IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i17p7616-d1731082.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Impacts and Sustainability Indicators of Construction in Prefabricated Concrete Houses in Ecuador

Author

Listed:
  • Marcel Paredes

    (Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Industriales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28001 Madrid, Spain
    Ingeniería Ambiental, Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo, Riobamba 060150, Ecuador)

  • Javier Perez

    (Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Industriales, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28001 Madrid, Spain
    Ingeniería Ambiental, Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo, Riobamba 060150, Ecuador)

Abstract

The construction of prefabricated concrete houses in Ecuador poses significant challenges in terms of environmental and social sustainability, amid growing housing demand and the urgent need to mitigate adverse impacts associated with the construction processes and materials. In particular, the lack of a comprehensive assessment of these impacts limits the development of effective strategies to improve the sustainability of the sector. In addition, in rural areas, the design of flexible and adapted solutions is required, as evidenced by recent studies in the Andean area. This study conducts a comprehensive assessment of the impacts and sustainability indicators for prefabricated concrete houses, employing international certification systems such as LEED, BREEAM, and VERDE, to validate various relevant environmental and social indicators. The methodology used is the Hierarchical Analytical Process (AHP), which facilitates the prioritization of impacts through paired comparisons, establishing priorities for decision-making. Hydrological, soil, faunal, floral, and socioeconomic aspects are evaluated in a regional context. The results reveal that the most critical environmental impacts in Ecuador are climate change (28.77%), water depletion (13.73%) and loss of human health (19.17%), generation of non-hazardous waste 8.40%, changes in biodiversity 5%, extraction of mineral resources 12.07%, financial risks 5.33%, loss of aquatic life 4.67%, and loss of fertility 3%, as derived from hierarchical and standardization matrices. Despite being grounded in a literature review and being constrained due to the scarcity of previous projects in the country, this research provides a useful framework for the environmental evaluation and planning of prefabricated housing. To conclude, this study enhances existing methodologies of environmental assessment techniques and practices in the construction of precast concrete and promotes the development of sustainable and socially responsible housing in Ecuador.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcel Paredes & Javier Perez, 2025. "Evaluation of Impacts and Sustainability Indicators of Construction in Prefabricated Concrete Houses in Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-13, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:17:p:7616-:d:1731082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/17/7616/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/17/7616/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yinghui Song & Junwu Wang & Denghui Liu & Feng Guo, 2022. "Study of Occupational Safety Risks in Prefabricated Building Hoisting Construction Based on HFACS-PH and SEM," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Reed, M.S. & Ferré, M. & Martin-Ortega, J. & Blanche, R. & Lawford-Rolfe, R. & Dallimer, M. & Holden, J., 2021. "Evaluating impact from research: A methodological framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    3. Janappriya Jayawardana & Malindu Sandanayake & Asela K. Kulatunga & J. A. S. C. Jayasinghe & Guomin Zhang & S. A. Udara Osadith, 2023. "Evaluating the Circular Economy Potential of Modular Construction in Developing Economies—A Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Jingyuan Shi & Jiaqing Sun, 2023. "Prefabrication Implementation Potential Evaluation in Rural Housing Based on Entropy Weighted TOPSIS Model: A Case Study of Counties in Chongqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Marcelo Reyes & Gabriel Pérez & Julià Coma, 2024. "The Role of Building-Integrated Greenery Systems in Building Sustainability Rating Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-23, July.
    6. Irina Canco & Drita Kruja & Tiberiu Iancu, 2021. "AHP, a Reliable Method for Quality Decision Making: A Case Study in Business," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-14, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Merve Anaç & Gulden Gumusburun Ayalp & Kamil Erdayandi, 2023. "Prefabricated Construction Risks: A Holistic Exploration through Advanced Bibliometric Tool and Content Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-31, August.
    2. Sueun Jung & Jihyun Lee, 2023. "Exploring a Conceptual Framework of Koreans’ Residential Satisfaction Based on Maslow’s Human Needs: A Qualitative and Quantitative Integrated Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-40, September.
    3. Oleg Kapliński, 2023. "Architectural, Civil, and Infrastructure Engineering in View of Sustainability: Editor’s Comment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-7, March.
    4. Pärli, Rea & Byamungu, Moustapha & Fischer, Manuel & Kantengwa, Speciose & Kintche, Kokou & Konlambigue, Matieyedou & Lieberherr, Eva & Six, Johan & Wilde, Benjamin & Späth, Leonhard, 2024. "“The reality in the DRC is just not the reality in Rwanda” – How context factors affect transdisciplinary research projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(7).
    5. Amon Exavery & Peter J Kirigiti & Ramkumar T Balan & John Charles, 2024. "Multivariate mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression models with difference-in-differences estimator of the impact of WORTH Yetu on household hunger and socioeconomic status among OVC caregivers in ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(4), pages 1-24, April.
    6. Veronika Bikse & Liva Grinevica & Baiba Rivza & Peteris Rivza, 2022. "Consequences and Challenges of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Impact on the Development of Employability Skills," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-23, June.
    7. Daniel Black & Susanne Charlesworth & Maria Ester Dal Poz & Erika Cristina Francisco & Adina Paytan & Ian Roderick & Timo von Wirth & Kevin Winter, 2023. "Comparing Societal Impact Planning and Evaluation Approaches across Four Urban Living Labs (in Food-Energy-Water Systems)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    8. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:273-285. is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Haopeng Chen & Huihui Wang, 2025. "Research on Green Supplier Selection Method Based on Improved AHP-FMEA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-29, March.
    10. Zoran Ilić & Goran Marinković & Vladimir Bulatović & Anđelko Matić & Vladimir M. Petrović, 2025. "Comprehensive MCDM Approach in the Process of Land Consolidation Project Choice," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-24, September.
    11. Amalia Kouskoura & Eleni Kalliontzi & Dimitris Skalkos & Ioannis Bakouros, 2025. "Analysis of Results of Experts’ Perspectives of Sustainable Regional Competitiveness Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process Multi-Criteria Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-13, March.
    12. Marius-Ionuț Gordan & Elena Peț & Gabriela Popescu & Ioan Brad & Anda Ioana Milin & Tabita Cornelia Adamov & Ramona Ciolac & Anka Roxana Pascariu & Tiberiu Iancu, 2022. "Factors Influencing the Accommodation Prices of Romanian Rural Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-22, December.
    13. Keishiro Hara & Iori Miura & Masanori Suzuki & Toshihiro Tanaka, 2023. "Designing research strategy and technology innovation for sustainability by adopting “imaginary future generations”—A case study using metallurgy," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3-4), September.
    14. Isabel Vogel & Chris Barnett, 2023. "Laying the Foundations for Impact: Lessons from the GCRF Evaluation," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(2), pages 281-297, April.
    15. Sharvini, Siva Raman & Stringer, Lindsay C., 2025. "Challenges and solutions for food waste-based biogas in Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    16. Anh Huu Nguyen & Thinh Gia Hoang & Duy Thanh Nguyen & Loan Quynh Thi Nguyen & Duong Thuy Doan, 2023. "The Development of Green Bond in Developing Countries: Insights from Southeast Asia Market Participants," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(1), pages 196-218, February.
    17. Ohid Yaqub & Dmitry Malkov & Josh Siepel, 2023. "How unpredictable is research impact? Evidence from the UK’s Research Excellence Framework," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 273-285.
    18. Li Yang & Xue Wang & Junqi Zhu & Liyan Sun & Zhiyuan Qin, 2022. "Comprehensive Evaluation of Deep Coal Miners’ Unsafe Behavior Based on HFACS-CM-SEM-SD," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-29, August.
    19. Chen, Xinmin & Huang, Yuhong & Gao, Yajia, 2024. "Can urban low-carbon transitions promote enterprise digital transformation?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    20. Sandija Zeverte-Rivza & Laura Girdziute & Agnieszka Parlińska & Peteris Rivza & Anastasija Novikova & Ina Gudele, 2023. "Digitalisation in Bioeconomy in the Baltic States and Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-20, September.
    21. Nidhal Marzougui & Nadia Ounalli & Sonia Sabbahi & Tarek Fezzani & Farah Abidi & Sihem Jebari & Sourour Melki & Ronny Berndtsson & Walid Oueslati, 2022. "How Can Sewage Sludge Use in Sustainable Tunisian Agriculture Be Increased?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-22, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:17:p:7616-:d:1731082. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.