The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Thematic evolution and trends linking sustainability and project management: Scientific mapping using SciMAT
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Previous research points to the need for decision support to handle sustainability and circularity challenges that involve uncertainty (Gibbin et al., 2023).”
From Rethinking the project life cycle – how circularity challenges processes, roles and governance (2025) · cites this paper as Gibbin et al., 2023
Citations
Cites
How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070 · Cited by 14,329
Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00019 · Cited by 2,093
Qualitative research: deductive and inductive approaches to data analysis
Azungah, T. (2018) · Qualitative Research Journal · doi:10.1108/qrj-d-18-00035 · Cited by 1,262
Bonilla, S. H., Silva, H. R. O., Terra da Silva, M., Franco Gonçalves, R., & Sacomano, J. B. (2018) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su10103740 · Cited by 645
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 109
- Aarseth, 2017, Project sustainability strategies: a systematic literature review, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 35, 1071, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.11.006 · DOI
- Abarca, 2020, Working in virtual teams: a systematic literature review and a bibliometric analysis, IEEE Access, 8, 168923, 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3023546 · DOI
- Abbas, 2019, Impact of knowledge management practices on green innovation and corporate sustainable development: a structural analysis, J. Clean. Prod., 229, 611, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.024 · DOI
- Akomea-Frimpong, 2022, Green finance for green buildings: a systematic review and conceptual foundation, J. Clean. Prod., 356, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131869 · DOI
- Argento, 2022, The facets of the sustainability paradox, Meditari Account. Res., 30, 26, 10.1108/MEDAR-10-2020-1051 · DOI
- Armenia, 2019, Sustainable project management: a conceptualization-oriented review and a framework proposal for future studies, Sustainability, 11, 2664, 10.3390/su11092664 · DOI
- Baba, 2021, Managing project sustainability in the extractive industries: towards a reciprocity framework for community engagement, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 39, 887, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.09.002 · DOI
- Bag, 2021, Key resources for industry 4.0 adoption and its effect on sustainable production and circular economy: an empirical study, J. Clean. Prod., 281, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125233 · DOI
- Banihashemi, 2017, Critical success factors (CSFs) for integration of sustainability into construction project management practices in developing countries, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 35, 1103, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.01.014 · DOI
- Beauséjour, 2009, Managing delivery of sanitation infrastructures for poor communities, Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus., 2, 355, 10.1108/17538370910971027 · DOI
- Bolis, 2023, Contribution of ergonomics and human factors to sustainable development: a systematic literature review, Ergonomics, 66, 303, 10.1080/00140139.2022.2079729 · DOI
- Bonilla-Chaves, 2023, Exploring the evolution of human resource analytics: a bibliometric study, Behav. Sci., 13, 244, 10.3390/bs13030244 · DOI
- Callon, 1991, Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: the case of polymer chemsitry, Scientometrics, 22, 155, 10.1007/BF02019280 · DOI
- Cerne, 2019, Projectification of sustainable development: implications from a critical review, Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus., 12, 356, 10.1108/IJMPB-04-2018-0079 · DOI
- Chow, 2021, Impact of sustainable project management on project plan and project success of the manufacturing firm: structural model assessment, PLoS One, 16, 10.1371/journal.pone.0259819 · DOI
- Christie, 2005, Is integrated coastal management sustainable?, Ocean Coast Manag., 48, 208, 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2005.04.002 · DOI
- Cobo, 2011, An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: a practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field, J. Inform., 5, 146, 10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002 · DOI
- Cobo, 2012, SciMAT: a new science mapping analysis software tool, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 63, 1609, 10.1002/asi.22688 · DOI
- Cobo, 2015, 25years at Knowledge-Based Systems: a bibliometric analysis, Knowl. Base Syst., 80, 3, 10.1016/j.knosys.2014.12.035 · DOI
- Daniel, 2022, Multi-level perspective framework in macro project studies: towards a complex project organizing approach to sustainability transitions, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 40, 865, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.10.001 · DOI
- Doskočil, 2018, Risk management and knowledge management as critical success factors of sustainability projects, Sustainability, 10, 1438, 10.3390/su10051438 · DOI
- Edum-Fotwe, 2009, A social ontology for appraising sustainability of construction projects and developments, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 27, 313, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.04.003 · DOI
- Ellegaard, 2015, The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: how great is the impact?, Scientometrics, 105, 1809, 10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z · DOI
- Ershadi, 2021, Core capabilities for achieving sustainable construction project management, Sustain. Prod. Consum., 28, 1396, 10.1016/j.spc.2021.08.020 · DOI
- Fafaliou, 2022, Firms' ESG reputational risk and market longevity: a firm-level analysis for the United States, J. Bus. Res., 149, 161, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.010 · DOI
- Fathalizadeh, 2021, Barriers impeding sustainable project management: a Social Network Analysis of the Iranian construction sector, J. Clean. Prod., 318, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128405 · DOI
- Fathalizadeh, 2022, Barriers to sustainable construction project management: the case of Iran, Smart Sustain. Built Environ., 11, 717, 10.1108/SASBE-09-2020-0132 · DOI
- Fernández-Sánchez, 2010, A methodology to identify sustainability indicators in construction project management—application to infrastructure projects in Spain, Ecol. Indicat., 10, 1193, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.04.009 · DOI
- Friedrich, 2023, A systematic literature review concerning the different interpretations of the role of sustainability in project management, Manag. Rev. Quarterly, 73, 31
- Furstenau, 2020, Link between sustainability and industry 4.0: trends, challenges and new perspectives, IEEE Access, 8, 140079, 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3012812 · DOI
- Galloway, 2003, The mission of the civil engineer in the movement of globalization, Leader. Manag. Eng., 3, 122, 10.1061/(ASCE)1532-6748(2003)3:3(122) · DOI
- Ganglmair-Wooliscroft, 2022, An investigation of sustainable consumption behavior systems – exploring personal and socio-structural characteristics in different national contexts, J. Bus. Res., 148, 161, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.049 · DOI
- Garcia-Buendia, 2021, 22 Years of Lean Supply Chain Management: a science mapping-based bibliometric analysis, Int. J. Prod. Res., 59, 1901, 10.1080/00207543.2020.1794076 · DOI
- Gaviria-Marin, 2019, Knowledge management: a global examination based on bibliometric analysis, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 140, 194, 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.006 · DOI
- Ghobakhloo, 2022, Identifying industry 5.0 contributions to sustainable development: a strategy roadmap for delivering sustainability values, Sustain. Prod. Consum., 33, 716, 10.1016/j.spc.2022.08.003 · DOI
- Goh, 2014, Renewable energy project: project management, challenges and risk, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 38, 917, 10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.078 · DOI
- Golinska, 2015, Grey Decision Making as a tool for the classification of the sustainability level of remanufacturing companies, J. Clean. Prod., 105, 28, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.040 · DOI
- Govindaras, 2023, Sustainable environment to prevent burnout and attrition in project management, Sustainability, 15, 2364, 10.3390/su15032364 · DOI
- Greenland, 2022, Sustainable management education and an empirical five-pillar model of sustainability, Int. J. Manag. Educ., 20
- Guedes, 2009, Sustainable architecture and urban design in Portugal: an overview, Renew. Energy, 34, 1999, 10.1016/j.renene.2009.02.014 · DOI
- Hadinoto, 2022, Beyond tablets' physical characteristics: incorporating environmental sustainability metrics into the selection of lubricants for pharmaceutical tableting, J. Clean. Prod., 362, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132336 · DOI
- Hedge, 2013, Green buildings need good ergonomics, Ergonomics, 56, 492, 10.1080/00140139.2012.718367 · DOI
- Herath, 2021, Key components and critical success factors for project management success: a literature review, Operat. Supply Chain Manag.: Int. J., 431, 10.31387/oscm0470314 · DOI
- Hwang, 2013, Project management knowledge and skills for green construction: overcoming challenges, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 31, 272, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.05.004 · DOI
- Jeurissen, 2000, John elkington, cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business, J. Bus. Ethics, 23, 229, 10.1023/A:1006129603978 · DOI
- Jones, 2006, Trying harder: developing a new sustainable strategy for the UK, Nat. Resour. Forum, 30, 124, 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2006.00165.x · DOI
- Kain, 2008, Management of complex knowledge in planning for sustainable development: the use of multi-criteria decision aids, Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., 28, 7, 10.1016/j.eiar.2007.03.007 · DOI
- Khalifeh, 2020, The impact of project sustainability management (PSM) on project success, J. Manag. Dev., 39, 453, 10.1108/JMD-02-2019-0045 · DOI
- Kiani Mavi, 2021, Sustainability in construction projects: a systematic literature review, Sustainability, 13, 1932, 10.3390/su13041932 · DOI
- Kim, 2022, Improving sustainable project success strategies focused on cost and schedule for electrical construction project management, Sustainability, 14, 2653, 10.3390/su14052653 · DOI
- Kipper, 2020, Scopus scientific mapping production in industry 4.0 (2011–2018): a bibliometric analysis, Int. J. Prod. Res., 58, 1605, 10.1080/00207543.2019.1671625 · DOI
- Kjaerheim, 2005, Cleaner production and sustainability, J. Clean. Prod., 13, 329, 10.1016/S0959-6526(03)00119-7 · DOI
- Koke, 2019, Earned Green Value management for project management: a systematic review, J. Clean. Prod., 230, 180, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.079 · DOI
- Krour, 2022, Industrial-scale valorization of fine recycled aggregates in cement raw meal: towards sustainable mixtures, J. Clean. Prod., 362, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132231 · DOI
- Labuschagne, 2005, Sustainable Project Life Cycle Management: the need to integrate life cycles in the manufacturing sector, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 23, 159, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.06.003 · DOI
- Labuschagne, 2005, Environmental and social impact considerations for sustainable project life cycle management in the process industry, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag., 12, 38, 10.1002/csr.76 · DOI
- Larsen, 1997, The concept of sustainable urban water management, Water Sci. Technol., 35, 10.2166/wst.1997.0326 · DOI
- Li, 2009, Urbanisation and its impact on building energy consumption and efficiency in China, Renew. Energy, 34, 1994, 10.1016/j.renene.2009.02.015 · DOI
- Lima, 2021, Sustainability in the construction industry: a systematic review of the literature, J. Clean. Prod., 289, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125730 · DOI
- López-Robles, 2019, 30 years of intelligence models in management and business: a bibliometric review, Int. J. Inf. Manag., 48, 22
- Mahmoudi, 2020, A novel model for risk management of outsourced construction projects using decision-making methods: a case study, Grey Syst. Theor. Appl., 10, 97, 10.1108/GS-09-2019-0038 · DOI
- Mahmoudi, 2021, Sustainable supplier selection in megaprojects: grey ordinal priority approach, Bus. Strat. Environ., 30, 318, 10.1002/bse.2623 · DOI
- Marcelino-Sádaba, 2015, Using project management as a way to sustainability. From a comprehensive review to a framework definition, J. Clean. Prod., 99, 1, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.03.020 · DOI
- Marnewick, 2022, Digitalization of project management: opportunities in research and practice, Project Leadership Soc., 3, 10.1016/j.plas.2022.100061 · DOI
- Martens, 2017, Key factors of sustainability in project management context: a survey exploring the project managers' perspective, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 35, 1084, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.04.004 · DOI
- Martins, 2019, Knowledge management in the context of sustainability: literature review and opportunities for future research, J. Clean. Prod., 229, 489, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.354 · DOI
- Moher, 2009, Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement, Ann. Intern. Med., 151, 264, 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · DOI · Paper page
- Mongeon, 2016, The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis, Scientometrics, 106, 213, 10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5 · DOI · Paper page
- Müller, 2018, What drives the implementation of Industry 4.0? The role of opportunities and challenges in the context of sustainability, Sustainability, 10, 10.3390/su10010247 · DOI
- Ng, 2022, The application of industry 4.0 technological constituents for sustainable manufacturing: a content-centric review, Sustainability, 14, 10.3390/su14074327 · DOI
- Nudurupati, 2022, Transforming sustainability of Indian small and medium-sized enterprises through circular economy adoption, J. Bus. Res., 149, 250, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.036 · DOI
- O'Dwyer, 2005, Assurance statement practice in environmental, social and sustainability reporting: a critical evaluation, Br. Account. Rev., 37, 205, 10.1016/j.bar.2005.01.005 · DOI
- Padilla-Lozano, 2022, Corporate social responsibility, green innovation and competitiveness – causality in manufacturing, Compet. Rev., 32, 21
- Palos-Sánchez, 2022, Artificial intelligence and human resources management: a bibliometric analysis, Appl. Artif. Intell., 36, 10.1080/08839514.2022.2145631 · DOI
- Palos-Sanchez, 2018, The effect of internet searches on afforestation: the case of a green search engine, Forests, 9, 51, 10.3390/f9020051 · DOI
- Peris-Mora, 2005, Development of a system of indicators for sustainable port management, Mar. Pollut. Bull., 50, 1649, 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.06.048 · DOI
- Piyathanavong, 2022, Role of project management on Sustainable Supply Chain development through Industry 4.0 technologies and Circular Economy during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multiple case study of Thai metals industry, Operat. Manag. Res.
- Podgórska, 2022, Challenges and perspectives in innovative projects focused on sustainable industry 4.0—a case study on polish project teams, Sustainability, 14, 5334, 10.3390/su14095334 · DOI
- Quelhas, 2019, Engineering education and the development of competencies for sustainability, Int. J. Sustain. High Educ., 20, 614, 10.1108/IJSHE-07-2018-0125 · DOI
- Robichaud, 2011, Greening project management practices for sustainable construction, J. Manag. Eng., 27, 48
- Saeed, 2019, Promoting employee's proenvironmental behavior through green human resource management practices, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag., 26, 424, 10.1002/csr.1694 · DOI
- Sánchez, 2015, Integrating sustainability issues into project management, J. Clean. Prod., 96, 319, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.087 · DOI
- Sankaran, 2021, The history and future of projects as a transition innovation: towards a sustainable project management framework, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 38, 696, 10.1002/sres.2814 · DOI
- Santana, 2020, What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis, Eur. Manag. J., 38, 846, 10.1016/j.emj.2020.04.010 · DOI
- Sarpin, 2021, Competency requirement for project manager in improving sustainable construction project success, Int. J. Sustain. Construct. Eng. Technol., 12, 10.30880/ijscet.2021.12.05.031 · DOI
- Schipper, 2018, Characteristics of smart sustainable city development: implications for project management, Smart Cities, 1, 75, 10.3390/smartcities1010005 · DOI
- Shooshtarian, 2022, Transformation towards a circular economy in the Australian construction and demolition waste management system, Sustain. Prod. Consum., 30, 89, 10.1016/j.spc.2021.11.032 · DOI
- Sigahi, 2023, Classical paradigms versus complexity thinking in engineering education: an essential discussion in the education for sustainable development, Int. J. Sustain. High Educ., 24, 179, 10.1108/IJSHE-11-2021-0472 · DOI
- Sigahi, 2022, Exploring applications of complexity theory in engineering education research: a systematic literature review, J. Eng. Educ., 111, 232, 10.1002/jee.20438 · DOI
- Sigahi, 2023, Which complexity? A review of typologies and a framework proposal for characterizing complexity-based approaches, Kybernetes
- Silvius, 2017, Sustainability as a new school of thought in project management, J. Clean. Prod., 166, 1479, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.121 · DOI · Paper page
- Silvius, 2020, Sustainability Impact Assessment on the project level; A review of available instruments, J. Modern Project Manag., 8, 240
- Stanitsas, 2023, Investigating the significance of sustainability indicators for promoting sustainable construction project management, Int. J. Construct. Manag., 23, 434, 10.1080/15623599.2021.1887718 · DOI
- Stanitsas, 2021, Integrating sustainability indicators into project management: the case of construction industry, J. Clean. Prod., 279, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123774 · DOI
- Tabassi, 2016, Leadership competences of sustainable construction project managers, J. Clean. Prod., 124, 339, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.076 · DOI · Paper page
- Thomé, 2016, Sustainable infrastructure: a review and a research agenda, J. Environ. Manag., 184, 143, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.080 · DOI
- Toledo, 2021, Is the incorporation of sustainability issues and Sustainable Development Goals in project management a catalyst for sustainable project delivery?, Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol., 28, 733, 10.1080/13504509.2021.1888816 · DOI
- Torres, 2018, The impact of knowledge management factors in organizational sustainable competitive advantage, J. Intellect. Cap., 19, 453, 10.1108/JIC-12-2016-0143 · DOI
- Trencher, 2014, University partnerships for co-designing and co-producing urban sustainability, Global Environ. Change, 28, 153, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.06.009 · DOI
- Uribe, 2018, What is going on with stakeholder theory in project management literature? A symbiotic relationship for sustainability, Sustainability, 10, 1300, 10.3390/su10041300 · DOI
- Verma, 2020, Investigating the emerging COVID-19 research trends in the field of business and management: a bibliometric analysis approach, J. Bus. Res., 118, 253, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.057 · DOI
- Vrchota, 2020, Critical success factors of the project management in relation to industry 4.0 for sustainability of projects, Sustainability, 13, 281, 10.3390/su13010281 · DOI
- Wang, 2021, The concept of sustainable construction project management in international practice, Environ. Dev. Sustain., 23, 16358, 10.1007/s10668-021-01333-z · DOI
- Wu, 2010, Project management and green buildings: lessons from the rating systems, J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 136, 64, 10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000006 · DOI
- Xia, 2018, Conceptualising the state of the art of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the construction industry and its nexus to sustainable development, J. Clean. Prod., 195, 340, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.157 · DOI
- Yang, 2022, Review of agricultural water-saving policies and measures in recent years – a case study of Jiangsu Province, China, Water Supply, 22, 3951, 10.2166/ws.2022.026 · DOI
- Young, 2005, Towards sustainable land use: identifying and managing the conflicts between human activities and biodiversity conservation in Europe, Biodivers. Conserv., 14, 1641, 10.1007/s10531-004-0536-z · DOI
- Zeng, 2015, Social responsibility of major infrastructure projects in China, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 33, 537, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.07.007 · DOI
- Zupic, 2015, Bibliometric methods in management and organization, Organ. Res. Methods, 18, 429, 10.1177/1094428114562629 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rethinking the project life cycle – how circularity challenges processes, roles and governance
Lingegård, S., & Hedborg, S. (2025) · Project Leadership and Society · doi:10.1016/j.plas.2025.100194 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Gibbin, R. V., Sigahi, T. F. A. C., Pinto, J. D. S., Rampasso, I. S., & Anholon, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Cleaner Production
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-08
- Volume
- 414
- Pages
- 137753
- ISSN
- 0959-6526
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 4
- Language
- en
- Licence
- Funders
- CNPq
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review