Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Automation in Construction
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/autcon

Blockchain in the built environment and construction industry: A systematic T

review, conceptual models and practical use cases
Jennifer Li , David Greenwood, Mohamad Kassem
⁎ ⁎

Department of Mechanical & Construction Engineering, Faculty of Engineering & Environment, Northumbria University, Newcastle NE1 8ST, UK

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The construction industry is facing many challenges including low productivity, poor regulation and compliance,
Blockchain technologies lack of adequate collaboration and information sharing, and poor payment practices. Advances in distributed
Distributed ledger technology (DLT) ledger technologies (DLT), also referred to as Blockchain, are increasingly investigated as one of the constituents
Socio-technical systems in the digital transformation of the construction industry and its response to these challenges.
Use cases
The overarching aim of this study was to analyse the current state of DLT in the built environment and the
Project Bank Accounts (PBAs)
Regulations and compliance
construction sector with a view to developing a coherent approach to support its adoption specifically in the
Built environment construction industry. Three objectives were established to achieve this: (a) to present the first state-of-the-art
Construction industry and literature review on DLT in the built environment and construction industry providing a consolidated view
of the applications explored and potential use cases that could support disruption of the construction industry.
Seven use-categories were identified: [1] Smart Energy, [2] Smart Cities & the Sharing Economy, [3] Smart
Government, [4] Smart Homes, [5] Intelligent Transport, [6] BIM and Construction Management, and [7]
Business Models and Organisational Structures; (b) to propose a framework for implementation composed of two
conceptual models (i.e. the DLT Four-Dimensional Model, and the DLT Actors Model), developed according to
extended socio-technical systems theory and including four dimensions (technical, social, process and policy), to
support the development of DLT-based solutions that are adequate to the challenges faced by the construction
industry. The DLT Four-Dimensional Model and the DLT Actors Model contribute to improve the understanding
of the concepts involved when discussing DLT applications in construction and represent flexible, adaptable and
scalable knowledge constructs and foundations that can be used for various further investigations; and (c) to
appraise three specific use cases (i.e. Project Bank Accounts, regulation and compliance, and a single shared-
access BIM model) as potential areas for DLT through the application of a decision support tool. The results show
that Project Bank Accounts (PBAs) and regulation and compliance are candidate areas for DLT applications and
warrant further attention. However, for the third use case (i.e. single shared-access BIM model) DLT are still
insufficiently developed at this time.
The research shows that there is real potential for DLT to support digitalisation in the construction industry
and enable solutions to many of its challenges. However, there needs to be further investigation of the readiness
of the industry, its organisations and processes, and to evaluate what changes need to occur before im-
plementation can be successful. Further investigations will include the development of a roadmap process in-
corporating the four dimensions to evaluate readiness across a series of use cases for the construction industry.

1. Introduction aspect of failure in the construction industry [3]. Conversely, it is one of

the biggest areas for potential improvement with McKinsey Global In-
Globally, construction spending is projected to reach US$12.4 tril- stitute [4] reporting a global productivity gap of $1.6tr that can be
lion by 2022 [1]. In the United Kingdom (UK) alone an estimated tackled by improving the performance of the industry. The industry is
£600bn will be spent over the next 10 years on public and private in- perceived as slow to innovate, particularly in its adoption of digital
frastructure resulting in efficiency and productivity improvements in technology [5]. There is some evidence of change, for example, through
the delivery of construction projects becoming strategic priorities for the advent of Building Information Modelling (BIM) [6–8] though
the UK Government [2]. Currently, poor productivity is cited as a key global BIM adoption has been slow due to perceived risks and

⁎
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: Jennifer.Li@northumbria.ac.uk (J. Li), Mohamad.Kassem@northumbria.ac.uk (M. Kassem).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.02.005
Received 24 August 2018; Received in revised form 9 January 2019; Accepted 9 February 2019
0926-5805/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

challenges at this stage of the technology's development and its sup- positive impacts are being seen through streamlining processes,
porting processes and standards [9,10]. There are also limitations in clamping down on corruption through promoting transparency, in-
knowledge and understanding of BIM [11] resulting in organisations' vesting in R&D, creating more standardised building codes and putting
and individuals' misconceptions of what the technology can achieve; the focus on project outcomes.
this often leads to abandonment and disappointment from those enga- Finally, payments are one of the construction industry's biggest
ging with it [7,12]. problems with regards contractual entitlements being paid late, not
One of the main issues hindering the modernisation of the con- being paid at all or being held up as a result of disputes which can often
struction industry is its inability to embrace technological advance- result in business failure [14,21].
ments in comparison with successes seen in logistics, automotive and The overarching aim of this study was to analyse the current state of
mechanical engineering industries [13–17]. “Blockchain”, or distributed DLT in the built environment and the construction sector on which to
ledger technology (DLT), is regarded as having the potential to trans- support development of a coherent roadmap for their adoption in the
form many global industries including construction. Blockchain was construction industry. Three objectives were established to achieve this:
developed as the underpinning technology for the world's first crypto- (1) to present the first state-of-the-art and literature review on DLT in
currency, Bitcoin, introduced in 2008 as a verification tool for its the built environment and construction industry providing a con-
transactions [18]. The term “blockchain” has now become synonymous solidated view of the applications explored and potential use cases that
with the concept of DLT and is used interchangeably. The more generic could support disruption of the construction industry; (2) to propose a
term distibuted ledger technologies (DLT) is adopted throughout this framework for implementation composed of two conceptual models
paper and includes, but is not limited to, the Bitcoin Blockchain. based on extended socio-technical systems theory and data obtained
For any technological advancement to become a viable and ac- from a systematic literature review; and (3) to appraise three specific
cepted solution in the construction industry, it must address the key use cases (i.e., Project Bank Accounts, regulation and compliance, and a
challenges affecting it through effective resolution of the underlying single shared-access BIM model) as potential areas for DLT through the
systemic cause(s). The key challenges affecting the construction sector application of a decision support tool. Section 2 defines blockchain and
have been highlighted in a number of recent reports and academic its related concepts. Section 3 addresses objective (1) presenting the
literature, which are summarised here to provide a baseline on which to methodology adopted for this paper and provides the results from three
consider throughout this paper and as a scene-setter for some of the research sieves: a systematic literature review of the-state-of-the-art of
problems DLT have the potential to help solve. DLT in the built environment, a focus group and expert interview that
A review of the UK construction industry by Farmer [3] identified were used to develop the conceptual models. Assimilating the knowl-
10 symptoms of failure and poor performance: low productivity; low edge described in Section 3, Section 4 proposes two conceptual models,
predictability; structural fragmentation; leadership fragmentation; low the DLT Four-Dimensional Model and the DLT Actors Model, developed
margins, adversarial pricing models and financial fragility; a dysfunc- in accordance with the extended socio-technical framework to satisfy
tional training, funding and delivery model; workforce size and de- objective (2). Section 5 focuses on objective (3) by presenting a decision
mographics; lack of collaboration and improvement culture; lack of R& support tool for analysing the suitability of use cases for DLT applica-
D and investment in innovation; and poor industry image. tions and tests three of the use cases identified using the tool. Finally,
Woodhead et al., [19] discuss the UK Government's biggest chal- Section 6 concludes the paper and offers suggestions for further work.
lenges to construction as: austerity affecting the ability to secure
funding for major projects; lack of affordable housing (making house 2. Key terms and concepts
building the biggest area of potential growth); an aging workforce
without suitable succession planning; and the UK's exit from the Eur- 2.1. Blockchain and distributed ledger technology (DLT)
opean Union causing projects to be stalled or cancelled due to un-
certainty and the potential loss of workforce as a result of changes to Distributed ledger technology (DLT), also referred to as blockchain,
immigration. Woodhead et al., [19] identify three contradictions in is regularly represented as having the transformative power to change
relation to these challenges: the requirement to build more for less; everything from the way commerce operates to driving the economy on
deliver more without the available skills; and increase capital ex- a global scale [22]. In the remainder of the paper, the term DLT is
penditure through increasing private sector investment in an environ- generally adopted except when reviewing work by other authors who
ment of uncertainty which makes quantifying return on investment had used the 'blockchain' term. There are key advantages in its inherent
difficult. immutability, transparency and the way it redefines the trust relation-
In Dame Judith Hackitt's Independent Review of Building ship by offering solutions that are fast and secure and can operate
Regulations and Fire Safety [20] following the events of the Grenfell publicly or privately [23]. O'Boyle [24] has characterised blockchain as
Tower fire in 2017, four key issues were highlighted as the underlying an ‘internet of value’, and its impact over the next 10 to 20 years could
reasons for system failure: ignorance – regulations and guidance are not match that of the internet due to its decentralisation and irrevocable
read by those required to comply with them or are misunderstood and/ nature [25]. It has the potential to change the way applications are
or misinterpreted; indifference – cutting costs and doing things as developed, create efficiencies and drive digital transformation in many,
quickly as possible are drivers rather than providing safe, quality homes perhaps all, industries including the construction industry [7].
for residents; lack of clarity on roles and responsibilities – ambiguity over The key features of DLT (here characterised by the Bitcoin
responsibilities and fragmentation across the industry result in preclu- Blockchain) are: (i) decentralisation operating across a peer-to-peer
sion of ownership and accountability; and inadequate regulatory over- network made up of computers (known as nodes); (ii) immutability,
sight and enforcement tools – enforcement is often lacking and not in- once blocks are chained; (iii) reliability, given that all nodes have an
formed by size or complexity of the project and penalties are identical copy of the blockchain which is checked through an algorithm
insufficient to be an effective deterrent. and highlights any anomalies; (iv) authentication: in the Bitcoin
McKinsey Global Institute [4] reports a productivity gap of $1.6 Blockchain, a Proof-of-Work mechanism is used to validate transactions
trillion a year in global construction. To benefit from this gap the in- and uses a mathematical and deterministic currency issuance me-
dustry only needs to make efficiencies with digitalisation being cited as chanism to reward its miners [26–28]. The miner completing the
the best driver for change. However, construction companies tend to mathematical equation first wins the right to mine the block to the
underinvest in IT and technology and neglect research and develop- blockchain and in return for their efforts, is rewarded in Bitcoin [29].
ment activities. Improvements and changes in regulation can facilitate Its design ensures security and uses cryptography and a distributed
industry shifts as seen in Australia, Germany and Singapore where consensus mechanism, which offers anonymity, persistence,

289
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

auditability, resilience and fault tolerance [30]. 3. Research methodology

When a transaction is broadcast to the network, it is received by all
nodes who validate and verify its existence though running pre-defined This section describes the process taken to perform the systematic
checks regarding the structure and activity within the transaction [31]. literature review and provides a description of the results obtained from
Blocks are considered valid when a majority of the nodes (51% or more) it including the extensive list of challenges and opportunities compiled
reach a consensus [32]. Upon mining the block to the blockchain each from the literature that informed development of the framework and
node's version of the blockchain is updated. It should be noted that the bibliometric indicators that describe the body of literature reviewed. In
blockchain itself is simply a distributed ledger; it does not have the addition, the remaining research methods used to develop the frame-
ability to perform computations, these are done outside of the block- work are explained, namely, a focus group discussion, an in-depth in-
chain by miners who then mine blocks of verified and validated terview and the socio-technical systems approach adopted.
transactions to the blockchain [33]. In public blockchains it is near-
impossible to change a block due to visibility across the network [22]
3.1. Results of a systematic literature review
and to the fact that it must be changed along with all blocks succeeding
it in the time it takes to mine just one block to the blockchain [34]. In
A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to: identify the
addition, all blocks link back to the genesis block ensuring the block-
current applications of DLT in the built environment; to evaluate the
chain's integrity [35]. In private blockchains, changes are simply made
extent to which DLT is addressed as a socio-technical system in the
when all nodes agree that it can be changed by consensus, typically off-
current body of research; and to determine the key challenges and
line, following which the data is modified. Access rights in private
opportunities facing DLT applications in the built environment. The
blockchains make data privacy stronger [30].
construction industry creates, adapts and supports evolution of the built
Perhaps one of the most important aspects of DLT for construction is
environment, all aspects of which (energy, infrastructure, transport,
smart contracts. They are self-executing pieces of code that execute the
built assets etc.) impact on what is constructed (or renovated) and how
terms of a contract [36] upon pre-set obligations being met [37]. Smart
new built assets integrate in the ecosystem around it. Therefore, the
contracts can also be considered as automatable traditional contracts as
scope of this literature review extends to the built environment pro-
there are elements that may still require human input and control [38].
viding a coherent understanding of what DLT can do for construction
In very simple terms, smart contracts are made up of if/then commands
and its interactions with the built environment. Moreover, as the lit-
and reduce the need for intermediaries, minimise the amount of phy-
erature shows, applications such as smart energy and smart government
sical paperwork [39], and can contribute to reduce possible attacks and
are at a more developed stage of DLT implementation than the con-
fraud, arbitration and enforcement costs [22]. According to the Win-
struction industry thus, it is important to scholars with an interest in
field-Rock Report, blockchain coupled with smart contracts can solve
construction to unravel such applications.
some of the problems of BIM adoption including increasing trust and
The results of the SLR informed the development of an extended
collaboration as “[t]he availability of a real-time, change-resistant and
socio-technical framework summarising the challenges and opportu-
hack-resistant record of data with trustworthy time entries increases the
nities from multiple dimensions (technical, policy, process and social).
reliability, integrity and transparency of the data” ([11], p. 39). The
From searches in three databases (Scopus, ScienceDirect and Web of
report also notes that there remain many aspects to be addressed such
Science) 534 papers were returned. After removal of duplicates, ap-
as untested legal issues as well as the continuing need for clear and
plication of inclusion and exclusion criteria and review of abstracts, 32
express contract terms and mitigating measures that reduce the risk that
papers were selected for review. Further searches were conducted in
parties take on unintended obligations and disputes [11].
Google Scholar following a more traditional route and an additional 41
One of the challenges presented for longer-term contracts is trans-
papers were added over a period of around 6 months, resulting in 73
action longevity: where a contract is coded today for execution in many
papers being reviewed in total. Following initial content analysis of
years (e.g. wills or futures), particularly when external information
these papers the applications of DLT in the built environment were
sources may no longer exist [15]. The complexity of coding smart
grouped into seven categories as detailed in Table 1. Papers concerning
contracts and the requirement for them to be coded correctly, given
the technological architecture of DLT were not included in this review.
that they will be forever sitting in a public ledger, may limit or delay
Moreover, additional papers concerning smart energy were not in-
their adoption and acceptance within the mainstream [40]. It is sug-
cluded beyond the first three databases given the extensive real-world
gested by Boucher et al., [37] that, due to the initial set up costs and
application and development of DLT in the energy industry; it was felt
requirement of effort, they are currently better suited to repetitive
this area was sufficiently covered by the initial search for this review
agreements rather than one off contracts or contracts with a long
and further analysis of the category would detract from the core aims of
duration that are often subject to variations. Other barriers to full im-
this study.
plementation of smart contracts are concerned with storage constraints,
interoperability, reliability of the data input and confidentiality [15].
3.1.1. DLT applications in the built environment
This section provides a succinct summary of the emerging applica-
tions of DLT in the built environment using the seven categories

Table 1
Categories of DLT applications in the built environment.
Category No. of papers References

[1] Smart Energy 22 ([41]; [42]; [43]; [44]; [45]; [46]; [47]; [48]; [49]; [50]; [51]; [52]; [53]; [54]; [55]; [56];
[57]; [58]; [59]; [60]; [25]; [61])
[2] Smart Cities & the Sharing Economy 7 ([32]; [62]; [63]; [64]; [65]; [66]; [67])
[3] Smart Government 12 ([68]; [69]; [70]; [37]; [71]; [72]; [73]; [74]; [75]; [76]; [77]; [78])
[4] Smart Homes 4 ([29,79]; [80]; [81])
[5] Intelligent Transport 12 ([82]; [83]; [84]; [85]; [55]; [86]; [87]; [88]; [89]; [90]; [91]; [92])
[6] Building Information Modelling (BIM) & Construction 11 ([13]; [93]; [6]; [15]; [7]; [28]; [21]; [94]; [10]; [95]; [96])
Management
[7] Business Models & Organisational Structures 7 ([26]; [37]; [97]; [98]; [99]; [100]; [101])

290
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

illustrated above. Estonia is the first country to have a blockchain-based identity system
where chipped identity cards hold personal data along with two certi-
3.1.1.1. Smart energy. Until recently, energy has been traded by Major ficates that authenticate a person's identity and provide a digital sig-
Power Producers (MPPs) who have led the market and set prices; they nature. The same ID card can be used to purchase tickets for public
still make up 94% of the electricity production market [42]. However, transport and order and collect prescriptions from a pharmacy [66].
due to the falling cost of renewable technologies and the increase in There is a shift of emphasis from price to value giving communities
prosumer-behaviour [102], this market is opening up to offer more the ability to create proprietary value systems on DLT based on what
opportunities to individual, residential producers of electricity, they deem important, a basis for which sharing of resources and ser-
primarily those who use solar photovoltaic panels on their home and vices is at the centre and puts the community in control of creating
who produce an excess to that which they need to run their home, to business logic and productive processes [65]. Emphasis is placed on
sell it to the grid or to their neighbours. Currently, trades are done via mutual benefit to suppliers of data (e.g. citizens) and collectors of data
MPPs, however, microgrids managed through DLT are making this (e.g. government) encouraging citizens to engage in the smart city [64].
possible in a decentralised way directly from prosumer to consumer Collaboration of technology, humans and organisations sits at the
[44]. centre of this environment [63]. The IoT, coupled with DLT, makes the
Internet of Things (IoT) devices coupled with smart contracts run- system more secure and ubiquitous. Swan [67] discusses the citizen
ning on DLT are reducing congestion and faults related to distribution taking back control of themselves and their societies through creation
and demand management is being revolutionised through monitoring of a “Cryptopolis” and a more trusting society built on DLT incorporating
using sensor technologies [46,59,60] that regulate power usage auto- “economic self-definition, the civic responsibility of the cryptocitizen, a
matically through smart contracts and/or inform homeowners of their social theory of dignity for mutual coexistence, and the future of work
usage allowing them to make sustainable changes to their energy (meaning the ability to meet higher-level Maslow needs in the auto-
consumption and lifestyle choices [53,54]. mation economy)" ([67], p.50). However, issues remain where auto-
Automated auction mechanisms running on DLT allow multiple mation of tasks is involved, particularly regarding which activities to
buyers and sellers to purchase energy from one another and are automate and which should remain under human control [65].
transforming the way in which users purchase energy becoming more
passive through automation [50–52,57]. Through this, individuals and/ 3.1.1.3. Smart government. DLT are being investigated, trialled and
or communities become more independent from the grid through mi- employed across many governments globally including in the United
crogeneration, which benefits the environment and allows prosumers to Arab Emirates, the United States [75], Sweden, Ukraine, United
generate better profits based on demand and supply [42]. Energy effi- Kingdom [78], Denmark, Honduras [76], the Republic of Georgia
ciency is key to achieving many of the “smart” goals such as smart city, [77] and Estonia [70]. Jun [78] provides a comprehensive list of 17
smart home and smart government as so much relies on the ability to nations and some of their blockchain-based government projects in
manage energy usage and ensure supply [58]. The construction in- addition to suggesting principles for their implementation as:
dustry must account for this in its designs for new built assets and Blockchain Statute law; disclosure of data and source code;
where existing assets are renovated and/or repaired. The key challenges implementing autonomous executing administration; building a
cited in these papers relate to lack of regulation and nascence of DLT. governance system based on direct democracy; and making
Distributed Autonomous Government (DAG). Other applications in
3.1.1.2. Smart cities and the sharing economy. A smart city is the this category focuses on smart contracts to automate processes and
integration of resources where human and social capital interact public services including tax collection, identity management, benefits
using technological solutions [59]. The concept is a response to distribution, property and land registries, local and/or national digital
projected increases in urban migration [87] putting immense currencies, government records management [37], regulatory
pressures on the built environment to manage this increase. Advances compliance [77] and health care services [76]. Transparency and
in information and communication technology (ICT) and the IoT have immutability offer accountability, efficiencies and reduced
made the sharing economy much easier and more accessible [62,65] bureaucracy as a result of automation [75]. In China, DLT is being
allowing people to see real-time data about the availability of resources explored to authenticate reliability of individuals' data allowing it to be
to make better-informed choices. It is a social model that helps power used for an enterprise credit system providing mutual information
the economy led by supply and demand. It can lead to further exchange between individuals and enterprises helping each to make
innovation, growth and employment, opening up new social and better informed decisions [72]. Blockchain-based e-voting is discussed
ecological opportunities. Value is created collaboratively, channelled to reduce time and cost associated with electoral voting and making it
through financial markets and is decentralised but controlled centrally more accessible to voters in remote areas bringing services to people
by organisations (e.g. Facebook and Airbnb) who determine how rather than them having to physically go to a polling station [73]. An e-
rewards are distributed via dividends, wages, rents etc. [65]. voting model based on blockchain to reduce fraud associated with
However, there is a requirement for robust governance to protect manipulation of traditional databases was proposed by Hanifunnisa and
users, particularly regarding unskilled providers, fraud and liability Rahardjo [71].
[63]. Atzori [68] highlights a number of challenges associated with de-
Ibba et al. [64] introduce the use of smart devices, the IoT and centralisation of governance where power shifts over time from central
blockchain to monitor and control air quality through a city. DLT-based bodies to groups of unknown people/code developers with un-
distributed applications (dApps) and Decentralised Autonomous Orga- accountable power resulting in a change of politics to electronic service
nisations (DAOs) allow people to monetise their items when idle or not delivery. There is potential for the rising of an anarchist state [68]
at full capacity (e.g. car sharing and ride sharing) [62,63]. DLT allow threatening to disrupt the international economic order [74]. Addi-
communications between entities to be more private and secure [32]. tional challenges to blockchain-based e-government services include
Further DLT use cases include: near real-time payments across borders; costs of development implementation, nascence of the technology,
monitoring of population growth; maintenance of health records and long-term preservation of records, social memory and historical evi-
granting access to relevant parties; more fair and democratic elections dence. Several solutions are proposed including standardised tech-
through improved participation; and improving government operations nology to combat interoperability issues and implementation costs;
through reduction of bureaucracy and increased efficiency. Individuals collaboration between software developers and institutions from the
have greater control over their own personal data making it easier for outset; clarification of governance around blockchain and building ro-
them to prove their identity and share it when and how they see fit. bust security and privacy into the system ensuring longevity [72].

291
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

3.1.1.4. Smart homes. Smart homes, while covered only briefly in the circumstances. Charging is done by setting a pre-agreed amount of to-
literature, are likely to become archetypal for new builds and existing kens in Pedrosa and Pau [91]. Finally, Strugar et al. [92] use the IOTA
homes as devices and appliances are replaced with smart versions and distributed ledger for facilitating billing, electric vehicle charging and
conversions are made to existing homes. In Dorri et al. [79] Blockchain machine-to-machine communication. Many of these developments are
is used to monitor and reduce energy consumption. Blockchain provides relevant to the construction industry and in particular, to the operation
increased privacy and security in the smart home and despite increases (in-use) phase of assets.
in overhead due to use of low-resource IoT devices the benefits are
deemed worthwhile [29]. Digital signatures can be used to identify 3.1.1.6. Building Information Modelling (BIM) and construction
suspicious activity while, at the same time, giving each smart home management. The adoption of Building Information Modelling (BIM)
device its own identity. Monitoring systems complement the smart has been commonly seen as a progression that involves levels of
home by learning normal behaviour and then acting appropriately increasing capability maturity across technology, process and policy
when non-normal behaviour is detected. Users are able to monitor and fields (Succar, [155]). Although it is generally accepted that BIM can
control conditions in their homes remotely such as temperature, benefit from integration with DLT there is a consensus that the degree
distance, illumination, humidity, current, motion etc. [81]. Lazariou of collaboration enabled by Level 2 BIM is insufficient and needs to
and Roscia [80] consider a residential smart district that allows people advance into more networked and integrated forms such as those
to remotely control their home but offers additional services such as envisioned in Level 3 before this can be realised [6,10,15]. Level 2 BIM
educational development and recreation providing a smart playground is a collaborative way of working, in which 3D models with the
where children generate electricity by playing on, for example, swings required data are created in separate discipline models according to a
and slides; mobile charging stations placed by park benches and set of guides, standards and specifications [103]. Level 3 BIM, also
interactive tables in the bar for reading the news, playing games, referred to as iBIM (integrated BIM), pertains to ‘fully open’ process and
watching television etc.; smart parking; a smart card payment system; data integration enabled by web services; compliant with the Industry
smart swimming pool; bike sharing; and car sharing. Blockchain offers Foundation Classes (IFC) and buildingSMART Data Dictionary (bsDD)
integration with the IoT and manages transactions within the smart standards (BIM Dictionary, [156]). Level 3 BIM also focuses on working
district (e.g. giving users autonomy to produce, buy and sell energy with a new contractual framework that promotes consistency, clarity,
from their home). Interoperability is cited as a challenge to smart home openness and collaboration in a culture that is cooperative and
implementation given different manufacturers' reluctance to dedicated to learning and sharing [104]. The integration of BIM, DLT,
collaborate and communicate with other devices. smart contracts and the IoT can have a significant impact on
construction activities and facilities management, especially where
3.1.1.5. Intelligent transport. DLT is broadening possible applications tracking of components proves useful and where there is duplication
within intelligent transport through integration with other applications of work; IoT tracking devices will automatically collect data regarding
such as smart energy and better use of resources [55]. Smart vehicles an item or a process and update the ledger accordingly [6]. DLT can be
now have on-board storage for private data which, via the blockchain, a solution to many issues that have slowed the adoption of BIM such as
owners can choose whether to grant access to third parties giving them limited collaboration and information sharing. Where there are legal
more control over their data. Blockchain reduces security and privacy issues, and in the event of a single [shared-access] BIM model,
issues through encryption and authentication. Various applications are ownership and rights (e.g. responsibilities, liabilities and intellectual
offered: remote software updates during manufacturing and for vehicle property rights) can be made explicit and transparent to all project
maintenance; flexible insurance based on data provided on driver parties on the distributed ledger leading to increased trust [10].
behaviour (i.e. speed, braking habits etc.); smart vehicle charging Issues of transparency and trust are highlighted by the World Bank
which integrates with smart home, calendars, individual behaviours in its overview of the key advantages of DLT/blockchain-enabled net-
etc. for example, charging at times when electricity is cheapest; and works [105]. The issue of trust is an interesting one. On one hand the
enabling car sharing services when a vehicle is not in use by its owner technology could remove or reduce the transaction costs traditionally
where the blockchain facilitates the financial transaction, unlocking of associated with construction projects [106] in the drafting, negotiating
the car, authorised access etc. [84,88]. and enforcing of agreements, thus, resulting in massive cost reductions
Mobile billing systems allow electric vehicle owners to charge their and efficiency gains. On the other hand, such an outcome, if wide-
vehicles away from home via a blockchain-based payment system [86]. spread, would have a truly disruptive effect on businesses, many of
Leasing of private charging piles is facilitated by blockchain and smart whom rely financially on the status quo of opportunism and contractual
leasing contracts removing third party intermediaries and ensure data behaviour [107].
privacy of transactions [85]. Sharma et al. [87] developed a system that BIM is described by Mason [15] as a pre-cursor to intelligent con-
integrates with public services such as the Department of Motor Ve- tracts where DLT provides a platform for them to operate and where the
hicles for monitoring and management of traffic through a smart city. two should be “viewed as part of the BIM-led revolution in construction
Blockchain is used for crowdsourcing of data incorporating smart and not separate from it” (p. 2). Semi-automation is the suggested ap-
contracts and eliminating the need for intermediaries. A seven-layer proach rather than full automation due to limitations in the technology
framework is applied to successful ride-sharing application, La’zooz, a and BIM along with the need for human intervention in construction
self-managed DAO that rewards users who share their data during projects [95]. Intelligent contracts running on a distributed ledger can
journeys with “zooz” tokens that can be used to pay for future journeys. lead to surety of payments stabilising smaller contractors and increase
The more people that allow their data to be crowdsourced in this way trust in projects through the historical immutable record of a dis-
improves social performance of the service [82]. A reputation-based tributed ledger [96].
system is offered by Yang et al. [83] that crowdsources data about Strengthening procurement and supply chain activities using smart
traffic conditions throughout a city. Decoster and Billard [89] propose contracts resulting in automated payments, provenance tracking, con-
the use of intelligent cars to determine the best route through a city to tract administration, disintermediation, ownership and control of data
avoid traffic delays without the use of a central internet service such as and redefining trust is offered by many authors (e.g. [7,13,108]). With
Google Maps or Tom Tom thereby preventing collection and storage of regards facilities management, Kinnaird and Geipel [10] offer a concept
private data by a central organisation. In Knirsch et al. [90], a dynamic of ‘The Blockchain of Circular BIM Things’ facilitating the transfer of
four-step bidding system involving exploration of charging rates and [near] live data about components in the building to the BIM model
locations, bidding, evaluation and charging is built on blockchain providing updates on the ‘as is’ state of the building, optimising per-
which allows users to choose from different options based on price and formance, predicting building lifespan and potentially extending the

292
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

lifespan as well as providing detailed building information at the de- [111] point out, DLT allow the elimination of intermediaries. This,
molition stage. The use case of integration between BIM, IoT and together with the vector of e-commerce creates wider, non-traditional
blockchain is proposed by Ye et al., [94] for creation of a DAO for funding opportunities such as crowdfunding. Little has been published
building maintenance systems resulting in a wholly automated system that is specifically related to crowdfunding in the property and con-
at the operations phase. struction sectors, an exception being by Mercado [112].
A more disruptive effect is the possibility of actually removing in- Roles of individuals and internal business structures will be changed
termediaries from the construction project supply chain. The economic by DLT. Hierarchies are likely to become much flatter as decision-
organisation and structure of the British construction industry illu- making becomes autonomous based on experience and expertise re-
strated by Ball [109] remains in a state where it is dominated by main ducing the level of involvement from senior management seen today
contractors who are essentially intermediaries between the owner and [26]. Existing roles will be supressed whilst new roles will be created
the lower supply chain and rely on cash flow for profit. The apparent such as that of a smart contract mediator [99]. Relaxation of centralised
benefits of DLT may bring the demise of some industry players. management could lead to fewer errors and corruption that can be seen
Key challenges include: the cost of implementing DLT as each in current systems and the introduction of more flexible and transparent
building system or component would need an IoT-enabled device; de- democratic processes. Concerns relate to regulation of such organisa-
velopers of appropriate technology not having the construction industry tions and the potential for people to set up DAOs with the purpose of
in mind so a significant time lag is expected [6]; the construction in- perverting the law (i.e. through sale of illicit goods) or simply operating
dustry is slow to adopt new technologies; implementation costs im- outside of current regulations [37].
pacting the rate of adoption; and scant knowledge and understanding of The coupling of DLT and the Internet of Things (IoT) will drive
the benefits of DLT in construction, with dissemination of that knowl- digital transformation within organisations. However, lack of standards
edge presenting further challenges [13]. and suitably skilled IT personnel are barriers to overcome [97].

3.1.1.7. Business models and organisational structures. DLT will affect 3.1.2. Summation of the systematic literature review
business models within organisations and organisational structures will The seven categories of application of DLT in the built environment
change as viable alternatives to traditional methods of practice become presented in this review highlight the potential impact this new form of
available. At an organisational level, DAOs will become commonplace; internet can have on society as a whole. DLT focuses on returning
made possible through smart contracts. DAOs function like traditional ownership of oneself back to individuals whilst creating more demo-
organisations but are not owned by anyone; they are fully automated cratic and transparent systems emphasising traceability and account-
and decentralised running on a P2P network. They incorporate machine ability. People continuously interact with the built environment which
learning technology and any profit derived from a DAO is based on a is why this review considered different facets alongside the construction
stake mechanism [100]. They are stateless so impervious to industry. With a move toward a circular economy centred on waste
conventional regulations and will change operations and organisation reduction it is easy to see how the categories interact and complement
of society [10]. Self-driving taxis will use fares they earn to pay for fuel, one another. The fully-realised “smart” vision of the future results in
repairs, insurance and replacement at its end of life [37]. DLT will affect complete integration of each of these aspects from smart devices in the
value-proposition, −creation, −delivery, −capture and smart home that make up smart communities that make up the smart
-communication through authentication of goods and services, cities currently being constructed that use smart energy and are gov-
disintermediation and efficiencies [98]. Financial reporting will be erned by smart governments. The smart transformation results in many
revolutionised as data will be readily available on the ledger negating activities being automated. If at a point in the future automated pay-
requirements for monthly/quarterly/annual reports [99]. Trade of ments are realised through smart contracts, myriad activities have the
goods and services will change through automated purchasing potential to be made faster, more efficient and cheaper. However, the
between human-to-human, human-to-DAO or DAO-to-DAO following sub-section highlights many of the challenges offered in the
transactions removing the need for human interaction once smart literature to be overcome before acceptance of a “smart world” based
contracts have been signed setting out under what circumstances they on DLT can become a reality.
give their agreement for a trade to take place [100]. Trust between
business parties will be redefined and DLT will support business process 3.1.3. Challenges and opportunities of adoption of DLT in the construction
reengineering. industry
Mention was made above of the potential impact of DLT on con- An extensive list of the challenges and opportunities related to im-
struction industry business models. This could equally apply at the very plementation of DLT in the construction industry was compiled from
outset of the process with the way projects are funded. Whatever the the body of literature reviewed. In addition, grey literature (e.g. in-
source of funding used for clients and contractors (i.e. working capital dustry reports, agency reports, online articles, news articles, blogs) was
and retained profits, clearing bank and merchant bank loans, lenders' consulted to ensure the list was as comprehensive as possible and is
and shareholders' equity in the Private Finance Initiative and Public presented in Tables 2 and 3. It is not intended to be exhaustive. The
Private Partnerships), financial protection against loss is normally re- non-construction-specific challenges and opportunities highlighted are
quired. This is effected through a wide variety of contractual and extra- equally applicable to the construction industry, however, specific ex-
contractual measures, including retention funds, performance bonds, amples were not available to provide context. In Tables 2 and 3, each
parent company guarantees, and collateral warranties (see Hughes challenge and opportunity has been mapped across four dimensions
et al., [157]). If, as Underwood [23] suggests, blockchain can mitigate that were identified consistently across the literature (technical, policy,
these risks then the need for such measures will be reduced or even process and social) and overlaid onto the DLT Four-Dimensional Model
removed. discussed in Section 4.1 below.
Writing about the impact of technology on business-model innova-
tion, Gambardella and McGahan [110] observe that "in the past, com- 3.1.4. Bibliometric indicators
mercial opportunities or technological problems called for innovations International scientific influence is an important parameter when
and technological solutions; today, technological solutions are seeking assessing the performance of research and, while the key focus should
commercial opportunities to trigger, or technological problems to solve" be on qualitative analysis through peer review, quantitative assessment
(p. 267). Such a commercial opportunity is crowdfunding/crowdsour- provides support to qualitative research through the use of bibliometric
cing as a source of finance for construction. Conventional markets are indicators [124]. They should be “accurate, sophisticated, up-to-date,
composed of buyers, sellers and intermediaries. As Zamani & Giaglis combined with expert knowledge, and interpreted and used with care”

293
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

Table 2
Challenges related to implementation of DLT in the construction industry.
Challenge Description & context for construction Tec Pol Pro Soc

Authentication of data Ensuring data uploaded to the ledger is legitimate; could cause fraudulent activity within the supply chain [98]. • • •
Bandwidth & connectivity Sufficient server capacity required for stability of the system along with continuous internet connectivity ([113]; •
[114]). Elements of the supply chain delivery system could fail with lack of connectivity [113].
Coding of smart contracts Human error and badly coded contracts could be disastrous [47]. All construction projects are reliant upon well • •
executed contracts that set out all parties' obligations thereunder [115].
Energy consumption Massive amounts of energy are required to run Proof-of-Work protocols ([114]; [47]). This impacts the built • • • •
environment regarding emissions, grid capacities and demand management [47].
Exchange rate volatility The value of Bitcoin fluctuated between $1000 and $20,000 in 2017 [116]. Fluctuations in cryptocurrency valuations •
means they are not yet stable enough for use in construction projects [117].
Interoperability Where different applications need to communicate, there are challenges with transfer of data. This is already seen as a •
key challenge to Building Information Modelling in construction [21].
Legal There is a lack of legal precedents and regulations [118]. Construction relies heavily on legally binding contracts to •
operate and has problems with enforcing regulations [20].
Malicious attacks Different types of attacks present risks for use of DLT. Theft of data/currency pose threats to smart cities, construction •
projects etc. [29].
Readiness for adoption Full adoption requires information sharing and collaboration from all participants. Some of the construction • • •
industry's biggest problems centre on sharing of information, trust and collaboration ([13]; [93]).
Resistance to change Implementation requires process changes at all levels of the organisation [111]. The industry is historically resistant •
to change so may not realise all possible benefits of DLT [117].
Skills Given its nascence, there is a significant lack of people sufficiently trained in DLT [114]. Fresh new talent is needed in • • •
the industry for successful implementation [119].
Technological state of the industry There is an underlying requirement for a certain standard of technology to exist within an industry before • • •
implementation. The industry is not yet sufficiently digitalised to take full advantage of DLT [117].

Non-construction specific challenges: poor application programming interfaces (APIs); dark net activity; data protection and ‘right to be forgotten’ issues with an
immutable ledger; risk of tampering of smart devices; lacks flexibility and scalability as system requires consensus for changes to be made; job security at risk due to
automation; nascent technology; privacy is sacrificed in place of transparency and auditability; redundancy is costly and presents issues of data storage as ledgers
grow in size; lack of regulation, role of state unclear, currently no authority to regulate cryptocurrencies; growth needs and means of financing scalability are
unknown; security and confidentiality of transaction information is challenging, particularly in public blockchains; forks can be created as some nodes update
software and others do not; throughput and latency of transactions is an issue where cryptocurrencies cannot compete with the likes of Visa who can process ~20,000
transactions per second.

([125], p. 13). Bibliometric analysis provides information on a country's keywords were not provided in the paper, where available, they were
research focus and makes comparisons on an international level with taken from the publisher's website or a database (i.e. IEEE, Com-
other research communities [126]. This paper uses the number of papers pendex). Terms with the same or similar meanings were grouped to-
indicator focusing on the following categories: country of authors, gether and their count cumulated to provide an accurate ranking.
publications per year, publication type and keywords. The data for the Keywords with one or two counts were not included in this analysis.
first three indicators were compiled directly from the papers. Data for The term “blockchain” and variations thereof had the highest number
keyword analysis was organised in EndNote and exported into BibExcel, of counts followed by smart contracts, security, internet of things (IoT),
an open source programme for analysis of bibliographic data [127]. smart city and peer-to-peer
Paper counts, where ‘paper’ referrers to any type of scientific text, allow The final indicator used for quantitative analysis of the papers re-
for relative impact analysis of data among the body of knowledge that viewed for this study is the distribution of technology employed. The
exists measuring the quantity produced based on the metric being Bitcoin Blockchain is the most widely used appearing in 25 papers,
considered [126]. In addition, a summary of the different DLT used followed by Ethereum appearing in 14 papers. Multichain appeared
across the body of research is presented. twice and five papers referred to other blockchains. As a number of
In Fig. 1, the body of knowledge was organised by country of lead papers did not conduct studies or provide empirical data, there were 28
author with the top contributing countries being the USA, China, Aus- papers that did not use any DLT. Additionally, one paper referred to
tralia, the UK, Italy and South Korea. both the Bitcoin Blockchain and Ethereum.
Given the infancy of DLT and the slow take-up of new technologies
generally in the construction industry, the majority of papers for this
study were published very recently. One paper was published in 2014, 3.2. Focus group discussion
two in 2015, six in 2016, 44 in 2017 and 20 in 2018. The jump from six
papers in 2016 to 44 papers in 2017 demonstrates the rapid increase in During the exploratory stages of the research, a focus group was
interest in DLT for applications in the built environment and it is ex- held with eight people on the premises of a UK university. The group
pected that the body of knowledge will expand significantly from 2018 consisted of five academics, four with knowledge and understanding of
onwards. DLT; two PhD students researching BIM and digital construction in-
Almost all the papers reviewed for this study were peer-reviewed, novation; and one industry practitioner. The purpose of the focus group
however, due to their relevance and contribution to the research, it was to obtain views on the use of DLT in the built environment, spe-
included a small number of papers from grey literature (i.e. industry cifically, the potential benefits and key challenges facing its im-
and government reports) and ‘Other’ which included a paper from the plementation. The discussions that took place helped direct the devel-
Social Science Research Network (SSRN) repository and a book chapter. opment of the framework presented further on in this paper.
The papers consisted of 30 journal articles, 37 conference papers, four The one-hour session began with an informative presentation on
from grey literature, and two other. DLT and their applications in the built environment, as identified
Keyword analysis was conducted in BibExcel following instructions through the systematic literature review discussed above. This was then
from Persson et al. [127], the results of which can be seen in Fig. 2. Of followed by an open discussion around the benefits and challenges of
the 73 papers reviewed, 13 did not include keywords. Where author DLT applications in construction.
One participant commented that blockchain in the built

294
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

Table 3
Opportunities related to implementation of DLT in the construction industry.
Opportunity Description & context for construction Tec Pol Pro Soc

Collaboration is increased Data is more transparent so will be shared more freely increasing collaboration and trust between parties [120]. • •
Tokenisation will reward parties for data sharing [117], reputation ratings will encourage more strategic partnerships
[93].
Digital twinning A digital replica of a built asset throughout its lifecycle provides valuable information to all stakeholders [115]. With IoT, • • •
drones and real-time data, DLT supports digital twinning by improving inspections [117].
Disintermediation DLT removes the need for intermediaries and guarantees execution of transactions; smart contracts automate processes • • •
and payments [117]; clients have more control over project time, cost and scope [121].
Efficiencies Promotes efficiency in international B2B trade; increases access to trade and supply chain finance [114]. Automating • •
activities allows for reallocation of resources reducing administration, transfers risk and reduces time and cost [93].
Faster processes Processes become streamlined and therefore faster. Reduces the need for multiple verifications as they can be accessed by • • •
all participants on the ledger, especially in design and planning [115].
Immutability Changing already chained blocks is very difficult so the ledger is considered immutable [56]. Timestamping, smart • • • •
contracts, multi-signature transactions, smart oracles create real work depositories of information [28]. Client (often the
taxpayer) sees cost reductions [13].
Low transaction costs Intermediary costs are eliminated; efficiency is increased in international payments; property registration costs are • •
reduced ([56]; [114]).
Proof-of-Ownership and rights Ownership, IPR and rights can be recorded for many types of assets from vehicles to buildings to bonds [34] and can be • • •
made explicit for shared BIM models leading to better trust between parties [10].
Provenance DLT and IoT-enabled devices allows for supply chain tracking of goods and services in [near] real-time [122]. • • • •
Procurement and supply chain activities are streamlined and allow for more robust and quicker investigations ([13]; [7];
[108]).
Reduces human error Automation of tasks, use of sensors, artificial intelligence and smart contracts reduces risk of human error. Certification/ • •
verification of coding through DLT will provide quality assurance for construction projects [115].
Smart contracts Automatically satisfies conditions set out in the contract upon meeting pre-set obligations. Construction contracts written • •
into code will change how organisations operate, speed up payments, reduce disputes etc. ([14]; [37]; [108]).
Societal benefits DLT will put the needs of society and challenges at the centre over technology development [69]. Can help extend asset •
lives through better facilities management with scheduled activities and monitoring with IoT [93].
Traceability and auditability Immutability adds transparency to agreements and transactions; allows for better visibility and real-time tracking of • • •
materials in projects and supply chain from provenance [68].
Workflow improvements Open project environment through increased collaboration and transparency results in accountability and project control; • •
may solve some BIM adoption issues as sharing increases [117]; workflows can be automated and made faster [123].

Non-construction specific opportunities: Compensation for created value through increased control of access rights and payment structures; cross-border trade;
reduces corruption through setting specific controls e.g. on how land titles can be transferred; distributed systems lead to decentralised power and more democratic
systems; increases differentiation and competition through emergence of new markets; promotes inclusion bringing goods and services to people across the globe;
integration of services through IoT and smart devices; Big Data sets on immutable ledgers offer better predictive capabilities; increases prosperity through granting
access to the global economy through, for example, smartphones offering new lines of credit, suppliers, partners etc.; inbuilt resilience makes the system resistant to
external threats and eliminates single point of failure; transparency holds people to account and reduces the ability to commit fraud; distributed systems reduce the
need for trust; community-led systems result in user empowerment; move toward a value-drive society and away from price-drive economy as technology develops
and focuses on individual and community needs.

environment “must be considered as a socio-technical system” while an- potential for DLT in the construction industry. The interview lasted
other raised the question of whether “it has the potential to address one of three and a half hours and used a semi-structured approach. A struc-
the biggest challenges in the construction industry, which is trust”. tured approach would not have been appropriate given the newness of
Discussions took place around whether a decentralised system is sui- the subject area and an unstructured approach could have been too
table and whether projects, organisations and the industry in general broad to ensure focus was given to the areas considered important by
would still benefit from a [more] centralised ledger. Consideration was the interviewer or could have resulted in missing key areas of interest
given to DLT in practice and the frequency required for transaction [128]. Those areas of specific interest were the potential use of DLT for
processing whether it be real-time, near-real-time, hourly, weekly, Project Bank Accounts (PBAs) and the underlying challenges of the
monthly etc. as this would impact on the technological requirements of construction industry. However, the semi-structured approached al-
any system implemented. Discussions around application in the supply lowed for emergence of regulations and compliance being discussed as
chain considered authenticity of data with one participant commenting one of the biggest challenges facing the construction industry.
that, “Blockchain doesn't remove the fact that people can be dishonest. RFID In terms of the validity and usefulness of the interviewee's opinions,
and IoT-enabled smart dust don't guarantee that a shipment has reached its it was important that s/he was:
place of delivery just because the blockchain says it has when people can
deliver the sensor from a shipment of bricks without the bricks and have the • an expert from within the construction industry;
shipment automatically register as complete.” Finally, thought was given • understood the key challenges facing the construction industry;
to the types of information to be recorded on the ledger during a con- • has experience of engaging with different types of organisations
struction project aside from financial transactions such as commu- across the industry from contractors at all tiers to public sector
nication, asset/IP information, labour etc. and whether the ‘as is’ clients;
functioning of those transactions can be improved across the industry. • has knowledge and understanding of the potential for DLT in the
industry.
3.3. Interview with senior industry representative
The interviewee commented that as a result of the collapse of the
UKs second largest construction company, Carillion Plc., in January
In April 2018, an interview was held with a senior industry re-
2018, “Now, in construction, there will be more visibility of supply chains
presentative with considerable experience in contract drafting, pro-
and more regulation using the available technology to reinforce the reg-
curement policy and acting in an advisory capacity to several national
ulatory framework from a safety point of view”. The interviewee went on
policy and legislative groups in the UK and overseas to discuss the

295
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

Fig. 1. Distribution of papers by country of lead author.

to say that, “The biggest problem is lack of enforceability. People are not bolster regulation would ensure there were repercussions for having the
clear what they are enforcing so people can't be held to account if we don't blockchain as a regulatory tool that would reverberate throughout environ-
know who did what, when”. Talking about blockchain, it was stated that, mental standards, procurement, delivery etc. It makes it easier to enforce the
it “will be the facilitator of collaboration in construction,” and, “The value delivery processes to quality and safety standards. Project Bank Accounts
that blockchain can add is installed at the outset of the procurement process. could be used to limit the scope of enquiry and will be complemented by
Every time someone does something, it will be recorded on the blockchain – regulations through traceability. Technology that forces people to account,
who, what, when, with what materials, how, who created the design, who for example, in quality factors, will change how people operate.” These
signed off the design etc. This would give oversight of the delivery team and comments regarding poor regulation and enforcement practices in the
would give a massive boost to the regulatory system”. The interviewee UK construction industry are reinforced by the Hackitt Review [20] and
observed that, “Current successes for blockchain applications have been represents another important use case for the application of DLT in the
seen in industries that already have integrated procurement and delivery and construction industry.
are already technology driven. They are more open and receptive to digital
advancements. For blockchain applications to be successful in construction, 3.4. Socio-technical systems
first, the whole procurement and delivery processes need to be fixed”. With
regards regulation, blockchain “gives us a way of achieving things that Socio-technical systems were developed in 1951 by Trist and
can't be achieved at the moment including improvements in procurement and Bamforth [129] with a focus on the relationship between technological
delivery, which, at present, are very disintegrated. Use of technology to and social aspects in the workplace, particularly heavy industry. The

Fig. 2. Analysis of top keyword counts.

296
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

original philosophy has remained the same but there has been “a gra-
dual broadening of enquiry to advanced manufacturing technologies
(…) through to office-based work and services” ([130], p. 172) ren-
dering its applicability to new developments in DLT.
Technological advancements inevitably require substantial invest-
ment; for example, when updating or switching from an older system to
a newer one including software tools, equipment, training, and new
production processes. However, they also have the longer-term benefit
of reducing production costs and increasing profit margins if adoption is
properly planned and executed. The break-even point, that is, the point
in time when benefits outweigh the costs, is variable and usually a key Four-
investment consideration to be addressed in the first instance [131],
dimensional
such that what is proposed provides real solutions rather than a patch
overlap
that only fixes the system temporarily.
As Baxter and Sommerville point out, “Socio-technical systems de-
sign (STSD) methods are an approach to design that considers human,
social and organisational factors, as well as technical factors in the
design of organisational systems” ([132], p. 4). This applies particularly
when developing computer-based systems: the social and technical
factors must be considered to meet the requirements of the designed
system, otherwise, the system is fated to fail due to meeting technical
requirements but missing social ones [132]. Three different aspects of
socio-technical systems are presented by Geels [133] as “production,
diffusion and use of technology” (p. 900). In the same vein as Baxter
and Sommerville, Geels [133] highlights the importance of looking at Fig. 3. DLT Four-Dimensional Model.
the relationships between innovation and users to ensure societal needs
are fulfilled. At the centre of Geels' socio-technical system is regulation:
capturing interlocking knowledge among the dimensions. This is im-
an element that produces trust and intercepts with each of the three
portant to preserve the endurance of the model and ensure its adapt-
‘aspects’. Currently in the development of DLT there appears to be
ability for different purposes, especially in a fast-evolving area of de-
limited consideration of socio-technical systems as evidenced by its lack
velopment such as DLT. The following subsections describe the four
of regulation, as reported by Ammous [134] and Kshetri [114]; this is
dimensions.
addressed as part of the socio-technical systems approach in this paper.

4. DLT in the construction industry: an extended socio-technical 4.1.1. The technical dimension
framework The technical dimension deals with implementation of all aspects
of the technical environment for DLT including software, hardware,
This section proposes a socio-technical framework for the im- networks and other infrastructure required for the system to function.
plementation of DLT in the construction industry, based on opportu- Given the stage of development for DLT and the lifecycle of new
nities and challenges identified in the reviewed literature and mapped technology in general, it is expected that many of the challenges
across four dimensions (technical, policy, process and social) as shown highlighted above (e.g. interoperability, throughput and latency) will
in Tables 2 and 3. The socio-technical perspective was adopted because be solved as new products and new versions of existing technologies are
of the increasing recognition of the importance of the social element in released. Current offerings that are likely to have an impact on the
solutions involving technological systems [65]. However, the socio- construction industry include Ethereum [135], NEO [136] and Brick-
technical stance was extended to incorporate policy and process on the schain [137]. A key consideration for their use in the construction in-
basis that a new technological system is one that needs to address other dustry will be whether ‘unpermissioned’ or ‘permissioned’ ledgers are
elements beyond society and technology. This extended socio-technical required. Upon taking the decision, considerations should then turn to
framework has two models at its core: the DLT Four-Dimensional scalability, security and privacy, integration with hardware (e.g. sen-
Model, and the DLT Actors Model which are described in the suc- sors), integration with software (e.g. IoT, APIs, interoperability, BIM
ceeding subsections. The models are intended to improve the under- models, networks) and data frequency requirements (e.g. real-time,
standing of the concepts involved when discussing DLT applications in near-real-time, hourly, weekly, monthly).
construction. They represent flexible, adaptable and scalable knowl-
edge constructs and foundations that can be used for various in- 4.1.2. The policy dimension
vestigations related to DLT applications in construction. For example, This dimension represents the policy environment in which DLT
following descriptions of the four dimensions, the DLT Four-Dimen- will be established; encompassing regulations, laws, policies, standards
sional Model was used to analyse the challenges and opportunities fa- and compliance. At present across most countries looking to the tech-
cing the implementation of DLT in construction. nology these areas are either non-existent or just emerging. Examples of
the latter include Russia [138] and China [139] who have begun to
4.1. DLT Four-Dimensional Model establish such regulations and standards. Due to many governments
having a goal of establishing smart cities, they have a responsibility to
This conceptual model represents the four dimensions involved sufficiently investigate the suitability of DLT and to ensure appropriate
when discussing the application of DLT within the construction sector. regulatory and technological infrastructure is in place to allow it to
Fig. 3 provides a graphical representation of the model and its four thrive long-term facilitating its adoption and integration (e.g. with
dimensions. The model can capture potential areas of overlap among all other smart technologies). The challenge will be in developing a reg-
four dimensions (i.e. the white area in the middle) and between two ulatory environment that promotes integration of services, overcoming
and/or three of the dimensions (i.e. the shaded areas surrounding the problems of interoperability and providing a manageable system
white area). This gives the model the flexibility for representing and without inhibiting innovation. On this basis, plans should also involve

297
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

educating the general public of the benefits and operation of DLT as

Bandwidth &
well as informing them of the potential security and privacy issues to Connectivity
enable it to be a successful user-run system based on user-generated Interoperability
data. Additionally, robust succession planning is essential to train suf- Redundancy
ficiently skilled people to run the system mitigating resourcing as a Poor APIs
potential barrier to its implementation.
Throughput
& Latency
4.1.3. The process dimension Scalability
The process dimension considers the practicalities of implementing Software
the technology in the construction industry and how individuals and updates
organisations will embrace and use it. This dimension involves: (1) Malicious
Privacy
Nascence
understanding of the implementation of DLT in procurement, design, Attacks
Energy
construction, and operation and maintenance of facilities; and (2) Consumption
capturing the possibilities and effects of DLT on underlying manage- Security
ment processes of the entire project lifecycle. In particular, this di-
Skills
mension will prompt individuals and organisations to consider the
specificities of how, when and where DLT will integrate into the project Legal
and asset lifecycles; how existing processes and procedures will change
as a result of its implementation; what changes in organisational
structures, business roles and business strategies (including business
models) will be required to fully exploit the technology; and what needs
to be done in terms of regulation at organisation, project, and supply Exchange
Regulations
chain levels to ensure compliance with both industry-wide regulatory rate
volatility
frameworks and client requirements.
Fig. 4. Challenges mapped across the DLT Four-Dimensional Model.
4.1.4. The social dimension
The social dimension is focused on the impact DLT will have on
society and its integration into the real world representing the social
system where the benefits will be realised. Such considerations are
gaining increasing importance in the light of the increased recognition
of the social impacts of technological systems: examples being the data
scandal involving Cambridge Analytica [140] and global policy changes
such as the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). How data is
generated, collected, stored and handled and what is uploaded (into
any system, including a blockchain) is more important than ever, par-
ticularly with regards privacy and security. Environmental sustain- Integration of
ability should be at the centre of technological development particu- services
larly given the high levels of energy consumption seen in distributed Resilience
ledgers that use Proof-of-Work protocols. These aspects reinforce the Better predictive
capabilities
need for DLT to be addressed as a socio-technical system as the overlap Immutability
between technology and its social impacts are clearly visible. They must Provenance
be considered together for any DLT application that promotes in-
formation sharing in order to avoid compromising on privacy and
hindering collaboration between parties. For DLT applications in con-
struction, the principal focus of this dimension will be at the opera-
tional phase of assets, although all other phases (e.g. design and plan-
ning, procurement, and construction) will also be relevant.

4.1.5. Mapping challenges and opportunities

To demonstrate an example of how the DLT Four-Dimensional
Model can be used to improve the understanding of DLT in construc-
tion, the challenges and opportunities identified from literature in Fig. 5. Opportunities mapped across the DLT Four-Dimensional Model.
Section 3.1.2 (including those non-specific to construction) have been
mapped in Figs. 4 and 5 across the different dimensions and their solution offered meets the requirements of its users and beneficiaries.
overlaps. The dotted line indicates those challenges and opportunities Within the context of the construction industry, 16 different actors have
that overlap two dimensions that are not positioned next to each other been identified and mapped across the four dimensions in Fig. 6 and
in the model. At a later stage in the implementation process, and when described in Table 4. Each actor is made up of either individuals, groups
used alongside the DLT Actors Model, this will assist in identifying the or organisations based on their involvement with DLT. A number of
actors to consult when addressing a particular challenge or opportunity. actors belong to more than one dimension.
This model can be used to plan the complementary effort of dif-
4.2. DLT Actors Model ferent actors in the adoption and diffusion of DLT applications for
construction and to assign varying levels of responsibility for the actors.
This model identified the actors across each of the four dimensions It can be used to assess and benchmark the level of contribution re-
representing the DLT domain in construction. Due to the complexities quired by each actor during adoption of DLT and can support assigning
of new technological systems, identifying and engaging with associated of roles and responsibilities throughout the process. Actors have been
actors during the development and implementation phases ensures any allocated one of three levels of contribution: ‘primary’ (those actors

298
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

who have a direct role in development of the technology, policies,

standards, and regulations and who have a say in how technologies
develop over time even after adoption); ‘secondary’ (those actors who
will use the technology day-to-day but who do not necessarily input
into its functionality); and ‘supporting’ (those actors who may con-
tribute to data uploaded to the ledger or who have an interest in how
they function but do not contribute to the running of the ledger nor use
it for commercial purposes).
Industry To demonstrate how the model works, three examples are given.
Associations During the early stages of DLT development, the System Architect has a
primary role as she is the person(s) responsible for creating the dis-
Supply
Chain Educational tributed ledger with a particular focus on software. The type of dis-
Institutions tributed ledger required will depend on its use. Public ledgers have
Miners different requirements to private ledgers, particularly with regards se-
Communities curity. The System Architect will be responsible for ensuring any re-
of Practice
quirements are met depending on the client and/or application. They
will need to be aware of regulations to ensure that any solution is
compliant. Individual Construction Organisations are considered to be
secondary contributors. While they are most likely to use off-the-shelf
technology, especially after adoption of the technology becomes more
widespread and the options available more varied, in some circum-
stances they will be purveyors of new technological solutions depen-
dent upon their organisation's needs. However, they will not be the
direct developers of any new solution; this will be contracted out to the
Fig. 6. DLT Actors Model. supply chain. Social Groups have been classed as a supporting con-
tributor as they have an interest in DLT but do not necessarily have any
influence over it other than their right to lobby authorities with regards

Table 4
Actors associated with DLT.
Dimension Actor Description Contribution

Technical System Architects Individuals and organisations who develop DLT including programmers, coders, software developers, Primary
system engineers etc.
Technology Providers Individuals and organisations who develop hardware, software, networking architecture for DLT and Primary
those associated with enabling or interrelated technologies (e.g. IoT, sensors, drone technology).
Service Providers Companies involved in providing a technical service to organisations using DLT, particularly where Secondary
private distributed ledgers are used.
Political National Authorities/Policy State and local government authorities responsible for making policy, writing standards and setting Primary
Makers regulations along with enforcing them.
International Political International groups working together to set international regulations for transactions that cross Primary
Authorities borders to promote international partnerships and to mitigate the possibility of fraud, corruption and
other criminal activities.
Process Individual Construction Individual organisations operating in the construction industry including main architectural, Secondary
Organisations engineering, contractor, sub-contractor and facilities management organisations.
Project Teams Individuals across the supply chain who specifically form the project team who have access to the Secondary
ledger and who have responsibility for producing information to the ledger or consuming information
from the ledger.
Clients Individuals or organisations, public and private, who commission construction projects with access to Secondary
information on the ledger regarding their project.
Social Individual Users Individuals who use DLT day-to-day either through performing transactions or by providing data to Supporting
be uploaded to the ledger.
Social groups Groups of individuals with an interest in the impact of DLT at a societal level (e.g. regarding energy Supporting
consumption, privacy, security, creation of a value-driven economy, ensuring societal needs are being
met by technological solutions).
Technical-Political DLT Councils Stakeholder groups of DLT tasked with approving changes to software, data in the ledger and Primary
overlap ensuring technology and operations comply with regulations and who have the power over how DLTs
function in general.
Technical-Social overlap Miners Individual miners, mining pools and mining organisations operating as nodes and running the peer- Secondary
to-peer network with an interest in the state of the technology and the level of energy required to run
the network (in the case of Proof-of-Work).
4D overlap Industry Associations Professional associations who represent the interests of individuals and organisations operating in the Supporting
construction industry.
Supply Chain Organisations that make up the supply chain for the construction industry that are: concerned with Secondary
technical elements of the system regarding tracking and updating ledgers; impacted upon regarding
international politics and regulations where supply chains cross borders; have a responsibility to
operate in a sustainable manner; and who must follow processes as set by industry standards and
clients.
Educational Institutions Universities and other educational institutions conducting research in the field and developing Secondary
programmes to train and upskill people in DLT.
Communities of Practice Groups of individual practitioners with an interest in a specific area of DLT (e.g. interoperability, Supporting
privacy, speed).

299
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

how their use impacts on day-to-day lives; they will not be developing changing the trust relationship using DLT [7,144]; and intellectual
the technology nor using it on a commercial level in the context of the property rights for example using DLT to prove ownership of specific
construction industry but will be impacted by it. BIM components [10,93]. If DLT mature to a level where even some of
these use cases are realised, solutions to key challenges such as poor
performance, low productivity and poor payment practices will likely
5. Potential use cases for DLT applications in the construction advance more rapidly.
sector Payments in construction contracts has long represented one of the
biggest challenges for the industry [145] and DLT are a promising de-
A number of use cases for application of DLT to support solutions to velopment in addressing it [14,21]. Funds can be embedded into smart
some of the many challenges in the construction industry have been contracts with self-executing functions making automatic payments
discussed in peer-reviewed academic literature and grey literature as upon completion of defined obligations, thereby speeding up payments
presented in Section 3. These include: the use of smart contracts to for contractors [21]. Combined with cryptocurrencies, the potential for
automate payments and other activities [14,15,21]; reforming pro- guaranteed payments increases significantly [14]. Micropayments to
curement practices and supply chain activities through tracking of onsite labourers are also being explored through EtchCoin where a
goods and services from provenance to in-situ use [122,141]; integra- worker could receive payment for the work completed on the same day
tion with BIM to generate networked ledgers of engineering informa- [146]. Automating payments and contracts through the use of smart
tion [142]; supporting BIM through smart contracts to: launch ten- contracts is likely to be one of the biggest impacts DLT will have on the
dering processes, archive documents, control model access and update construction industry. This, together with tackling the issue of regula-
transaction settlements [143]; verification of the timing and source of tion and compliance are two use cases with the potential to make
the addition of components to a BIM model [141]; automated equip- massive positive changes that will reverberate across all phases of the
ment leasing using smart contracts [21]; facilities management using project and asset lifecycles.
IoT connected devices and the transactional environment of DLT to The World Economic Forum [147] published a White Paper pre-
provide a live BIM model of building performance in real-time senting a framework to support business executives in assessing whe-
[10,13,115]; maintenance and replacement insurance [142]; digital ther a blockchain-based solution would be suitable for business needs.
twinning where DLT would provide verified data of an asset to a po- Peck [148] offered a simpler decision tree asking slightly different but
tential buyer or provide real-time data through sensors and smart pertinent questions. Here, in Fig. 7, the two have been amalgamated as
contracts [115,117]; collaboration and information sharing through

12) Is the database

1) Would a 11) Are likely to be attacked/
13) Do you need to 14) Should
traditional contributors censored? Do you
Yes No Yes be able to control No transactions be
database meet interests unified or need redundant copies
functionality? public?
your needs? well-aligned? in multiple distributed
computers?
No No Yes No Yes Yes

2) Are you
attempting to 10) Do contributors
remove No know and trust Yes
intermediaries or each other?
brokers? DLT are not
suitable for Yes
Yes
this type of
3) Are you working application
9) Do you require A
with digital assets
No shared write No
(versus physical
access? DLT could be a permissioned
assets)? A public
potential /private
distributed
solution, distributed
Yes Yes ledger could
however, further ledger could
4) Can you create 8) Are you
provide a good
investigations provide a
a permanent managing solution
authoritative record No contractual No
are required good
of the digital asset relationships or solution
in question? value exchange?

Yes No

6) Do you intend to 7) Do you

5) Do you require store large want/need to rely
high performance, amounts of non- on a trusted third
No No Yes
rapid (~millisecond) transactional data party (e.g. for
transactions? as part of your compliance or
solution? liability reasons)?
Yes Yes

DLT are not yet ready for this type

of application Do you need a distributed ledger?
Fig. 7. Decision Tree to assess if a distributed ledger is required.

300
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

a means of assessing whether DLT will be suitable for a series of use

cases. For this study, three use cases are analysed: (1) automated Pro-
ject Bank Accounts (PBAs), (2) regulation and compliance and (3) a
single, shared-access BIM model. The following subsections present
step-by-step application of the decision tree to assess the uses cases in
terms of the suitableness of DLT. Fig. 8 shows the path through the
decision tree for each use case.

5.1. Use case 1: automated Project Bank Accounts (PBAs)

In the introduction, poor payment practices were introduced as one

of the biggest challenges facing the construction industry. The extent of
this can be seen through the collapse of Carillion Plc. which was the
second largest construction company in the UK until January 2018
when it was forced into liquidation having been affected by problems of
cashflow. According to Thomas [149] the company had £1.5bn worth
of debt and only £29 m in the bank; as a result leaving thousands of
individuals and organisations in a state of uncertainty, particularly as
Carillion had an extended payment period of 120 days, much longer
than the industry standard. An event of this magnitude has the potential
to impact on the UK's economic growth [150]. It is reported that most
small subcontractors may not receive any of the money they are owed,

Fig. 8. Path through decision tree for three construction industry use cases.
with the more fortunate ones likely to receive less than 1p for each £1
owed [151].
Introduced in Section 3.3, Project Bank Accounts have been offered
as one solution to prevent the impacts of insolvencies, non-payments
and late-payments. They were first proposed by the National Audit
Office in 2005 and later endorsed by the Office of Government Com-
merce in 2007 [152]. A PBA is an electronic bank account that is set up
by the client or the client and the main contractor to ring-fence funds
for different contractors by putting the funds into a trust. Once trig-
gered by completion of contractual obligations, payments are made by
the client directly and simultaneously to members of the supply chain
associated with it [153]. As noted above, smart contracts have the
ability to embed funds into a contract which will protect contractors,
subcontractors and other supply chain members from insolvency [21]
and could automate the (currently manually-administered) principles of
payment under a PBA, increasing efficiency, decreasing payout time
[39], and minimising risk of fraud, back-office costs and operational
risks [98].
The use case concerning PBAs considers the use of smart contracts to
automate payments within a publicly-funded construction project.
Table 5 shows the responses to the questions in the decision tree using
the knowledge assimilated by the researchers during this study and
related networking and interaction activities.
The outcome of this analysis demonstrates that PBAs could benefit
from DLT in the form of smart contracts. This particular use case con-
templated the use of a public ledger. However, a private ledger could be
substituted depending on the circumstances of the project. The very
transactional nature of this use case lends itself to being automated;
reflecting the original purpose for which DLT was developed (i.e.
Bitcoin transactions). The use of DLT does not entirely remove the
potential for payment disputes on construction projects, but, as argued
by Margie [154] it could, by alleviating concerns over payment, sub-
stantially reduce them thereby increasing collaboration between project
participants.

5.2. Use case 2: regulation and compliance

The serious shortcomings of regulation and compliance were high-

lighted in the introduction with reference to the Grenfell Tower fire and
subsequent Hackitt report and the fact that Carillion's collapse is able to
happen. Table 6 presents hypothetical responses in relation to a use
case considering the use of an immutable distributed ledger to record
data during a project creating a historical record to demonstrate com-
pliance with regulations.

301
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

Table 5 Table 5 (continued)

Decision tree analysis for automated Project Bank Accounts (PBAs).
whether transactions are made public or only certain transactions are made
1. Would a traditional database meet your needs? public would need to be considered on a project by project basis.
No. A traditional database does not provide an immutable, historical record nor
perform automated activities required with the use of PBAs in this use case.
2. Are you trying to remove intermediaries or brokers?
Yes. Currently, contract payments are conducted following UK legislation that
Table 6
sets out how payments should be made. Payments are made by banks or financial Decision tree analysis for regulation and compliance.
institutions as the intermediary from the client to the main contractor and then
1. Would a traditional database meet your needs?
cascaded down through the supply chain with banks carrying out the
No. There is a requirement for an immutable, historical ledger to allow for
transactions. Removal of banks as the transacting institution would reduce
effective investigations following events such as Grenfell Tower and to provide
transaction costs and increase speed of payment. However, there still needs to be
proof of certifications and verifications that take place throughout the project and
a central repository where the project funds are stored like a trust until
asset lifecycles.
cryptocurrencies are stable enough to be used to finance projects.
2. Are you trying to remove intermediaries?
3. Are you working with digital assets (versus physical assets)?
Yes. The current regulatory system and enforcement of that system is not
Yes. As construction projects become more digital and integrate completely with
functioning sufficiently. Information is not readily available and that which is, is
technologies such as BIM and move toward digital twinning, all project-related
not comprehensive enough to demonstrate or assess compliance without
data throughout the project and asset lifecycles will be generated and stored
extensive investigations, as shown by the Grenfell Tower tragedy in June 2017.
digitally.
Removal of intermediaries will make the system smoother and more robust if
4. Can you create a permanent authoritative record of the digital asset in question?
elements of the system can be automated and full historic ledgers of data
Yes. This is the element that will support increased trust, collaboration and
transactions recorded.
information sharing across projects through greater clarity, ownerships, rights
3. Are you working with digital assets (versus physical assets)?
and responsibilities.
Yes. All data from a construction project, if not already, can be digitised.
5. Do you require high performance rapid (~millisecond) transactions?
4. Can you create a permanent authoritative record of the digital asset in question?
No. Construction projects do not require the level of transaction processing seen
Yes.
in banking and energy because financial transactions at a project level are made
5. Do you require high performance rapid (~millisecond) transactions?
following UK legislation payment terms and can take months for payment
No.
transactions to actually be made due to current payment terms and the need to
6. Do you intend to store large amounts of non-transactional data as part of your
wait for funds to cascade the supply chain.
solution?
6. Do you intend to store large amounts of non-transactional data as part of your
No. However, signposts to the correct information must be made available on the
solution?
ledger to be able to demonstrate that a project complies with regulations and the
No. For this particular use case, non-transactional data will not be required as this
location of the signposted documents must be made available on a permanent
is focused on payment of projects contracts only. Where data are required from
basis.
the project to confirm whether compliance with the project has been made, they
7. Do you want/need to rely on a trusted third party (e.g. for compliance or liability
will be stored on project servers and made accessible to those parties with access
reasons)?
rights through, for example, the BIM Common Data Environment (CDE) rather
Guidance from the World Economic Forum's decision tree is such that, “If an
than on the distributed ledger.
industry has specific requirements on the use of intermediaries or trusted partners, then
7. Do you want/need to rely on a trusted third party (e.g. for compliance or liability
it may be complicated to deploy blockchain, even if other benefits of its use are readily
reasons)?
apparent. In use cases where regulation plays a big role, it may be necessary to include
No, not if the smart contract is coded correctly, transactions performed as
regulators in the project and deliver means by which the regulators can ensure
required and a record of the transaction is uploaded to the ledger. For regulatory
compliance with laws, such as antitrust and environmental law. This engagement will
purposes, the ledger will provide the immutable historical record to demonstrate
be a critical piece that needs to be addressed in many industries. An example is an
compliance and the smart contract will only execute upon meeting the required
industry that has strict requirements from multiple regulators, such as antitrust and
obligations set within it. Any smart contract will be required to comply with any
environmental, each of which requires visibility into a different aspect of the
industry and financial regulations from the outset.
transaction data, and where the issuer does not seek to display the entirety of the
8. Are you managing contractual relationships or value exchange?
transaction data to any one regulator for legal or other reasons. It could be quite
Yes. All construction projects involve contracts, often complex, between two or
difficult to deploy a blockchain for this situation without regulatory engagement”
more parties throughout the life of the project and asset. Payments are the most
([147], p. 7). Therefore, to exploit DLT for regulatory compliance purposes,
important element of the contract to the contractors and represents the tangible
actors (as identified in the DLT Actors Model) should collaborate on developing
value to be exchanged between parties.
an approach – within the context of the extended socio-technical framework –
9. Do you require shared write access?
that enables the involvement of regulators in the project to ensure compliance.
Yes. The client, main contractor and subcontractors need to be able to administer
8. Are you managing contractual relationships or value exchange?
the PBA with regards payment notices and other data and transactions required to
Yes.
comply with the smart contract terms for a payment to be made.
9. Do you require shared write access?
10. Do contributors know and trust each other?
Yes. All members of the project team need to have write access to the ledger to be
No. The parties may know each other from previous projects, but the construction
able to update project progress and for functioning of the smart contracts within
industry is notorious for lack of trust between contracting parties which is why
the project.
traditional contracts have become so complex.
10. Do contributors know and trust each other?
11. Are contributors' interests unified or well-aligned?
No.
No. Often, main contractors will attempt to pay less than was originally set out in
11. Are contributors' interests unified or well-aligned?
the contract based on work performed that often results in legal disputes being
No.
raised. Therefore, with regards payments, their interests are not aligned.
12. Is this database likely to be attacked or censored? Do you need redundant copies in
12. Is this database likely to be attacked or censored? Do you need redundant copies in
multiple distributed computers?
multiple distributed computers?
Yes. Multiple copies would hold individuals and organisations to account.
Yes, in principle. Dependent upon the project, there is potential for attack or
13. Do you need to be able to control functionality?
censorship. For example, public defence projects may be attacked in a bid to
Yes. A private permissioned ledger will most likely be the preferred choice for
obtain sensitive information not in the public domain. With regards the need for
publicly funded construction projects.
redundant copies, this would protect integrity of the data as any changes would
14. Should transactions be public?
be immediately visible. In addition, project participants would be more
No, in principle. As with the previous use case, this will be dependent on the
comfortable with their own copies of the ledger.
project as it is publicly funded. But, transaction data are most likely not required
13. Do you need to be able to control functionality?
to be public due to security or commercial sensitivity reasons.
Yes. The ability to change permissions and/or add amendments to contracts
regarding payment terms within the ledger may be required as contracts evolve
when project schedules progress.
14. Should transactions be public? The regulations and compliance use case (2) is much more strategic
Yes, in principle. As this is a publicly funded project, there is a strong argument in nature than its predecessor (automated PBAs). The key finding from
that the financial transactions within the contract should be made public. analysing this use case is the need for regulatory reform before any new
However, this type of information is also considered commercially sensitive so
solutions can be implemented. DLT can be part of a solution but they

302
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

Table 7 content of the BIM is uploaded into the ledger. The ‘unchained’ sce-
Decision tree analysis for single shared-access BIM model for whole asset life- nario, where the BIM files are stored into a management server and only
cycle uses. their fingerprints and metadata are stored into the ledger, still represent
1. Would a traditional database meet your needs? a feasible option [28] and its testing against the decision tree would
No. BIM Models are too complex to be satisfied by a traditional database. have followed the same path as Use Case 2.
2. Are you trying to remove intermediaries?
Yes, to some extent. The current model for delivering projects in construction
5.4. Evaluation of the decision tree
includes many intermediaries for things like insurance, certifications, validations,
supply chain activities, procurement, financial transactions, contract writing etc.
that carry high associated costs. Removal of intermediaries will dramatically Three use cases were employed to evaluate the effectiveness of the
reduce project costs. proposed decision tree. These procedures have demonstrated the initial
3. Are you working with digital assets (versus physical assets)? level of evaluation that should take place to allow a decision to be made
Yes. Most data from a construction project, if not already, can be digitised.
on whether a specific use case warrants further investigations into the
4. Can you create a permanent authoritative record of the digital asset in question?
Yes. value of DLT. The decision tree captures the key elements of DLT and
5. Do you require high performance rapid (~millisecond) transactions? can be applied to a range of applications. In addition, it can support
No. identification of use cases that may benefit from DLT but also re-
6. Do you intend to store large amounts of non-transactional data as part of your
cognises that DLT are still in development and do not yet provide
solution?
Yes. Ultimately, the vision would be to have an entire BIM Model on a distributed universal solutions. Consideration should be given to the fact that just
ledger for whole asset lifecycle use including: e.g. records every transaction that because DLT can provide a solution to construction industry challenges,
takes place; stores every document related to the project and built asset; it is not necessarily the best or most efficient option; all other options
automates facilities management activities; manages buildings like a Distributed should be explored when considering routes to technological ad-
Autonomous Organisation (DAO) through the use of smart contracts connected
vancement.
with the IoT, sensors and drone technologies; etc.

6. Conclusions and future work

are not the solution to the entirety of the challenges faced. In question 7
of Table 6, guidance from the World Economic Forum suggests that This paper contributes to knowledge in the following ways:
regulators become part of the project delivery team. If this were to be
the case for a construction project, they would no longer be considered a) identifies the key areas of research interest of DLT in the built en-
a third party but rather a project participant. Under these circum- vironment through categorising and analysing results from a state-
stances, DLT could prove to be an effective element in regulation and of-the-art and literature review highlighting seven categories of:
compliance of construction projects and in this instance a public or a smart energy, smart cities and the sharing economy, smart govern-
private ledger would be suitable depending on the circumstances. ment, smart homes, intelligent transport, Building Information
Modelling (BIM) and construction management, and business
models and organisational structures;
5.3. Use case 3: single shared-access BIM model b) presents an extensive list of challenges and opportunities of DLT
with specific examples for the construction industry along with re-
It was noted earlier (in Section 3.1.1) that the benefits of combining sults from a focus group and expert interview to demonstrate cur-
BIM with DLT are only likely to be fully realised with more inter- rent thinking on the topic;
connected and networked collaborative BIM ways of working such as c) assimilates those results into developing a framework that contains
those envisioned for Level 3 BIM maturity. Level 3 BIM presupposes a two multi-dimensional conceptual models to form the basis of a
single shared-access BIM model where all project participants work roadmap for implementation of DLT in the construction sector. The
from one centrally held model managed by a collaborative Model DLT Four-Dimensional Model incorporates four elements (technical,
Server during a construction project from the design and planning policy, process and social) and the DLT Actors Model identifies a list
phase, through construction, into asset operation and through to the of actors within and across each of the dimensions, which should be
end of its life. This use case considers the use of DLT as a vector for considered when developing any DLT-based solution for the con-
participants' inputs/outputs of information into/from the model where struction industry ensuring that any solution provides benefits for
all participants are granted access based on their rights and responsi- society rather than just providing a technological solution; and
bilities throughout the project. As participants add to and update the d) proposes a decision tool for use by practitioners to help evaluate
BIM model, the ledger will automatically update each participant's different use case scenarios for their suitability and potential for
version of the model across the distributed network to ensure that all benefitting from DLT implementation.
participants are working from the same model in real time. This pro-
motes collaboration and information sharing, addresses problems of The biggest challenges causing slow technological adoption in the
trust within construction projects and encourages further uptake of construction industry have been identified as: lack of collaboration and
BIM. Although the capabilities described are in part fulfilled by the information sharing; poor levels of trust between parties; low pro-
Common Data Environment (CDE), what DLT offers to this use case is ductivity; late payments; lack of enforcement of regulations; and issues
the ability to automatically and conclusively validate and verify who surrounding ownership and intellectual property rights. Three use cases
did the updates, what was done, how it was done and when it was done. (automated Project Bank Accounts; regulation and compliance; and a
In addition, this helps to satisfy the Hackitt Report's recommendation single shared-access BIM model) centred around these key challenges
for a digital record [20]. Table 7 shows the hypothetical responses to were selected and tested using the decision support tool. The results
the questions in the decision tree. show that the first two use cases did warrant further investigations,
The prospect of single shared-access BIM models (as described in however, the technologies are insufficiently developed for the third use
Table 7 and envisaged at Level 3 BIM implementation target) becoming case at this time.
standard practice in construction is a distant one [10], and one that The characteristics of DLT, namely, immutability, traceability and
requires considerable change to current standard workflows and busi- transparency resulting in better accountability, auditability and re-
ness models. Until these changes occur, it is unlikely that the benefits of duced bureaucracy, have the potential to reform practices within the
incorporating DLT with BIM will be realisable, though in the future they construction industry to support its technological advancements and
are likely. Moreover, the use case above assumed that the actual bring it in line with other industries such as automotive, mechanical

303
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

engineering and logistics. This will allow the industry to better manage 1943-4170.0000233.
resources and reduce costs, project durations and payment disputes. As [16] C. Merschbrock, Unorchestrated symphony: the case of inter-organizational col-
laboration in digital construction design, Electron. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 17
DLT develop and mature, many of the challenges identified will be (2012) 333–350 http://www.itcon.org/2012/22.
addressed and opportunities to exploit its benefits will increase. [17] T.D. Oesterreich, F. Teuteberg, Understanding the implications of digitisation and
However, the construction industry must be open to change and em- automation in the context of industry 4.0: a triangulation approach and elements
of a research agenda for the construction industry, Computers in Industry, 83
brace the possibilities that DLT can bring to it if it is to overcome the Elsevier B.V., 2016, pp. 121–139, , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2016.09.
problems that beset it. In addition, it must realise that DLT are not a 006.
solution in and of themselves but they should be accompanied with [18] S. Rasoloharijaona, B. Rakotosamimanana, B. Randrianambinina, E. Zimmermann,
Pair-specific usage of sleeping sites and their implications for social organization
developments across the legal, social and process dimensions, as de- in a nocturnal Malagasy primate, the Milne Edwards’ sportive lemur (Lepilemur
scribed in the proposed framework. Only in such a way, the construc- edwardsi), Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 122 (3) (2003) 251–258, https://doi.org/10.
tion sector may keep the pace with the on-going applications of DLT 1002/ajpa.10281.
[19] R. Woodhead, P. Stephenson, D. Morrey, Digital construction: from point solutions
and other digital developments in the wider built environment on the
to IoT ecosystem, Automation in Construction, 93(May) Elsevier, 2018, pp. 35–46,
ever-fast evolving journey toward the “smart” vision of the future. In , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.05.004.
line with this need, the authors intend to further develop the framework [20] J. Hackitt, Building a Safer Future - Independent Review of Building Regulations
by proposing a roadmap process to achieveing readiness for adoption of and Fire Safety: Interim Report, HM Government, (2018) (doi:ID
CCS1117446840).
DLT in the construction industry across a variety of use cases. This will [21] J. Wang, P. Wu, X.Y. Wang, W.C. Shou, The outlook of blockchain technology for
permit gap analysis across the four dimensions comparing the current construction engineering management, Front. Eng. Manag. 4 (1) (2017) 67–75,
against the required state for readiness which will in turn support the https://doi.org/10.15302/j-fem-2017006.
[22] D. Tapscott, A. Tapscott, Blockchain Revolution: How the Technology behind
development of detailed recommendations for the adoption of DLT in Bitcoin Is Changing Money, Business, and the World, Penguin, New York, 978-
the consturction industry. 1101980132, 2016.
[23] S. Underwood, Blockchain beyond bitcoin, Commun. ACM 59 (11) (2016) 15–17,
https://doi.org/10.1145/2994581.
References [24] R. O'Boyle, Block capital: How blockchain could change planning, The Planner,
2017 Available at: https://www.theplanner.co.uk/features/block-capital-how-
[1] PR Newswire, Global Construction Outlook 2022, Available at: https://www. blockchain-could-change-planning , Accessed date: 19 December 2017.
prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-construction-outlook-2022-300624581. [25] K.N. Khaqqi, J.J. Sikorski, K. Hadinoto, M. Kraft, Incorporating seller/buyer re-
html, (2018) , Accessed date: 16 May 2018. putation-based system in blockchain-enabled emission trading application, Appl.
[2] A. Neely, Carrying the torch for digital built Britain, BIMPlus, 2018 Available at: Energy 209 (2018) 8–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.070.
http://www.bimplus.co.uk/people/carrying-torch-digital-built-britain/?utm_ [26] K. Kypriotaki, E. Zamani, G. Giaglis, From bitcoin to decentralized autonomous
source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter , Accessed date: 18 January 2018. corporations - extending the application scope of decentralized peer-to-peer net-
[3] M. Farmer, The Farmer review of the UK construction labour model: modernise or works and blockchains, Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on
die, Construction Leadership Council, 2016 Available at: http://www. Enterprise Information Systems, SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology
constructionleadershipcouncil.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Farmer- Publications, 2015, pp. 284–290, , https://doi.org/10.5220/0005378402840290.
Review.pdf , Accessed date: 17 May 2018. [27] M. Swan, Blockchain temporality: smart contract time specifiability with block-
[4] McKinsey Global Institute, Reinventing Construction: A Route To Higher time, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in
Productivity, McKinsey & Company, 2017, p. 168 (February). Available at: http:// Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 9718 2016, pp.
www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/ 184–196, , https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42019-6_12.
reinventing-construction-through-a-productivity-revolution , Accessed date: 29 [28] Ž. Turk, R. Klinc, Potentials of blockchain technology for construction manage-
May 2018. ment, Creative Construction Conference 2017, CCC 2017. Primosten, Croatia,
[5] R. Agarwal, S. Chandrasekaran, M. Sridhar, Imagining construction's digital fu- 2017, pp. 638–645, , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.052.
ture, McKinsey and Company, 2016 Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/ [29] A. Dorri, S.S. Kanhere, R. Jurdak, P. Gauravaram, Blockchain for IoT security and
industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/imagining- privacy: the case study of a smart home, 2017 IEEE International Conference on
constructions-digital-future , Accessed date: 2 April 2018. Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops),
[6] A. Heiskanen, The technology of trust: how the internet of things and blockchain Kona, HI, USA, IEEE, 2017, pp. 618–623, , https://doi.org/10.1109/PERCOMW.
could usher in a new era of construction productivity the technology of trust: how 2017.7917634.
the internet of things and blockchain could, Construction Research and [30] E. Ben Hamida, K.L. Brousmiche, H. Levard, E. Thea, Blockchain for enterprise:
Innovation, 8(2) Taylor & Francis, 2017, pp. 66–70, , https://doi.org/10.1080/ overview, opportunities and challenges, ICWMC 2017: The Thirteenth
20450249.2017.1337349. International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Communications, (c), 2017, pp.
[7] M. Mathews, D. Robles, B. Bowe, BIM+ Blockchain: a solution to the trust pro- 83–88 https://www.iaria.org/conferences2017/ICWMC17.html.
blem in collaboration? CITA BIM Gathering 2017. Dublin, Ireland, 2017 https:// [31] E. Karafiloski, A. Mishev, Blockchain solutions for big data challenges: a literature
arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1032&context=bescharcon. review, IEEE EUROCON 2017 -17th International Conference on Smart
[8] B. Succar, M. Kassem, Macro-BIM adoption: conceptual structures, Automation in Technologies, Ohrid, Macedonia, IEEE, 2017, pp. 763–768, , https://doi.org/10.
Construction, 57 Elsevier B.V., 2015, pp. 64–79, , https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 1109/EUROCON.2017.8011213.
autcon.2015.04.018. [32] K. Biswas, V. Muthukkumarasamy, Securing smart cities using blockchain tech-
[9] A. Ghaffarianhoseini, J. Tookey, A. Ghaffarianhoseini, N. Naismith, S. Azhar, nology, Proceedings of 2016 IEEE 18th International Conference on High
O. Efimova, K. Raahemifar, Building information modelling (BIM) uptake: clear Performance Computing and Communications; IEEE 14th International
benefits, understanding its implementation, risks and challenges, Renew. Sust. Conference on Smart City; IEEE 2nd International Conference on Data Science and
Energ. Rev. 75 (October 2015) (2017) 1046–1053, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser. Systems (Hpcc/Smartcity/Dss). Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2016, pp. 1392–1393, ,
2016.11.083. https://doi.org/10.1109/HPCC-SmartCity-DSS.2016.178.
[10] C. Kinnaird, M. Geipel, Blockchain Technology: How the Inventions Behind [33] E. Mik, Smart contracts: terminology, technical limitations and real world com-
Bitcoin are Enabling a Network of Trust for the Built Environment, ARUP, plexity, Law, Innovation and Technology, 9(2) Taylor & Francis, 2017, pp.
Available at: https://www.arup.com/publications/research/section/blockchain- 269–300, , https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2017.1378468.
technology, (2018) , Accessed date: 12 February 2018. [34] D. Yermack, Corporate governance and blockchains, Rev. Financ. 21 (1) (2017)
[11] M. Winfield, S. Rock, The Winfield Rock Report: Overcoming the Legal and 7–31, https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfw074.
Contractual barriers of BIM, Available at: http://www.ukbimalliance.org/media/ [35] M. Nofer, P. Gomber, O. Hinz, D. Schiereck, Blockchain, Business & Information
1185/the_winfield_rock_report.pdf, (2018) , Accessed date: 4 April 2018. Systems Engineering, 59(3) 2017, pp. 183–187, , https://doi.org/10.1007/
[12] K. Panuwatwanich, V. Peansupap, Factors affecting the current diffusion of BIM: a s12599-017-0467-3.
qualitative study of online professional network, Creative Construction [36] N. Szabo, Smart Contracts, Available at: http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/
Conference, Budapest, Hungary, 2013, pp. 575–586 http://hdl.handle.net/10072/ Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature/LOTwinterschool2006/szabo.
53328. best.vwh.net/smart.contracts.html, (1994) , Accessed date: 8 February 2018.
[13] O. Barima, Leveraging the blockchain technology to improve construction value [37] P. Boucher, S. Nascimento, M. Kritikos, How blockchain technology could change
delivery: the opportunities, benefits and challenges, in: K. Hall (Ed.), Construction our lives, In-depth Analysis, European Parliament, 2017, , https://doi.org/10.
Projects, Nova Science Publishers, Inc, New York, NY, USA, 978-1-53610-742-5, 2861/926645.
2017, pp. 93–112. [38] C.D. Clack, V.A. Bakshi, L. Braine, Smart Contract Templates: Foundations, Design
[14] H. Cardeira, Smart contracts and possible applications to the construction in- Landscape and Research Directions, (2016), pp. 1–15 http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.
dustry, New Perspectives in Construction Law Conference, New Perspectives in 00771.
Construction Law Conference, Bucharest, 2015, https://heldercardeira.com/ [39] A. Cohn, T. West, C. Parker, Smart after all: blockchain, smart contracts, para-
1503P.pdf. metric insurance, and smart energy grids, Georgetown Law Technology Review, 1
[15] J. Mason, Intelligent contracts and the construction industry, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. 2017, pp. 273–304 https://perma.cc/TY7W-Q8CX.
Resolut. Eng. Constr. 9 (3) (2017) 04517012, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA. [40] C.K. Frantz, M. Nowostawski, From institutions to code: towards automated

304
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

generation of smart contracts, Proceedings - IEEE 1st International Workshops on 1–5, , https://doi.org/10.1145/3120459.3120472.
Foundations and Applications of Self-Systems, FAS-W 2016, 2016, pp. 210–215, , [65] A. Pazaitis, P. De Filippi, V. Kostakis, Blockchain and value systems in the sharing
https://doi.org/10.1109/FAS-W.2016.53. economy: the illustrative case of Backfeed, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 125
[41] M. Mihaylov, S. Jurado, N. Avellana, K. Van Moffaert, I.M. de Abril, A. Nowe, (2017) 105–115, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.025.
NRGcoin: Virtual currency for trading of renewable energy in smart grids, 11th [66] R. Rivera, J.G. Robledo, V.M. Larios, J.M. Avalos, How digital identity on block-
International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM14), Krakow, chain can contribute in a smart city environment, 2017 International Smart Cities
Poland, IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–6, , https://doi.org/10.1109/EEM.2014.6861213. Conference (ISC2), Wuxi, China, IEEE, 2017, pp. 1–4, , https://doi.org/10.1109/
[42] J. Murkin, R. Chitchyan, A. Byrne, Enabling peer-to-peer electricity trading, ISC2.2017.8090839.
Proceedings of ICT for Sustainability 2016, Atlantis Press, Paris, France, 2016, pp. [67] M. Swan, Blockchain enlightenment and Smart City cryptopolis, Proceedings of
234–235, , https://doi.org/10.2991/ict4s-16.2016.30. the 1st Workshop on Cryptocurrencies and Blockchains for Distributed Systems -
[43] P. Kianmajd, J. Rowe, K. Levitt, Privacy-preserving coordination for smart com- CryBlock’18, 2018, pp. 48–53, , https://doi.org/10.1145/3211933.3211942.
munities, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops [68] M. Atzori, Blockchain technology and decentralized governance: is the state still
(INFOCOM WKSHPS): Student Activities. San Francisco, CA, USA, 2016, pp. necessary? SSRN Electron. J. (2015), https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2709713.
1045–1046, , https://doi.org/10.1109/INFCOMW.2016.7562245. [69] S. Ølnes, J. Ubacht, M. Janssen, Blockchain in government: benefits and im-
[44] J.A.F. Castellanos, D. Coll-Mayor, J.A. Notholt, Cryptocurrency as guarantees of plications of distributed ledger technology for information sharing, Gov. Inf. Q. 34
origin: Simulating a green certificate market with the Ethereum Blockchain, 2017 (3) (2017) 355–364, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.09.007.
the 5th IEEE International Conference on Smart Energy Grid Engineering. Oshawa, [70] C. Sullivan, E. Burger, E-residency and blockchain, Computer Law & Security
ON, Canada, 2017, pp. 367–372, , https://doi.org/10.1109/SEGE.2017.8052827. Review, 33(4) Elsevier Ltd, 2017, pp. 470–481, , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.
[45] M.L. Di Silvestre, L. Dusonchet, S. Favuzza, M.G. Ippolito, S. Mangione, 2017.03.016.
F. Massaro, L. Mineo, E.R. Sanseverino, E. Telaretti, G. Zizzo, Transparency in [71] R. Hanifatunnisa, B. Rahardjo, Blockchain based e-voting recording system design,
transactive energy at distribution level, 2017 AEIT International Annual 2017 11th International Conference on Telecommunication Systems Services and
Conference, 2017, pp. 1–5, , https://doi.org/10.23919/AEIT.2017.8240568. Applications (TSSA), 2017, pp. 1–6, , https://doi.org/10.1109/TSSA.2017.
[46] M. Mylrea, S.N.G. Gourisetti, Blockchain for smart grid resilience: Exchanging 8272896.
distributed energy at speed, scale and security, 2017 Resilience Week (RWS), [72] H. Hou, The application of blockchain technology in e-government in China, 2017
Wilmington, DE, USA, IEEE, 2017, pp. 18–23, , https://doi.org/10.1109/RWEEK. 26th International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks
2017.8088642. (ICCCN), Vancouver, BC, Canada, IEEE, 2017, pp. 1–4, , https://doi.org/10.1109/
[47] Z. Nehaï, G. Guerard, Integration of the blockchain in a smart grid model, The ICCCN.2017.8038519.
14th International Conference of Young Scientists on Energy Issues (CYSENI) [73] M. Kovic, Blockchain for the People: Blockchain Technology as the Basis for a
2017. Kaunas, Lithuania, 2017, pp. 127–134 (ISSN 1822-7554). Secure and Reliable E-Voting System. Zurich, Switzerland, (2017), https://doi.
[48] C. Rottondi, G. Verticale, A privacy-friendly gaming framework in smart electricity org/10.31235/osf.io/9qdz3.
and water grids, IEEE Access, 5 2017, pp. 14221–14233, , https://doi.org/10. [74] J. Maupin, The G20 countries should engage with blockchain technologies to build
1109/ACCESS.2017.2727552. an inclusive, transparent, and accountable digital economy for all, No 2017-48,
[49] J.J. Sikorski, J. Haughton, M. Kraft, Blockchain technology in the chemical in- Economics Discussion Papers, 2017 http://www.economics-ejournal.org/
dustry: machine-to-machine electricity market, Appl. Energy 195 (2017) 234–246, economics/discussionpapers/2017-48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.03.039. [75] A. Nordrum, Govern by blockchain Dubai wants one platform to rule them all,
[50] A. Hahn, R. Singh, C.-C. Liu, S. Chen, Smart contract-based campus demonstration while Illinois will try anything, IEEE Spectr. 54 (10) (2017) 54–55, https://doi.
of decentralized transactive energy auctions, 2017 IEEE Power & Energy Society org/10.1109/MSPEC.2017.8048841.
Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT), IEEE, Washington D.C., [76] A. Alketbi, Q. Nasir, M.A. Talib, Blockchain for government services — Use cases,
USA, 2017, pp. 1–5, , https://doi.org/10.1109/ISGT.2017.8086092. security benefits and challenges, 2018 15th Learning and Technology Conference
[51] K. Tanaka, K. Nagakubo, R. Abe, Blockchain-based electricity trading with (L&T), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, IEEE, 2018, pp. 112–119, , https://doi.org/10.1109/
Digitalgrid router, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics - LT.2018.8368494.
Taiwan (ICCE-TW), Taipei, Taiwan, IEEE, 2017, pp. 201–202, , https://doi.org/ [77] Z. Engin, P. Treleaven, Algorithmic government: automating public services and
10.1109/ICCE-China.2017.7991065. supporting civil servants in using data science technologies, Comput. J. (2018)
[52] J. Wang, Q. Wang, N. Zhou, Y. Chi, A novel electricity transaction mode of mi- bxy082 (August), https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxy082.
crogrids based on blockchain and continuous double auction, Energies 10 (12) [78] M. Jun, Blockchain government - a next form of infrastructure for the twenty-first
(2017) 1971, https://doi.org/10.3390/en10121971. century, J. Open Innov. Technol. Market Complex. 4 (7) (2018), https://doi.org/
[53] J. Hwang, M. Choi, T. Lee, S. Jeon, S. Kim, S. Park, S. Park, Energy prosumer 10.1186/s40852-018-0086-3.
business model using blockchain system to ensure transparency and safety, Energy [79] A. Dorri, S.S. Kanhere, R. Jurdak, Towards an optimized blockchain for IoT,
Procedia 141 (2017) 194–198, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.11.037. Proceedings of the 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Internet-of-Things
[54] F. Imbault, M. Swiatek, R. de Beaufort, R. Plana, The green blockchain: managing Design and Implementation. Pittsburgh, PA USA, 2017, pp. 173–178, , https://doi.
decentralized energy production and consumption, 2017 IEEE International org/10.1145/3054977.3055003.
Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering and 2017 IEEE Industrial [80] C. Lazaroiu, M. Roscia, Smart district through IoT and blockchain, 6th
and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC/I&CPS Europe), IEEE, 2017, pp. International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and Applications, 5
1–5, , https://doi.org/10.1109/EEEIC.2017.7977613. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1109/DISTRA.2017.8191102.
[55] J. Kang, R. Yu, X. Huang, S. Maharjan, Y. Zhang, E. Hossain, Enabling localized [81] X. Zhu, Y. Badr, J. Pacheco, S. Hariri, Autonomic identity framework for the in-
peer-to-peer electricity trading among plug-in hybrid electric vehicles using con- ternet of things, 2017 International Conference on Cloud and Autonomic
sortium blockchains, IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 13 (6) (2017) 3154–3164, https://doi. Computing (ICCAC), Tucson, AZ, USA, IEEE, 2017, pp. 69–79, , https://doi.org/
org/10.1109/TII.2017.2709784. 10.1109/ICCAC.2017.14.
[56] I. Kounelis, G. Steri, R. Giuliani, D. Geneiatakis, R. Neisse, I. Nai-Fovino, Fostering [82] Y. Yuan, F.-Y. Wang, Towards blockchain-based intelligent transportation systems,
consumers’ energy market through smart contracts, 2017 International Conference 2016 IEEE 19th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems
Energy and Sustainability in Small Developing Economies (ES2DE), Funchal, (ITSC), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, IEEE, 2016, pp. 2663–2668, , https://doi.org/10.
Portugal, 2017, pp. 1–6, , https://doi.org/10.1109/ES2DE.2017.8015343. 1109/ITSC.2016.7795984.
[57] E. Mengelkamp, B. Notheisen, C. Beer, D. Dauer, C. Weinhardt, A blockchain- [83] Z. Yang, K. Zheng, K. Yang, V.C.M. Leung, A blockchain-based reputation system
based smart grid: towards sustainable local energy markets, Computer Science - for data credibility assessment in vehicular networks, 2017 IEEE 28th Annual
Research and Development, 33(1–2) Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2018, pp. International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications
207–214, , https://doi.org/10.1007/s00450-017-0360-9. (PIMRC), 2017, pp. 1–5, , https://doi.org/10.1109/PIMRC.2017.8292724.
[58] L. Park, S. Lee, H. Chang, A sustainable home energy prosumer-chain methodology [84] A. Dorri, M. Steger, S.S. Kanhere, R. Jurdak, BlockChain: a distributed solution to
with energy tags over the blockchain, Sustainability 10 (3) (2018) 658, https:// automotive security and privacy, IEEE Commun. Mag. 55 (12) (2017) 119–125,
doi.org/10.3390/su10030658. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2017.1700879.
[59] A. Pieroni, N. Scarpato, L. Di Nunzio, F. Fallucchi, M. Raso, Smarter city: smart [85] Y. Hou, Y. Chen, Y. Jiao, J. Zhao, H. Ouyang, P. Zhu, D. Wang, Y. Liu, A resolution
energy grid based on Blockchain technology, Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inform. Technol. of sharing private charging piles based on smart contract, 2017 13Th International
8 (1) (2018) 298–306, https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.8.1.4954. Conference on Natural Computation, Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery
[60] C. Pop, T. Cioara, M. Antal, I. Anghel, I. Salomie, M. Bertoncini, Blockchain based (Icnc-Fskd), IEEE, 2017, pp. 3004–3008, , https://doi.org/10.1109/FSKD.2017.
decentralized management of demand response programs in smart energy grids, 8393262.
Sensors 18 (2) (2018) 162, https://doi.org/10.3390/s18010162. [86] N.H. Kim, S.M. Kang, C.S. Hong, Mobile charger billing system using lightweight
[61] E. Mengelkamp, J. Gärttner, K. Rock, S. Kessler, L. Orsini, C. Weinhardt, Designing blockchain, 2017 19th Asia-Pacific Network Operations and Management
microgrid energy markets: a case study: the Brooklyn microgrid, Appl. Energy 210 Symposium (APNOMS), Seoul, South Korea, IEEE, 2017, pp. 374–377, , https://
(2018) 870–880, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.06.054. doi.org/10.1109/APNOMS.2017.8094151.
[62] S. Huckle, R. Bhattacharya, M. White, N. Beloff, Internet of things, Blockchain and [87] P.K. Sharma, S.Y. Moon, J.H. Park, Block-VN: a distributed blockchain based ve-
shared economy applications, Prog. Comput. Sci. 98 (2016) 461–466, https://doi. hicular network architecture in Smart City, J. Inf. Process. Syst. 13 (1) (2017)
org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.074. 184–195, https://doi.org/10.3745/JIPS.03.0065.
[63] J. Sun, J. Yan, K.Z.K. Zhang, Blockchain-based sharing services: what blockchain [88] M. Cebe, E. Erdin, K. Akkaya, H. Aksu, S. Uluagac, ‘Block4Forensic: An Integrated
technology can contribute to smart cities, Financ. Innov. 2 (1) (2016) 26, https:// Lightweight Blockchain Framework for Forensics Applications of Connected
doi.org/10.1186/s40854-016-0040-y. Vehicles’, (October), (2018), pp. 50–57 (doi:arXiv:1802.00561v1).
[64] S. Ibba, A. Pinna, M. Seu, F.E. Pani, CitySense, Proceedings of the XP2017 [89] K. Decoster, D. Billard, HACIT: A privacy preserving and low cost solution for
Scientific Workshops on - XP ‘17, ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 2017, pp. dynamic navigation and forensics in VANET, in: M. Helfert, O. Gusikhin (Eds.),

305
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

VEHITS 2018 - Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Vehicle IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network and Service
Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems, SciTePress, Funchal, Portugal, Management, 2017, pp. 772–777, , https://doi.org/10.23919/INM.2017.
9789897582936, 2018, pp. 454–461. 7987376.
[90] F. Knirsch, A. Unterweger, D. Engel, Privacy-preserving blockchain-based electric [114] N. Kshetri, Will blockchain emerge as a tool to break the poverty chain in the
vehicle charging with dynamic tariff decisions, Computer Science - Research and Global South? Third World Quarterly, 38(8) Routledge, 2017, pp. 1710–1732, ,
Development, 33(1–2) Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2018, pp. 71–79, , https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2017.1298438.
org/10.1007/s00450-017-0348-5. [115] BRE Group, Blockchain - feasibility and opportunity assessment, Available at:
[91] A.R. Pedrosa, G. Pau, ChargeltUp, Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on https://bregroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/99330-BRE-Briefing-Paper-
Cryptocurrencies and Blockchains for Distributed Systems - CryBlock’18, ACM blockchain-A4-20pp-WEB.pdf, (2018) , Accessed date: 26 March 2018.
Press, Munich, Germany, 2018, pp. 87–92, , https://doi.org/10.1145/3211933. [116] S. Higgins, From $900 to $20,000: Bitcoin's historic 2017 Price run revisited,
3211949. CoinDesk, 2017 Available at: https://www.coindesk.com/900-20000-bitcoins-
[92] D. Strugar, R. Hussain, M. Mazzara, V. Rivera, J. Lee, R. Mustafin, On M2M historic-2017-price-run-revisited/ , Accessed date: 14 March 2018.
Micropayments: A Case Study of Electric Autonomous Vehicles, (2018), pp. 2–5 [117] A. Koutsogiannis, N. Berntsen, Blockchain and construction: The how, why and
http://arxiv.org/abs/1804.08964. when, BIMPlus, 2017 Available at: http://www.bimplus.co.uk/people/
[93] I. Belle, The architecture, engineering and construction industry and blockchain blockchain-and-construction-how-why-and-when/ , Accessed date: 13 March
technology, in: G. Ji, Z. Tong (Eds.), Digital Culture 数码文化 Proceedings of 2017 2018.
National Conference on Digital Technologies in Architectural Education and [118] M. Winfield, The legal frontier: blockchain and smart contracts, BIMPlus, 2018
DADA 2017 International Conference on Digital Architecture, China Architecture Available at: http://www.bimplus.co.uk/management/legal-frontier-blockchain-
Industry Publishers, Nanjing: China, 2017, pp. 279–284 https://www. and-smart-contracts/ , Accessed date: 1 February 2018.
researchgate.net/publication/322468019_The_architecture_engineering_and_ [119] R. de Cicco, Digital skills require a culture of continuous learning, Construction
construction_industry_and_blockchain_technology. Manager, 2018 Available at: http://www.constructionmanagermagazine.com/
[94] Z. Ye, M. Yin, L. Tang, H. Jiang, Cup-of-water theory: a review on the interaction opinion/digital-skills-require-culture-continuous-learning/?platform=hootsuite ,
of BIM, IoT and blockchain during the whole building lifecycle, 2018 Proceedings Accessed date: 20 April 2018.
of the 35th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction [120] M. Winfield, Blockchain and smart contracts: Binary solutions in a non-binary
(ISARC 2018). Berlin, Germany, 2018, pp. 478–486, , https://doi.org/10.22260/ industry? Planning Building and Control Today, 2018 Available at: https://www.
ISARC2018/0066. pbctoday.co.uk/news/bim-news/blockchain-and-smart-contracts-binary-
[95] J. Mason, H. Escott, Smart contracts in construction: views and perceptions of solutions-in-a-non-binary-industry/39349/ , Accessed date: 13 March 2018.
stakeholders, Proceedings of FIG Conference, Istanbul May 2018. Istanbul, Turkey, [121] A. Av, Blockchain can streamline ownership, size and value structure of property,
2018 http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/35123/. TechObserver, 2018 Available at: https://techobserver.in/article/opinion/
[96] A. McNamara, S.M.E. Sepasgozar, Barriers and drivers of intelligent contract im- blockchain-can-streamline-ownership-size-and-value-structure-of-property ,
plementation in construction, in: K. Do, M. Sutrusna, A. Hammad, C. Ramanayaka Accessed date: 14 March 2018.
(Eds.), 42nd AUBEA Conference 2018: Educating Building Professionals for the [122] H.M. Kim, M. Laskowski, Towards an ontology-driven blockchain design for
Future in the Globalised World, Curtin University, Singapore, 978-0-9871831-7-0, supply chain provenance, SSRN Electron. J. (2016), https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.
2018, pp. 281–293. 2828369.
[97] S.A. Hossain, Blockchain computing: Prospects and challenges for digital trans- [123] D. Fiander-McCann, Blockchain could transform the construction industry, Design
formation, 2017 6th International Conference on Reliability, Infocom Buildings, 2018 Available at: https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/
Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions) (ICRITO), Noida, Blockchain_could_transform_the_construction_industry , Accessed date: 14 March
India, IEEE, 2017, pp. 61–65, , https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRITO.2017.8342399. 2018.
[98] W. Nowiński, M. Kozma, How can blockchain technology disrupt the existing [124] A.F.J. van Raan, The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance as-
business models? Entrep. Bus. Econ. Rev. 5 (3) (2017) 173–188, https://doi.org/ sessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments, Praxis 12
10.15678/EBER.2017.050309. (1) (2003) 20–29 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.
[99] D. Tapscott, A. Tapscott, How blockchain will change organizations, MIT Sloan 153.629&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
Manag. Rev. 58 (2) (2017) 9–13 http://mitsmr.com/2gbIHrI. [125] H.F. Moed, New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evalua-
[100] Y. Zhang, J.T. Wen, The IoT electric business model: using blockchain technology tion, Arch. Immunol. Ther. Exp. 57 (1) (2009) 13–18, https://doi.org/10.1007/
for the internet of things, Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, 10(4) 2017, s00005-009-0001-5.
pp. 983–994, , https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-016-0456-1. [126] Y. Okubo, Bibliometric Indicators and Analysis of Research Systems: Methods and
[101] H. Johng, D. Kim, T. Hill, L. Chung, Using blockchain to enhance the trust- Examples, OECD Science, Technology and INdustry Working Papers, (1997),
worthiness of business processes: a goal-oriented approach, 2018 IEEE https://doi.org/10.1787/208277770603.
International Conference on Services Computing (SCC), IEEE, San Francisco, CA, [127] O. Persson, R. Danell, J.W. Schneider, How to use Bibexcel for various types of
2018, pp. 249–252, , https://doi.org/10.1109/SCC.2018.00041. bibliometric analysis, Celebrating Scholarly Communication Studies: A Festschrift
[102] European Parliament, Electricity ‘Prosumers’, Available at: http://www.europarl. for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday, 2009, pp. 9–24 http://lup.lub.lu.se/record/
europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/593518/EPRS_BRI(2016)593518_EN.pdf, 1458990/file/1458992.pdf#page=11.
(2016) , Accessed date: 18 January 2018. [128] C. Kothari, Research methodology: methods and techniques, Vasa, New Age
[103] M. Kassem, M. Jenaban, D. Craggs, N. Dawood, A tool for assessing the compliance International (P) Ltd, New Delhi, India, 9788122424881, 2004.
of project activities and deliverables against the requirements of bim level 2, 13th [129] E.L. Trist, K.W. Bamforth, Some social and psychological consequences of the
International Conference on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality, (April), longwall method of coal-getting, Hum. Relat. 4 (1) (1951) 3–38, https://doi.org/
2016 http://hdl.handle.net/10149/620667. 10.1177/001872675100400101.
[104] NBS, BIM Levels Explained, Available at: https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/ [130] M.C. Davis, R. Challenger, D.N.W. Jayewardene, C.W. Clegg, Advancing socio-
bim-levels-explained, (2014) , Accessed date: 15 August 2018. technical systems thinking: a call for bravery, Appl. Ergon. 45 (2) (2014) 171–180,
[105] World Bank Group, Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) and Blockchain: FinTech https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2013.02.009.
Note 1, (2017), https://doi.org/10.1596/29053. [131] J. Kandt, Understanding Smart Cities from the bottom up (February). Available at:
[106] H. Li, D. Arditi, Z. Wang, Determinants of transaction costs in construction pro- https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x9fMBFxDvhEIrJ13JyVfP2DKVwVG-DjD/view,
jects, J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 21 (5) (2015) 548–558, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. (2018) , Accessed date: 21 February 2018.
anbehav.2015.11.005. [132] G. Baxter, I. Sommerville, Socio-technical systems: from design methods to sys-
[107] P. Love, P. Davis, J. Ellis, S.O. Cheung, Dispute causation: identification of pa- tems engineering, Interact. Comput. 23 (1) (2011) 4–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/
thogenic influences in construction, Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 17 (4) (2010) j.intcom.2010.07.003.
404–423, https://doi.org/10.1108/09699981011056592. [133] F.W. Geels, From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems, Res.
[108] Z. Zheng, S. Xie, H. Dai, X. Chen, H. Wang, An overview of Blockchain technology: Policy 33 (6–7) (2004) 897–920, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015.
architecture, consensus, and future trends, Proceedings - 2017 IEEE 6th [134] S.H. Ammous, Blockchain technology: what is it good for? SSRN Electron. J.
International Congress on Big Data, BigData Congress 2017, 2017, pp. 557–564, , (2016), https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2832751.
https://doi.org/10.1109/BigDataCongress.2017.85. [135] Ethereum, Ethereum Project, Available at: https://www.ethereum.org/, (2018) ,
[109] M. Ball, Rebuilding Construction (Routledge Revivals): Economic Change in the Accessed date: 14 February 2018.
British Construction Industry, Routledge, London, 9781317811466, 2014. [136] NEO, NEO white paper: a distributed network for the smart economy, Available at:
[110] A. Gambardella, A.M. McGahan, Business-model innovation: general purpose http://docs.neo.org/en-us/index.html, (2018) , Accessed date: 8 March 2018.
technologies and their implications for industry structure, Long Range Planning, [137] Brickschain, Brickschain, Available at: https://www.brickschain.com/, (2018) ,
43(2–3) Elsevier Ltd, 2010, pp. 262–271, , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07. Accessed date: 16 July 2018.
009. [138] G. Georgiev, Russia Moves to Regulate Crypto, Issues First Commercial Bonds via
[111] E.D. Zamani, G.M. Giaglis, With a little help from the miners: distributed ledger Blockchain, Bitcoinist, 2018 Available at: http://bitcoinist.com/russia-moves-to-
technology and market disintermediation, Ind. Manag. Data Syst. (2018) 637–652, regulate-crypto-issues-first-commercial-bonds-transaction-via-blockchain/ ,
https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-05-2017-0231. Accessed date: 8 June 2018.
[112] D.S. Mercado, Crowdfunding, an alternative source of financing construction and [139] Coin Idol, China to Establish Blockchain National Standards, Coin Idol, Available
real estate projects, Guideline for Developers on How to Use This Tool in Medium at: https://coinidol.com/china-to-establish-blockchain-national-standards/,
Size Projects, University of Applied Sciences, 2017Available at: http://urn.fi/ (2018) , Accessed date: 8 June 2018.
URN:NBN:fi:amk-2017100215600 , Accessed date: 3 January 2019. [140] The Economist, The Facebook scandal could change politics as well as the internet,
[113] T. Bocek, B.B. Rodrigues, T. Strasser, B. Stiller, Blockchains everywhere - A use- The Economist, 2018 Available at: https://www.economist.com/news/united-
case of blockchains in the pharma supply-chain, Proceedings of the IM 2017–2017 states/21739167-even-used-legitimately-it-powerful-intrusive-political-tool-

306
J. Li, et al. Automation in Construction 102 (2019) 288–307

facebook-scandal , Accessed date: 9 April 2018. 2018.

[141] M. Geipel, Blockchains Will Change Construction, ARUP, 2017 Available at: [150] G. McIntyre-Kemp, The Carillion story is proof our economic system is obsolete,
http://thoughts.arup.com/post/details/612/blockchains-will-change- The National, 2018 Available at: http://www.thenational.scot/news/15857174.
construction , Accessed date: 14 March 2018. The_Carillion_story_is_proof_our_economic_system_is_obsolete/#comments-anchor
[142] IEBC, Engineers Solving The World's Most Complex Problems with Blockchain , Accessed date: 23 January 2018.
Technology: Use Cases, IEBC, Available at: https://iebc.co/use-cases/, (2018) , [151] B. Chapman, Carillion collapse: Small firms in supply chain could lay off thousands
Accessed date: 12 June 2018. of workers as they join queue of creditors, The Independent, 2018 Available at:
[143] BIM World, BIM and Blockchain (Part 2): What does the Blockchain has to do with http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/carillion-collapse-latest-
BIM? BIM World, 2017 Available at: https://www.bim-world.de/bim-blockchain- updates-job-losses-supply-chain-creditors-payments-workers-govenrment-
part-2-blockchain-bim/ , Accessed date: 17 July 2018. a8161576.html , Accessed date: 6 March 2018.
[144] J. Kogure, K. Kamakura, T. Shima, T. Kubo, Blockchain Technology for Next [152] R. Griffiths, W. Lord, J. Coggins, Project bank accounts: the second wave of se-
Generation ICT, Fujitsu Sci. Tech. J. 53 (5) (2017) 56–61 http://www.fujitsu.com/ curity of payment? J. Financ. Manag. Property Constr. 22 (3) (2017) 322–338,
global/documents/about/resources/publications/fstj/archives/vol53-5/paper09. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-04-2017-0011.
pdf. [153] Cabinet Office, Government Construction: Project Bank Accounts – Briefing
[145] M. Latham, Trust and money: Interim report of the joint government/industry Document, Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
review of procurement and contractual arrangements in the United Kingdom uploads/attachment_data/file/62117/Project-Bank-Accounts-briefing.pdf, (2012)
construction industry, Joint Government/Industry Review of Procurement and , Accessed date: 15 January 2018.
Contractual Arrangements in the United Kingdom Construction Industry, 1993. [154] J. Margie, Project bank accounts, their time has come, Expert Guides, 2017
[146] E. Evans, Etch, Available at: https://www.etch.work/files/Etch_White_Paper.pdf, Available at: https://www.expertguides.com/articles/project-bank-accounts-
(2017) , Accessed date: 11 June 2018. their-time-has-come/ardnpjzd , Accessed date: 6 March 2018.
[147] World Economic Forum, Blockchain Beyond the Hype: A Practical Framework for [155] B. Succar, Building information modelling framework: A research delivery foun-
Business Leaders, Available at: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/48423_Whether_ dation for industry stakeholders, Autom. Constr. 18 (2009) 357–375, https://doi.
Blockchain_WP.pdf, (2018) , Accessed date: 16 May 2018. org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003.
[148] M.E. Peck, Blockchain world - do you need a blockchain? This chart will tell you if [156] BIM Dictionary, Level 3 BIM, (2018) https://bimdictionary.com/en/level-3-bim/
the technology can solve your problem, IEEE Spectr. 54 (10) (2017) 38–60, 1/ , Accessed date: 15 August 2018.
https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2017.8048838. [157] W.P. Hughes, P. Hillebrandt, J.R. Murdoch, Financial protection in the UK
[149] D. Thomas, Where did it go wrong for Carillion? BBC News, 2018 Available at: building industry: bonds, retentions and guarantees, Spon, London, 978-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42666275 , Accessed date: 18 January 0419242901, 1998.

307