Strategic Engineering Management for Sustainable and Resilient U.S. Industrial Infrastructure
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23120750Keywords:
Strategic engineering management, sustainability performance, infrastructure resilience, sustainable design, resilience planning, digital transformation, stakeholder engagement, quantitative survey, structural equation modelling, U.S. infrastructureAbstract
As the U.S. industrial system is expected to achieve two objectives at once — sustainability aligned with decarbonisation and resilience in the climate era — it is faced with limited budgets and an aging infrastructure. This study empirically examines a strategic-engineering-management (SEM) model that posits that strategic leadership, sustainable design practices, resilience planning, digital transformation, and stakeholder engagement collectively influence two outcomes: sustainability performance and infrastructure resilience. The cross-sectional survey data was gathered from N = 412 infrastructure managers, chief engineers, sustainability directors, and chief resilience officers from eight infrastructure industries between February and August 2024 in the United States. A seven-construct reflective measurement model was estimated with acceptable reliability (Cronbach's α range 0.85–0.89; CR range 0.79–0.85; AVE range 0.48–0.52) and satisfactory model fit (χ²/df = 1.44; CFI = 0.947; TLI = 0.941; RMSEA = 0.038 [0.032, 0.044]; SRMR = 0.046). There are six hypotheses that were tested. Strategic leadership is a significant predictor of sustainability performance (β = 0.142, p < .01) and infrastructure resilience (β = 0.157, p < .001); sustainable design practices is the dominant predictor of sustainability performance (β = 0.396, p < .001); resilience planning is the dominant predictor of infrastructure resilience (β = 0.388, p < .001); stakeholder engagement partially mediates the strategic leadership → infrastructure resilience path (Sobel z = 6.57, p < .001); digital transformation is a significant predictor, but does not amplify the strategic leadership → sustainability performance path (β_int = 0.023, ns). The final models account for 44.9% of the variance in sustainability performance and 53.2% in resilience. Practical implications are derived on how investments in strategic, technical, and stakeholder-facing infrastructure should be sequenced to support joint sustainability and resilience goals of U.S. infrastructure firms.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Business Integrity and Technology Advancements

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
