Schedule risks of green certified construction projects: A comparison between Turkey and the United States

Traditional construction methods, combined with increasing consumption trends, cause the depletion of natural resources. The expansion of the green building concept, which produces less waste, uses natural resources wisely and provides the highest level of comfort for its users, has emerged as a convenient solution to rapidly build sustainable cities and reduce damage to the environment by the industry. However, green buildings that require more complex construction processes than conventional projects have additional risks resulting with delays. In this study, the risks encountered in green building projects were investigated and the differences that may arise in the local construction sector in Turkey and the US were compared and evaluated. The information needed to be used in the analyzes was collected by reaching professionals with green building application experience both in Turkey and the US. The answers to the questionnaires prepared for this purpose have been obtained by online forms and individual interviews. In order to determine the risks included in the questionnaire, an extensive literature research was conducted first. Then, interviews with experienced people in the sector matured the risks identified and categorized into four main categories. These categories are determined as; materials, products and process risks, financial risks, legal and contractual risks and consultants and subcontractors risks. Thirteen different risk headlines have been examined under these categories. According to the analysis results, there are differences between the two countries, both on the basis of the main risk categories and on the basis of the risk headlines. According to the survey results, the three most important risk headlines in Turkey are: (i) contractors and subcontractors agreeing to standards that are not within their expertise and competence; (ii) lack of green construction experience and qualification; and (iii) lack of expertise in new products/technologies. On the other hand in the US, results are sorted as; (i) contractors and subcontractors agreeing to standards that are not within their expertise and competence; (ii) failure to receive materials/products in a timely fashion causing delays and (iii) lack of expertise in new products/technologies. These headings belong to the risk categories of consultants and subcontractors and materials, products and processes for both countries. With the other rankings of the headings taken into account, differences between the two countries, especially in response to the level of experience of the project sides, remained noticeable. It has emerged that Turkey is still trying to solve the problems in the planning phase with respect to the US, which is regarded as a pioneer country, and that the Turkish construction sector needs more time and incentives to adapt to the green building certifications. In addition, it was seen that the professionals in Turkey gave higher risk score answers than their US colleagues in all categories. This can be attributed to the urgent necessity of establishing a suitable system for adapting the green building certification to the construction culture in Turkey, and as a result, the increase in the number of experienced and qualified consultants/subcontractors, even though the systems based on foreign countries are tried to be applied. Careful consideration of these identified risks, especially during the planning phase, has a crucial importance to be able to avoid delays in green building projects. This study sets an example in terms of consideration of developed and developing countries' risk perspectives on sustainable construction concepts in a context dependent to the schedule.