Intergration of Sustainable Procurement and Circular Logistics into Project Delivery: A Framework for Environmental, Ethical, Social Standards, and Value Creation

Project logistics is traditionally concerned with ensuring that materials, equipment, information and related services are available at the right location, time, quantity and cost. However, the increasing environmental, social and ethical consequences of project activities require logistics decisions to extend beyond conventional cost, time and quality considerations. Sustainable procurement provides an important mechanism through which project organizations can integrate environmental protection, responsible sourcing, social value and economic efficiency into project delivery.
Project logistics also influences cost, schedule, quality, resource consumption, emissions, waste, labour conditions and community outcomes. Yet sustainability is frequently managed as a reporting requirement rather than as an integrated project-delivery decision process. This conceptual article develops a Project Sustainability Integration Framework (PSIF) that connects sustainable procurement, circular logistics, ethical and social safeguards, performance measurement and continual improvement across the project lifecycle. The framework is organized around six stages: Plan, Source, Move, Use and Recover, Measure, and Improve.
The article adds an illustrative pilot scenario for a medium-scale public infrastructure project facing selected input-price inflation, intermittent supplier delays and limited supplier-level environmental data. The scenario demonstrates how proportionate procurement criteria, transport controls, circular-material actions, supplier screening and performance indicators can be operationalized without assuming sophisticated digital systems. The numerical values in the scenario are explicitly illustrative assumptions, not empirical findings.
The article also expands the discussion of SMEs and developing-economy contractors through phased implementation, low-cost data practices and risk-based controls. International reference points include ISO 20400:2017, ISO 14001:2026, ISO 26000:2010 and the UN Global Compact Ten Principles. The contribution is therefore a practical, testable conceptual framework rather than a claim of empirical validation.
The article argues that sustainability should not be treated as an additional reporting exercise after procurement decisions have been completed. Instead, sustainability considerations should influence project planning, supplier selection, logistics design, materials management, contract administration and performance evaluation. The proposed framework provides a practical structure for connecting procurement decisions with environmental, economic and social outcomes. It also highlights the importance of life-cycle thinking, supplier due diligence, circular resource management, measurable indicators, transparent reporting and continuous improvement. The article concludes that integrating sustainable procurement with project logistics can improve resource efficiency, supply-chain resilience, stakeholder confidence and long-term project value while reducing avoidable environmental and social risks.

sustainable procurement; circular logistics; project delivery

1. Alghababsheh, M., Gallear, D., & Riedel, B. (2022). Sustainable supply chain management and supply chain resilience: A systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Production Research. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Gupta, N., Gunawan, I., & Kamineni, R. (2024). Analysing resilience and leagility in post-pandemic sustainable supply chain management: A systematic literature review. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 14(3), 432–448.https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-10-2022-0151 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. ISO. (2010). ISO 26000:2010 Guidance on social responsibility. International Organization for Standardization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. ISO. (2017). ISO 20400:2017 Sustainable procurement — Guidance. International Organization for Standardization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. ISO. (2019). ISO 14005:2019 Environmental management systems — Guidelines for a flexible approach to phased implementation International Organization for Standardization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. ISO. (2026). ISO 14001:2026 Environmental management systems — Requirements with guidance for use. International Organization for Standardization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Malik, M., Ghaderi, H., & Andriansyah, R. (2022). A systematic review on barriers and enablers toward circular procurement management. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 33, 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.07.013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. UN Global Compact & BSR. (2015). Supply Chain Sustainability: A Practical Guide for Continuous Improvement (2nd ed.). United Nations Global Compact. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. United Nations Global Compact. (n.d.). The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Xu, X., Chung, S.-H., Lo, C. K. Y., & Yeung, A. C. L. (2022). Sustainable supply chain management with NGOs, NPOs, and charity organizations: A systematic review and research agenda. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review,164, 102822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2022.102822 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar