new opportunities. In: Proceedings of the CIB
2017; Sept 14–17 Manchester: University of Salford, p. World Building Congress I, Tampere: Tampere
870–879,. University of Technology, p. 39–49.
Field A. 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS for Ogunsanya OA. 2018. An integrated sustainable procurement
Windows. 3rd ed. London: Sage Publications. model for the Nigerian construction industry [Unpublished
Gelderman CJ, Semeijn J, Bouma F. 2015. Implementing Thesis], Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg.
sustainability in public procurement: The limited role of Ogunsanya OA, Aigbavboa CO, Thwala WD. 2016.
procurement managers and party-political executives. Towards an integrated sustainable procurement model
Journal of Public Procurement. 15(1):66–92. for Nigerian construction industry: a review of stake-
Greener S. 2008. Business research methods. London: holder satisfaction with current regimes. Proceeding of
Ventus Publishing ApS. 9th CIDB Post Graduate Conference, Feb 2–4; Cape
Hair JF, Jr., Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. 2010. Town, South Africa, 2016, p. 82–91.
Multivariate data analysis. 7th edn. Upper Saddle River Olanrewaju ALA, Anavhe PJ, Mine N. 2014. Sustainable
(NJ): Prentice-Hall. construction procurement: A case study of Nigeria.
Hair JF, Jr., Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. 2013. A Malaysian Construction Research Journal. 14(1):31–46.
primer on partial least squares - Structural equation Ozoigbo B, Chukuezi C. 2011. The impact of multinational
modelling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage. corporations on the Nigerian economy. European
Hillebrandt PM. 2000. The construction industry and the Journal of Social Sci. 19(3)
economy. In: Economic theory and the construction Pallant J. 2013. SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide
industry. London: Palgrave Macmillan. to data analysis using SPSS. 4th ed. Maidenhead:
Idoro G. 2010. Influence of quality performance on client McGraw-Hill Publishers.
patronage of indigenous and expatriate construction con- PricewaterhouseCoopers 2009. Collection of statistical informa-
tractors in Nigeria. J Civil Eng Manage. 16(1):65–73. tion on green public procurement in the EU – Report on
872 O. A. OGUNSANYA ET AL.

data collection results. Netherlands: PricewaterhouseCoopers. United Nations 2016. Sustainable development goals. http://
www.pwc.nl. www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-develop-
Public Procurement Act 2007. www.bpp.gov.ng/?ContentPage& ment-goals.
sub_cnt [Accessed 23 Feb 2017]. United Nations Environmental Programme 2016.
Renda A, Pelkmans J, Egenhofer C. 2012. The Uptake of Sustainable public procurement. www.unep.org/resour-
green public procurement in the EU27. Brussels: Centre ceefficiency/portals/24147/scp/procurement/docsres/project
for European Policy Studies and College of Europe. Info/studyonImpactofspp.pdf.
Renukappa S, Akintoye A, Egbu C, Suresh S. 2016. United Nations 2017. UN Procurement Practitioner’s
Sustainable procurement strategies for competitive Handbook version 2017. https://www.ungm.org.
advantage: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of the United Nations Environmental Programme 2012. The
Inst. of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and impacts of sustainable public procurement. Rue de
Law, 169(1):17–25. Milan, France: UNEP. www.unep.fr/scp/.
Roos R. 2012. Sustainable public procurement: mainstream- UNODC 2019. Preventing corruption in public procure-
ing sustainability criteria in public procurement in devel- ment to achieve the sustainable development goals. www.
oping countries. Lueneburg: Centre for Sustainability
unodc.org.
Management, Leuphana University of Lueneburg.
Varn€as A, Balfors B, Faith-Ell C. 2009. Environmental con-
Ruparathna R, Hewage K. 2015. Sustainable procurement in
sideration in procurement of construction contracts:
the Canadian construction industry: current practices,
drivers and opportunities. J Cleaner Prod. 109:305–314. Current practice, problems and opportunities in green
Rwelamila PD, Talukhaba AA, Ngowi AB. 2000. Project procurement in the Swedish construction industry. J
procurement systems in the attainment of sustainable Cleaner Prod. 17(13):1214–1222.
construction. Sust Dev. 8(1):39–50. Walker H, Brammer S. 2009. Sustainable procurement in
Spiller P, Reinecke N, Ungerman D, Teixeira H. 2012. The the United Kingdom public sector. Supply Chain
drivers of sustainable procurement performance. In: Management. Supp Chain Mnagmnt. 14(2):128–137.
Procurement 20/20: Supply entrepreneurship in a chang- Weiss L, Thurbon E. 2006. The business of buying
ing world. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. American: Public procurement as trade strategy in the
Sustainable Development Commission 2004. Developing USA. Rev Int Polit Econ. 13(5):701–724.
Sustainable procurement as a share priority –vision to real- Williams-Elegbe S. 2012. A comparative analysis of the
ity. Final report. Sustainable Development Commission. Nigerian Public Procurement Act against international
Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. 2007. Using multivariate statistics best practice. http://www.ippa.org/IPPC5/Proceedings/
5th ed. Boston (MA): Pearson Education. Part3/PAPER3-9.pdf [accessed 25 Feb 2017].