Mapping Two Decades of Construction Risk Management: A Scientometric Study of Global Trends, Gaps, and Thematic Evolution

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 6, 1943 - 1956, 15.11.2025

Sadık Varolgüneş

https://doi.org/10.34248/bsengineering.1734348

Öz

This study conducts an original, data-driven bibliometric investigation into the evolution of construction risk management (CRM) research between 2002 and 2024. Drawing on a dataset of 778 peer-reviewed publications retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection, the study utilizes VOSviewer and Biblioshiny to empirically map publication trends, thematic clusters, and regional distributions. A key contribution of the research is the development of a four-phase thematic evolution model that illustrates the transition from conventional risk classification approaches to integrated frameworks incorporating advanced technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), Building Information Modelling (BIM), and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles. The analysis reveals three dominant thematic axes: methodological innovations in risk assessment, technological advancement in digital integration, and socio-political dynamics in stakeholder governance. Despite the increasing academic emphasis on data-driven approaches, persistent regional disparities and implementation gaps remain, particularly in underrepresented regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. The study also uncovers the fragmented integration of ESG dimensions across literature, suggesting the need for more coherent and context-sensitive risk models. By offering a longitudinal and spatial synthesis of global knowledge production, this research enhances our understanding of how CRM has evolved and where critical research gaps persist. The findings aim to inform future efforts toward inclusive, resilient, and adaptable risk management strategies in the construction sector.

Anahtar Kelimeler

ESG integration , Risk perception , Thematic mapping , Regional disparities , Stakeholder governance , Construction sector

Etik Beyan

Ethics committee approval was not required for this study because of there was no study on animals or humans.

Teşekkür

I would like to thank Fatma KÜRÜM VAROLGÜNEŞ for her valuable support.

Kaynakça

• Akintoye AS, MacLeod MJ. 1997. Risk analysis and management in construction. Int J Project Manag, 15(1): 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(96)00035-X
• Al Qudah SMA, Fuentes-Bargues JL, Ferrer-Gisbert PS. 2024. Bibliometric analysis of the literature on risk management in the construction sector: Exploring current and future trends. Ain Shams Eng J, 15(8): 102843 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ASEJ.2024.102843
• Aria M, Cuccurullo C. 2017. Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informet, 11(4): 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2017.08.007
• Chenya L, Aminudin E, Mohd S, Yap LS. 2022. Intelligent Risk Management in construction projects: Systematic literature review. IEEE Access, 10: 72936-72954. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3189157
• Dey PK. 2010. Managing project risk using combined analytic hierarchy process and risk map. Applied Soft Comput J, 10(4): 990-1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2010.03.010
• Dikmen I, Birgonul MT, Han S. 2007. Using fuzzy risk assessment to rate cost overrun risk in international construction projects. Int J Project Manag, 25(5): 494-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJPROMAN.2006.12.002
• El-Sayegh SM. 2008. Risk assessment and allocation in the UAE construction industry. Int J Project Manag, 26(4): 431-438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.07.004
• Hwang BG, Zhao X, Toh LP. 2014. Risk management in small construction projects in Singapore: Status, barriers and impact. Int J Project Manag, 32(1): 116-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.01.007
• José de Oliveira O, Francisco da Silva F, Juliani F, César Ferreira Motta Barbosa L, Vieira Nunhes T. 2019. Bibliometric method for mapping the state-of-the-art and identifying research gaps and trends in literature: An Essential instrument to support the development of scientific projects. In:. Kunosic S, Zerem E editors, Scientometrics Recent Advances (1st ed.). IntechOpen. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85856
• Junjia Y, Alias AH, Haron NA, Abu Bakar N. 2023. A Bibliometric review on safety risk assessment of construction based on CiteSpace software and WoS database. Sustainability, 15(15): 11803. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511803
• Khodabakhshian A, Puolitaival T, Kestle L. 2023. Deterministic and probabilistic risk management approaches in construction projects: A Systematic literature review and comparative analysis. Buildings, 13(5): 1312. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13051312
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. 2009. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Annals Internal Medic, 151(4). https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136
• Loosemore M, Al Muslmani HS. 1999. Construction project management in the Persian Gulf: inter-cultural communication. Int J Project Manag, 17(2): 95-100.
• Mesa Fernández JM, González Moreno JJ, Vergara-González EP, Alonso Iglesias G. 2022. Bibliometric analysis of the application of artificial intelligence techniques to the management of innovation projects. Appl Sci, 12(22): 11743. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122211743
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Antes G, Atkins D, Barbour V, Barrowman N, Berlin JA, Clark J, Clarke M, Cook D, D’Amico R, Deeks JJ, Devereaux PJ, Dickersin K, Egger M, Ernst E, Gøtzsche PC, Tugwell P. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals Internal Medic, 151(4): 264-269. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
• Rifai AI, Rio PS, Indrastuti I, Prasetijo J. 2024. A bibliometric analysis of risk management in road construction project. J Sustain Devel Innov, 1(4): 151-157. https://doi.org/10.61552/JSI.2024.04.003
• Smith NJ, Merna T, Jobling P. 2006. Managing Risk in Construction Projects. URL: https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=2YQKAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=Oxford:+Blackwell+Publishing,+Managing+risk+in+construction+projects&ots=S3FHnsy2nB&sig=-S3ar9SkHf_Da0jakj-BLBK5t0c&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed date: May 10, 2025).
• Tang W, Qiang M, Duffield CF, David, Young M, Lu Y. 2007. Risk management in the chinese construction industry. Int J Construct Eng Manag, 133(12): 944-956.
• Umeokafor N, Umar T, Evangelinos K. 2022. Bibliometric and scientometric analysis-based review of construction safety and health research in developing countries from 1990 to 2021. Safety Sci, 156(1): 105897. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SSCI.2022.105897
• van Eck NJ, Waltman L. 2010. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2): 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
• Victory J, Irfan Rifai A, Isradi M. 2024. Bibliometric analysis of health and safety risk management in highrise building construction. Asian J Eng Soc Health, 3(7): 1488-1498.
• Viswanathan SK, Jha KN. 2019. Factors influencing international market selection for Indian construction firms. J Manag Eng, 35(5): 05019006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000703
• Viswanathan SK, Jha KN. 2020. Critical risk factors in international construction projects: An Indian perspective. Eng Construct Architect Manag, 27(5): 1169-1190. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-04-2019-0220
• Wang SQ, Dulaimi MF, Aguria MY. 2004. Risk management framework for construction projects in developing countries. Construct Manag Econ, 22(3): 237-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000124689
• Wen S, Tang H, Ying F, Wu G. 2023. Exploring the global research trends of supply chain management of construction projects based on a bibliometric analysis: Current status and future prospects. Buildings, 13(2): 373. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13020373
• Zou PXW, Zhang G, Wang J. 2007. Understanding the key risks in construction projects in China. Int J Project Manag, 25(6): 601-614. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJPROMAN.2007.03.001