Wiley

Journal of Engineering
Volume 2024, Article ID 2442345, 20 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/2442345

Research Article
Challenges of Blockchain Implementation in Construction

Ahsan Waqar,1 Lubna A. Alharbi,2 Faiz Abdullah Alotaibi,3 Khaled A. Alrasheed,4

Abdul Mateen Khan ,1 and Hamad Almujibah 5
1
University of Lahore, Gujrat Campus, Jalalpur Jattan Road, Gujrat 50700, Punjab, Pakistan
2
Department of Computer Science, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 71491, Saudi Arabia
3
Department of Information Science, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, King Saud University,
P.O. Box 145111, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
4
College of Engineering and Petroleum, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
5
Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21974, Saudi Arabia

Correspondence should be addressed to Abdul Mateen Khan; [email protected]

Received 21 September 2023; Revised 14 November 2023; Accepted 15 July 2024

Academic Editor: Dongdong Yuan

Copyright © 2024 Ahsan Waqar et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Te implementation of blockchain techniques in extensive building work undertakings has encountered multiple obstacles.
Te barriers encompass a variety of areas including technical, functional, economic, social, and standardization concerns.
Notwithstanding the growing recognition of the prospective advantages of blockchain technology among the building
industry, there exists a paucity of the literature that delves into the obstacles of implementing blockchain technology in
extensive building undertakings. Te purpose of this study is to check the difculties attached with the implementation of
blockchain technology in extensive building undertakings. Tis research study uses a mixed-method technique that
combines structural equation modelling (SEM) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to assess the data gathered from
a survey of construction industry experts. Te conclusions of this research study recommend that the implementation of
blockchain technology in large-scale building projects is signifcantly impacted by various barriers, including procedural,
technical, functional, standardization, social, and economic factors. Tis research study reveals that the primary obstacles to
standardization, technical integration, and functional implementation are the absence of established norms, barriers to
assimilating with current systems, and restricted utilization scenarios, respectively. Furthermore, this research study has
revealed that the primary, social, and economic hurdles for implementation of blockchain technology in extensive building
projects are stakeholders’ reluctance to change, disputes over ownership, and the challenge of demonstrating a defnitive
return on investment. Te study’s implications indicate that the building industry should establish a uniform methodology
for implementing blockchain technology that efectively tackles the barriers brought to light in this study. Tis study’s
results provide great views to diferent stakeholders in the building industry, such as construction managers, investors, and
regulators, regarding the difculties involved in implementing blockchain technology in extensive building projects. Te
research implications underscore the necessity for a standardized approach to implement blockchain technology in large-
scale construction projects. Tis insight is crucial for construction professionals, investors, and regulators, informing
strategic decisions to overcome identifed barriers and facilitate the seamless integration of blockchain, thereby enhancing
efciency and transparency in the industry.

1. Introduction information is of utmost importance in guaranteeing the

success of large-scale building projects, owing to their
Te building industry is a multifaceted and ever-evolving magnitude and intricacy [1, 2]. Building businesses are in-
industry distinguished by a multitude of interested parties, creasingly turning to emerging technologies such as
expansive networks of suppliers, and substantial quantities blockchain to achieve this goal since it has the potential to
of information. Te efcient handling of data and revolutionize how data are managed and shared within the
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 Journal of Engineering

construction sector. Blockchain technology allows for the render integration difcult. Tere exist apprehensions re-
open and secure logging and confrmation of interactions garding the regulatory and legal structures that oversee the
over a network of computers. It is a dispersed and decen- utilization of blockchain technology, specifcally concerning
tralized digital ledger [3]. Every block of the blockchain safeguarding data privacy and security [12, 13]. Te
contains a cryptographic hash of the block before it, which implementation of blockchain technology in building pro-
helps to ensure the data’s authenticity stored among the jects lacks sufcient research despite its ability and advan-
chain. Te immunity of blockchain to manipulation is at- tages on a large scale. Te signifcance of this knowledge gap
tributed to its decentralized nature, while its transparency is noteworthy, considering the crucial role played by the
guarantees equal access to information for all building industry in the economy and the imperative for
stakeholders [3]. efcient data management in building projects of consid-
Te integration of blockchain technology in extensive erable magnitude.
building undertakings holds the capacity to tackle numerous Tis study flls a signifcant need in the literature by
predicaments encountered by the industry, such as supply investigating the difculties of using blockchain technology
chain administration, quality assurance, and project su- in large-scale construction projects. Te innovation resides
pervision. In the context of this study, “extensive buildings” in the all-encompassing analysis of procedural, technolog-
refer to large-scale construction projects characterized by ical, functional, standardized, social, and economic obsta-
substantial size, complexity, and signifcant impact on the cles. Tis research adds by providing a detailed knowledge of
built environment. Tese projects often include high-rise these obstacles, allowing for more calculated choices to be
structures, large commercial developments, and in- made in the building sector. Practical insights for con-
frastructure undertakings that involve extensive resources, struction managers, investors, and regulators negotiating the
intricate planning, and multifaceted implementation pro- challenges of incorporating blockchain technology into
cesses. Blockchain technology can facilitate the monitoring large-scale construction endeavors are provided via the
of the transportation of materials and equipment, thereby identifcation of impediments and potential solutions.
guaranteeing their timely and accurate delivery to the Te aim of this study is to evaluate obstacles relevant to
intended destination [4]. Likewise, blockchain technology the integration of blockchain technology in extensive
can be employed to document the examination and eval- building undertakings among the construction context. Tis
uation of materials and machinery, guaranteeing their ad- study will focus on investigating the viewpoints and dis-
herence to requisite quality benchmarks [5]. Blockchain positions of stakeholders among the building industry re-
technology is strategically implemented in various areas of garding blockchain technology. In addition, this research
the construction sector, including but not limited to supply study will explore the technical, regulatory, and legal ob-
chain management, project management, documentation stacles that may arise during the implementation of this
and records, quality assurance and compliance, and smart technology. Te study will investigate the aforementioned
contracts in transactions. obstacles and examine possible remedies to ascertain opti-
Tere are numerous benefts associated with the mal methodologies for the profcient integration of block-
implementation of blockchain techniques in the building chain technology in extensive building undertakings. Te
industry. Initially, blockchain technology can ofer a secure subsequent sections include a thorough exploration of the
and transparent method for storing and exchanging data. literature review, an in-depth methodology detailing the
Te implementation of such measures can ability mitigate mixed-method approach, a comprehensive analysis of data
the likelihood of fraudulent activities and inaccuracies while and results, a discussion of fndings, and fnally, conclusive
concurrently promoting equitable accessibility of in- insights with managerial recommendations and avenues for
formation among all relevant parties [6, 7]. Moreover, the future research.
implementation of blockchain technology can facilitate the
automation of specifc procedures, such as payment and 2. Related Work
documentation processes, thereby mitigating administrative
complexities and enhancing operational efcacy. Blockchain A primary obstacle to the integration of blockchain tech-
technology can enhance collaboration and communication niques in building endeavors is the insufcient cognizance
among stakeholders, thereby facilitating more efcient and comprehension of the technology among the industry’s
teamwork [8, 9]. stakeholders [14]. Te author posits that there exists
Notwithstanding the ability advantages of blockchain a noteworthy defciency in the understanding of blockchain
technology, there exist several obstacles that must be technology and its ability advantages among stakeholders in
overcome before its successful integration among extensive the building industry. Insufcient comprehension may
building endeavors. Te building industry stakeholders impede the assimilation of blockchain technology and result
exhibit a defciency in comprehending and acknowledging in a reluctance to embrace innovation [15, 16].
the technology. Te scalability of blockchain is a matter of Te scalability of blockchain technology presents a sig-
concern, especially concerning extensive building projects nifcant challenge in the implementation of such technology
that produce substantial volumes of data. Tis is the second in building projects [17]. Given the substantial data output of
point of consideration [10, 11]. Tirdly, barriers may arise building projects, it is imperative to establish a blockchain
regarding the interoperability of blockchain with pre- infrastructure capable of efectively and securely managing
existing systems and technologies, and the ability to signifcant data volumes [18, 19]. Te scalability of current
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 3

blockchain infrastructures may pose a challenge in ac- concerned parties in the building industry, along with the
commodating the requirements of extensive building pro- requirement for blockchain infrastructures that are scalable
jects, and the ability to impede the efcacy of blockchain and interoperable. Te construction context presents
integration in the industry [20, 21]. a noteworthy research void regarding the obstacles of
Te challenge of ensuring interoperability between blockchain implementation in extensive building projects,
blockchain and pre-existing systems and technologies re- thereby emphasizing the necessity for additional research in
quires attention [22, 23]. Integration of blockchain tech- this domain.
nology with various systems and technologies is crucial for
the building industry to function efectively [24, 25]. Te 3. Methodology
absence of established interoperability standards about
blockchain technology among the building industry can Te research methodology chosen for evaluating the dif-
pose barriers to its integration and impede the imple- culties joined with the implementation of blockchain
mentation of blockchain [26, 27]. technology in extensive building works was a mixed-method
Te implementation of blockchain in building projects research design, as portrayed in Figure 1. Te research study
necessitates the consideration of regulatory and legal bar- was carried out in three distinct stages, namely, a thorough
riers [28]. Te utilization of blockchain technology entails analysis of the appropriate literature and consulting with
the transmission and retention of delicate information, specialists in the feld, and a survey of participants [46, 47]. A
thereby raising apprehensions regarding the safeguarding of detailed analysis of the body of the available literature was
data confdentiality and integrity [24, 25]. It is imperative to used in the early stage to identify barriers to the adoption of
establish unambiguous regulatory and legal structures that blockchain technology. Te goal of reviewing earlier re-
oversee the utilization of blockchain technology [24, 25]. search studies was to get a better understanding of the
Tis is necessary to guarantee adherence to pertinent reg- current state of knowledge on the challenges posed by the
ulations and laws and to ensure that all stakeholders are well deployment of the blockchain in the construction sector
informed [29, 30]. [48, 49]. During the third phase, a primary survey was
Te literature reveals a research gap concerning the executed to assess the dependability and accuracy of
barriers to blockchain implementation in large-scale questionnaires. Following the preliminary survey results,
building projects despite the increasing interest in the a main questionnaire survey was developed and adminis-
ability of blockchain technology in the building industry tered [50]. Te research study used exploratory factor
[31, 32]. Although several studies have explored the dif- analysis (EFA) and structural equation modelling (SEM) to
culties of integrating blockchain technology among the evaluate the model’s overall goodness of ft and to discover
building industry, there is an end of the study that focuses on the correlations between the factors that infuence the ap-
the construction milieu [33]. plication of blockchain technology. While some research
Te study involved a survey conducted by authors to studies may opt to combine EFA and SEM into a single stage,
evaluate the awareness scale and perceptions of professionals we decided to split them of since we wanted a more
in the building industry towards blockchain technology thorough and systematic method to investigate latent
[34, 35]. Te research study revealed that although a sig- components and rigorously verify the hypothesised model.
nifcant proportion of participants were familiar with No similar research studies with the identical methodo-
blockchain, there existed a dearth of comprehension re- logical approach were located in the literature, indicating
garding the intricacies of the technology and its prospective that our work provides a fresh viewpoint to the area by
advantages [36, 37]. Nonetheless, the investigation did not employing a sequential EFA-SEM technique. Te study ti-
scrutinize the particular obstacles associated with the in- tled “Challenges of Blockchain Implementation in Con-
tegration of blockchain technology in extensive building struction” involving human participants was reviewed and
undertakings [38, 39]. approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Taif
Barriers to scalability in blockchain implementations University, Saudi Arabia. Te research protocol was
among the building industry were found as a signifcant designed in accordance with the ethical principles outlined
concern by authors [40, 41]. Nonetheless, the investigation in the Declaration of Helsinki. Te study was granted ap-
did not assess the ability of blockchain to be scaled in the proval under the reference number TU-IRB-2024-01234.
construction setting [42, 43]. In general, the scant research Participants provided informed consent prior to their in-
on the obstacles associated with the integration of block- volvement in the study. All data collected were anonymized
chain technology in extensive building contracts un- to ensure participant confdentiality and privacy. Te re-
derscores the necessity for additional investigation in this search team adhered to all ethical guidelines throughout the
domain [44, 45]. study to protect the rights and well-being of the participants.
Te ability and advantages of integrating blockchain
technology among the building industry have been exten-
sively recognized. Te use of blockchain technology in ex- 3.1. Identifcation of Barriers. A literature review was con-
tensive building undertakings poses difculties due to ducted to ascertain the barriers associated with the imple-
various technical, regulatory, and legal considerations. Te mentation of blockchain technology in large-scale building
extant scholarly works emphasize the necessity for enhanced works. Search for relevant articles was carried out on various
cognizance and comprehension of the technology among the academic databases, including MDPI, Science Direct, Web
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
4 Journal of Engineering

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4

Literature
Survey and
Review for SEM Framework
Data
Variables Analysis Development
Collection
Evaluation

Figure 1: Flowchart of the research method.

of Science, and Google Scholar [51, 52]. Te literature review involved in extensive building projects. Tis approach en-
facilitated the identifcation of the most frequently cited sures statistical reliability and enhances the generalizability
hurdles in implementation of blockchain technology in the of our fndings to the broader population of interest.
building industry. Tese barriers encompass concerns about A pilot study was conducted to assess the validity and
data quality, privacy and security, interoperability, gover- consistency of the questionnaire. Te questionnaire included
nance, and trust. In conjunction with the comprehensive questions on the 20 impediments that had been determined
review of the existing literature, the perspectives of 12 by professional judgment and literature assessment. Te
building construction professionals were requested to pro- survey instrument was constructed utilizing a Likert-type
vide expert insight [53, 54]. Te professionals were requested scale consisting of fve points, with the numerical value of 1
to prioritize the signifcant obstacles encountered in the representing “strongly disagree” and the numerical value of
integration of blockchain technology in the building in- 5 representing “strongly agree.” A pilot survey was con-
dustry. Te second stage of interviews with industry experts ducted on a group of 133 participants who were employed in
aimed to gather in-depth insights into the difculties related the building industry. Te participants were selected using
to blockchain implementation in the building industry. a random sampling technique, ensuring representation
Tese interviews were designed to elicit perspectives on the across various professional categories, including construc-
challenges relevant to the implementation of blockchain tion managers, engineers, blockchain technology experts,
technology in signifcant building projects. Table 1 is and regulators. Te participants selected for the research
showing a comprehensive list of 20 barriers was identifed study utilizing a random sampling technique, ensuring that
for further examination through a pilot survey and main each category of professionals was equally represented [32].
questionnaire survey based on expert opinion. Te selection criteria were carefully defned to ensure rep-
resentation across professional categories.
Te design of the initial questionnaire survey was in-
3.2. Data Assortment. Te target population for our study formed by an analysis of pilot survey results. Te primary
comprises professionals and stakeholders directly involved survey instrument comprised inquiries into the difculties
in extensive building projects within the construction in- discerned in the analysis of the preliminary survey. A survey
dustry. Tis includes construction managers and engineers was conducted on a group of 201 participants employed in
(individuals responsible for overseeing and managing the the building industry [19]. Te study participants exhibited
execution of large-scale building projects), blockchain comparable characteristics to those observed in the pilot
technology experts (professionals with expertise in block- survey, and the sampling technique employed was also
chain technology, particularly its application in the con- random sampling.
struction sector), and industry regulators and policy-makers Ten, the role of the questionnaire survey was to evaluate
(authorities involved in setting standards, regulations, and difculties associated with the integration of blockchain
policies related to the implementation of blockchain in technology in extensive building undertakings. Te main
construction). questionnaire survey included a random sample of 201
Te determination of the sample size for this study was experts from the building industry. Te sample size was
guided by recognized principles in survey research and determined based on rigorous criteria to ensure a repre-
statistical methodology. It employed the Cochran method sentative and diverse participant pool. Te survey inquiries
for calculating the sample size in a survey, taking into ac- were formulated under the difculties ascertained in the
count factors such as the desired level of confdence, margin assessment of the preliminary survey.
of error, and estimated population variability [32]. In ad- Te procedure for collection of data was meticulously
dition, considerations were made to ensure that the sample crafted to ensure the dependability and accuracy of the
size would adequately represent the diversity of pro- fndings. A random sample of professionals employed in the
fessionals and stakeholders within the construction industry building industry was administered in both the pilot and
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 5

Table 1: Barriers to the implementation of blockchain.

Sr. no Types of concerns Descriptions References
Implementing blockchain may necessitate alterations to existing procurement
1 Complexity [10, 51]
procedures, which can be complex and time-consuming
Due to regulatory requirements, obtaining approvals and permits for implementing
2 Regulations [55]
blockchain in building projects may be time-consuming
Using smart contracts on a blockchain may necessitate intricate legal and
3 Contractual contractual arrangements, such as delineating roles, responsibilities, and liabilities, [24, 25]
which can be time-consuming and difcult to negotiate
Blockchain technology may give rise to disputes over ownership and intellectual
4 Confict [47, 56]
property rights
It may be necessary to train and educate the workforce on blockchain technology,
5 Training which can be time-consuming and may encounter resistance from stakeholders with [45, 46]
limited knowledge and experience using blockchain
6 Interoperability It can be difcult to achieve interoperability with existing systems [29, 37]
It may be challenging to demonstrate a clear return on investment for blockchain
7 ROI [57, 58]
implementations in the building industry
Blockchain technology may not adequately address data security and privacy
8 Privacy [59, 60]
concerns in the building industry
9 Structural Governance structures for blockchain networks are still in development [20, 43]
Stakeholders may be resistant to implement new technology due to their resistance
10 Stakeholders [34, 61]
to change
11 Energy Signifcant quantities of energy can be consumed by blockchain technology [20, 21]
Blockchain’s scalability can be limited when dealing with signifcant quantities of
12 Scalability [25]
data or transactions
Tere may be a limited number of use cases for blockchain technology in building
13 Cases [60, 62]
endeavors
Te building industry lacks established standards for the implementation of
14 Codes [63]
blockchain technology
Implementing blockchain in the building industry can be both expensive and
15 Cost [64, 65]
difcult
Some building projects may lack the necessary infrastructure for blockchain
16 Infrastructure [66, 67]
implementations
17 Cultural It can be difcult for diverse cultures to adopt blockchain technology [68, 69]
18 Integration Integration barriers’ blockchain integration with existing systems can be difcult [70]
19 Creativity Blockchain technology is still relatively new and unverifed on a long-term basis [37, 71]
It can be difcult to locate competent personnel with experience in blockchain
20 Expertise [59, 72]
technology

main questionnaire surveys to guarantee that the fndings analyze the inner continuity of data, thereby ensuring that
were a good representation of the general populace. Te the questions in the questionnaire were both reliable and
questionnaire design was rigorously tested to guarantee that interrelated.
it properly captured the key hurdles to blockchain de-
ployment in the construction sector.
3.4. Structure Equation Modelling (SEM). Descriptive sta-
tistics were utilized to analyze the demographic data of
3.3. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Following collection participants, which provided insights into their character-
of data through pilot survey questionnaire, an EFA was istics, including age, sex, schooling, and professional ex-
performed to attain latent factors and analyses the data’s perience [54, 73]. Te evaluation of the survey questions’
independence. Te adequacy of the sample size for EFA was convergent validity was conducted through the utilization of
assessed by conducting the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) the average variance extracted (AVE). On the other hand,
test. Furthermore, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was carried out the assessment of the discriminant validity was performed
to assess the correctness of the correlation matrix of the using the Fornell and Larcker criterion.
variables for factor analysis [37]. Te suitability of the results Te researchers employed the heterotrait-monotrait
for EFA has been confrmed by the outcomes of both tests. A (HTMT) ratio as a means of assessing the discriminant
rotated element grid with a varimax rotation was used to validity of the survey items. Te study used path analysis as
extract factors from data. Te criteria were then examined to a technique to look at the relationship between the hurdles
determine the biggest barriers to the adoption of blockchain found and the adoption of blockchain technology in the
technology within the construction sector. In addition, construction sector. Te assessment of the predictive rele-
Cronbach’s alpha value was used to assess the data’s de- vance of the SEM model was conducted through the
pendability [3]. Cronbach’s alpha coefcient is utilized to comparison of the observed values with the predicted values.
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
6 Journal of Engineering

Te use of SEM analysis helped identify the main ob- signifcance and pertinence of the recognized obstacles and
stacles to the use of the blockchain in large-scale con- the precision of the suggested SEM framework [9, 11].
struction projects and allowed for an examination of those Descriptive statistics were utilized to analyze the experts’
obstacles’ efects. Te study conducted a thorough analysis of responses to identify any ability areas of disagreement or
demographic data, convergent validity, discriminant val- inconsistencies with the results of the current research study.
idity, HTMT ratio, path analysis, and predictive relevance to In general, the utilization of a validation survey aforded the
gain a comprehensive understanding of the obstacles faced chance to corroborate the discoveries of this investigation
during the use of blockchain technology in the construction and authenticate the suggested structural equation model-
sector. ling framework [22, 49]. Te survey questions facilitated the
acquisition of signifcant feedback from professionals in the
feld, enabling the identifcation of ability areas of en-
3.5. Model Validation Survey. To authenticate the results of
hancement in the proposed model.
the present investigation, a validation survey was supervised
by a cohort of 12 professionals who specialize in the building
industry. Te validation survey included a cohort of 12 4. Results and Discussion
experts specializing in the building industry. Practitioners
were chosen for their substantial experience and expertise in 4.1. Demographics. Te study’s demographic data in Fig-
various aspects of the building industry, ensuring a nuanced ure 2 indicate that the preponderance of the participants
understanding of the challenges faced in large-scale con- possesses a Master’s degree (65%), trailed by those with
struction projects. Individuals with a background or a Bachelor’s degree (18%), and a minority with other
knowledge in blockchain technology were prioritized to qualifcations (12%). None of the participants possess a high
ensure a comprehensive grasp of the technological aspects school diploma. Te majority of participants (35%) possess
infuencing the integration of blockchain in construction. 5–10 years of experience, while the second largest group
Te purpose of the validation survey was to verify the (20%) has 0–5 years of experience. Te residual members
pertinence and precision of the identifed obstacles to possess a spectrum of expertise spanning from 11 to 20 years
blockchain implementation in sizable building un- and above. Te study reveals that the largest proportion of
dertakings, as well as the proposed SEM framework [27, 33]. respondents identify as civil engineers (55%), with project
Te survey questions were developed to assess the veracity of managers (25%) and architects (15%) following closely be-
the acknowledged barriers and the application of the SEM hind in terms of occupational distribution. Te residual
framework in the construction sector. All seven validation members are afliated with alternative vocations among the
criteria are listed as follows: realm of the building. Te demographic information of the
participants ofers valuable insights into their background
(1) Do you agree with the identifed barriers of block- and expertise, which can facilitate the comprehension of the
chain implementation in large building projects as study’s outcomes and their ability relevance to the industry.
presented in this study?
(2) In your opinion, what are the most relevant barriers
to blockchain implementation within building 4.2. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Te adequacy of the
industry? sample for factor analysis can be evaluated through the
utilization of KMO and Bartlett’s test. Te present in-
(3) Do you agree with the SEM model that has been
vestigation yielded a KMO measurement of adequate
suggested to evaluate the obstacles to blockchain
sampling of 0.858, indicating satisfactory adequacy for factor
application in the construction industry??
analysis and thus a suitable sample as shown in Table 2. Te
(4) How relevant and accurate do you think the iden- quantitative evaluation showed that the fgure of 1562.211
tifed barriers of blockchain implementation are in for Bartlett’s test of sphericity produced a meaningful
the building industry? outcome (p 0.05). Tis shows that the factors for discussion
(5) How useful do you think the proposed SEM model is are not autonomous and that the relationship matrix is not
in assessing the barriers of blockchain imple- a matrix of identities. Tis statement endorses the imple-
mentation in large building projects? mentation of factor analysis as a means to investigate the
(6) Do you think there are any other barriers to fundamental framework of the recognized obstacles to the
blockchain implementation in the building industry implementation of blockchain technology in extensive
that was not identifed in this study? building endeavors [16, 74]. To summarize, the outcomes of
the KMO and Bartlett’s test suggest that the chosen sample
(7) How efective do you think the proposed SEM model
size and correlation structure of the variables are adequate
is in predicting the implementation of blockchain
for executing factor analysis.
technology in the building industry?
Table 3 shows the rotated component matrix, which
Te validation survey comprised a set of seven inquiries shows the results of the EFA on the pilot survey ques-
that pertained to the difculties encountered during the tionnaire. Te loadings of each item on each of the extracted
implementation of blockchain technology in extensive factors, which are referred to as components in this table, are
building undertakings. Te inquiry was formulated to shown in the matrix [75, 76]. Cronbach’s alpha coefcient is
evaluate the viewpoints of the specialists regarding the used to assess each variable’s internal coherence. A value
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 7

Education Experience Profession

5-10 Years 0-5 Years Civil Engineer

35% 20% 55%
Masters
65%

Others Architect
12% 11 to 15 16-20 Above Project 15%
Bachelors Years Years 20 Years Manager
18% PhD 15% 15% 15% 25% Safety...

Figure 2: Demographics.

Table 2: KMO and Bartlett’s test. Te rotating component matrix makes it easier to
identify the questions that belong to each component and
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of provides insightful information about the basic design of the
0.858
sampling adequacy
main survey questionnaire [79]. Robust Cronbach’s alpha
Approx. chi-square 1562.211 values imply favorable internal consistency of the items
Bartlett’s test of sphericity df 201
among each component, and the eigenvalues and percent-
Sig 0.000
ages of variance elucidate that the three components are
signifcant factors to contemplate when assessing the ob-
Table 3: Rotated component matrix. stacles of executing blockchain in extensive building
projects.
Cronbach’s alpha Te barriers encountered in the implementation of
Activities
1 2 3 4 5 6 blockchain technology in the building industry have been
C12 0.849 summarized in Table 4. Tese barriers are categorized in six
C20 0.792 0.855 distinct constructs, namely, procedural, technical, func-
C1 0.734 tional, standardization, social, and economic.
C18 0.815 Te procedural construct demonstrates the difculties of
C11 0.775 using blockchain technology in construction projects. Tese
0.821
C19 0.726 barriers include issues related to scalability, limited avail-
C13 0.687
ability of skilled personnel, and the intricacy of modifying
C2 0.798 existing procurement procedures. Te aforementioned
C6 0.744 0.788
concerns can impede the timely conclusion of a project,
C16 0.678
escalating expenses, and potentially harm the rapport with
C14 0.779
0.763 stakeholders [18].
C8 0.742
Te technical construct delineates the technical obstacles
C10 0.722
relevant to the assimilation of blockchain technology into
C4 0.686 0.711
C17 0.618
pre-existing building systems. Te aforementioned factors
encompass the noteworthy energy consumption associated
C15 0.725
0.726 with blockchain technology, restricted applicability, and
C7 0.696
apprehensions regarding the durability and safety of the
Eigen values 4.431 4.134 3.834 3.212 2.453 2.113
technology over an extended period. Te aforementioned
% variance 15.415 14.211 12.721 9.514 8.621 9.622
concerns can dissuade building industry stakeholders from
Extracted variables � C3, C5, and C9.
embracing blockchain technology [13, 28].
Te functional construct elucidates the difculties as-
greater than 0.7 is generally considered to be indicative of sociated with acquiring authorizations and licenses for the
good internal consistency [77, 78]. Te variances explained deployment of blockchain technology, accomplishing
by each component are represented by their respective ei- compatibility with pre-existing systems, and the inadequacy
genvalues, and the percentage of variance is also reported of requisite infrastructure in certain building endeavors [23].
[4, 30]. Te aforementioned concerns can impede the
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
8 Journal of Engineering

Table 4: Barriers with named constructs.

Constructs Code Barriers
Blockchain’s scalability can be limited when dealing with signifcant quantities of
C12
data or transactions
It can be difcult to locate competent personnel with experience in blockchain
Procedural C20
technology
Implementing blockchain may necessitate alterations to existing procurement
C1
procedures, which can be complex and time-consuming
C18 Blockchain integration with existing systems can be difcult
C11 Signifcant quantities of energy can be consumed by blockchain technology
Technical C19 Blockchain technology is still relatively new and unverifed on a long-term basis
Tere may be a limited number of use cases for blockchain technology in building
C13
endeavors
Obtaining approvals and permits for implementing blockchain in building projects
C2
may be time-consuming
Functional C6 It can be difcult to achieve interoperability with existing systems
Some building projects may lack the necessary infrastructure for blockchain
C16
implementations
Te building industry lacks established standards for the implementation of
C14
blockchain technology
Standardization
Blockchain technology may not adequately address data security and privacy
C8
concerns in the building industry
Stakeholders may be resistant to implementing new technology due to their
C10
resistance to change
Social Blockchain technology may give rise to disputes over ownership and intellectual
C4
property rights
C17 It can be difcult for diverse cultures to adopt blockchain technology
Implementing blockchain in the building industry can be both expensive and
C15
difcult
Economic
It may be challenging to demonstrate a clear return on investment for blockchain
C7
implementations in the building industry

implementation of blockchain technology among the Six research hypotheses were developed in response to
building industry. the EFA fndings, as shown in the hypothesised framework
Te construct of standardization highlights the absence of Figure 3.
of established norms for the implementation of blockchain (i) H1: procedural barriers create a signifcant impact
techniques in the building industry. Tis can result in on the implementation of blockchain in large-scale
barriers to the compatibility and acceptance of the tech- building projects
nology [48, 64]. Te successful integration of blockchain
technology into the building industry is contingent upon its (ii) H2: technical barriers create a signifcant impact on
standardization. the implementation of blockchain in large-scale
building projects
Te concept of social construct elucidates the obstacles
that arise when stakeholders resist the implementation of (iii) H3: functional barriers create a signifcant impact
novel technology. Tese barriers may stem from a reluctance on the implementation of blockchain in large-scale
to embrace change, disputes over ownership and intellectual building projects
property rights, and complications in achieving widespread (iv) H4: standardization barriers create a signifcant
implementation across diverse cultural contexts [2, 52]. Te impact on the implementation of blockchain in
successful implementation of blockchain technology in the large-scale building projects
building industry hinges on addressing the social barriers (v) H5: social barriers create a signifcant impact on the
at hand. implementation of blockchain in large-scale
Te economic framework highlights the prohibitive building projects
costs associated with using digital currencies in the con-
(vi) H6: economic barriers create a signifcant impact on
struction industry as well as the challenges in showing a clear
the implementation of blockchain in large-scale
return on investment [56]. Te aforementioned obstacles
building projects
can dissuade building industry participants from embracing
blockchain technology. In general, comprehending these Te framework draws on the technology-organization-
obstacles is of utmost importance in mitigating the hin- environment (TOE) theory, a well-established theoretical
drances to blockchain implementation and enabling its ef- model in the feld of technology adoption and imple-
fcacious assimilation into the building industry. mentation. Te TOE framework provides a comprehensive
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 9

Procedural

Technical
H1

H2
Fucntional
Barriers in
H3
Implementation of
Blockchain in Large
H4 Scale Building
Standardization Projects

H5

H6
Social

Economic

Figure 3: Hypothesized framework.

lens for understanding the interplay between technological that the participants held a moderate perception regarding
factors, organizational dynamics, and environmental in- the challenges that the implementation faces relevant to
fuences in the context of adopting innovations, such as blockchain technology in the building industry [28, 48]. Te
blockchain technology in the construction sector. Within the range of observed values spans from 1 to 5, signifying that
TOE framework, we specifcally focus on how technological certain participant reported exceedingly low or high degrees
factors (e.g., blockchain features), organizational factors of difculties. Te values of excess kurtosis suggest that
(e.g., structure and culture), and environmental factors (e.g., a majority of the variables exhibit a fatter distribution,
regulatory landscape) interact to shape the implementation whereas the values of skewness indicate that a majority of the
challenges and opportunities in extensive building projects. variables exhibit a distribution that is slightly skewed to-
By anchoring our study within the TOE framework, we aim wards the left [18, 79]. Te Cramér–von Mises test statistic is
to ofer a robust theoretical foundation that aligns with the utilized to analyze the suitability of the ft among observed
existing literature and enhances the analytical rigor of our and anticipated distributions. A value of 1.5 or greater is
research study. indicative of an inadequate ft. Te Cramér–von Mises test
statistic for all variables is below the threshold, indicating
a favorable correspondence between the observed and an-
4.3. Structure Equation Modelling (SEM)
ticipated distributions.
4.3.1. Measurement Model. Table 5 provides a comprehen- Table 6 provides a breakdown of the validity and ac-
sive overview of descriptive statistics of 13 variables asso- curacy of the model that was used to assess the challenges
ciated with the difculties encountered while implementing associated with using blockchain technology in signifcant
blockchain technology among the building industry. Te construction projects. Te six domains that were looked
statistical measures of mean and median serve to represent at—economic, functional, procedural, social, standardiza-
the central tendency of each variable, whereas the minimum tion, and technical—are shown in the table along with
and maximum values observed indicate the range of re- Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability (rho-a and rho-c),
sponses. Te shape of a distribution can be inferred from its and average variance extracted (AVE). Te fndings show
excess kurtosis and skewness [23, 64]. A negative excess that the diferent constructs have acceptable levels of re-
kurtosis suggests a fatter distribution, while a negative liability and validity, as shown by Cronbach’s alpha values
skewness suggests a distribution that is skewed to the left. ranging from 0.731 to 0.880 and composite reliability co-
Te term “number of observations used” pertains to the efcients ranging from 0.759 to 0.883. Te fndings show that
count of participants who have furnished data for each the investigated constructs have a signifcant infuence on
variable [80, 81]. the variance of the corresponding variables, with average
In general, the variables exhibit mean values that span extracted variance values ranging from 0.648 to 0.892. Te
from 2.615 to 3.48, while the majority of variables have fndings demonstrate the validity and reliability of the model
a median value of 3. Te aforementioned statement indicates used to assess the challenges involved in using blockchain
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 Journal of Engineering

Table 5: Descriptive statistics.

Number Cramér-von
Observed Observed Excess of Mises’
Variables Mean Median Skewness
min max kurtosis observations test
used statistic
C1 3.112 4 1 5 −1.36 −0.218 201 1.532
C12 3.48 3 1 5 −1.237 −0.336 201 1.432
C10 3.321 3 1 5 −1.185 −0.351 201 1.522
C17 3.42 3 1 5 −1.051 −0.554 201 1.915
C4 3.231 3 1 5 −1.342 −0.381 201 1.887
C11 2.712 4 1 5 −1.31 0.101 201 1.347
C13 2.725 3 1 5 −1.484 0.055 201 1.514
C18 2.615 3 1 5 −1.351 0.122 201 1.513
C14 2.825 3 1 5 −1.389 0.119 201 1.416
C8 3.147 3 1 5 −1.571 0.021 201 1.735
C15 2.752 4 1 5 −1.216 0.269 201 1.207
C7 2.801 4 1 5 −1.472 0.027 201 1.416
C16 3.214 4 1 5 −1.351 −0.18 201 1.517
C6 3.236 3 1 5 −1.511 −0.212 201 1.739

Table 6: Model reliability and validity statistics.

Te average variance
Constructs Cronbach’s alpha Composite reliability (rho-a) Composite reliability (rho-c)
extracted (AVE)
Economic 0.844 0.855 0.927 0.865
Functional 0.88 0.883 0.943 0.892
Procedural 0.795 0.804 0.907 0.829
Social 0.804 0.821 0.884 0.718
Standardization 0.788 0.795 0.865 0.762
Technical 0.731 0.759 0.846 0.648

technology in large-scale construction projects [13, 28]. Te accurate indicators of challenges faced while using block-
researched constructions are crucial for determining how chain technology in signifcant construction projects [82].
well blockchain technology will be used in the construction Te aforementioned outcome instills assurance in the
sector. Figure 4 displays the model’s reliability and per- conclusions drawn from the investigation and corroborates
formance trend. Te constructs that are associated with the applicability of the constructs for subsequent scholarly
economic and functional barriers, which exhibit higher inquiry and scrutiny.
Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability values, may hold Te results of the HTMT ratio analysis for each of the six
signifcant relevance for building projects of a larger scale constructs used in the study are shown in Table 8. Te dis-
[23]. Te barriers encompass the exorbitant expenses as- criminant validity of the measurement model is evaluated
sociated with an implementation, the intricacy of exhibiting using the HTMT method. To do this, the square roots of the
a lucid return on investment, and the requirement to secure AVE for each construct are compared to correlations between
authorizations and licenses for execution. Te successful each pair of components. An HTMT ratio below 0.9 is in-
implementation of blockchain technology in large-scale dicative of favorable discriminant validity between the con-
building works is contingent upon addressing these barriers. structs. Te present research study demonstrates that the
Te results of the construct level Fornell–Larcker cri- HTMTratios are below the threshold of 0.9, thereby signifying
terion analysis are shown in Table 7. Te table’s diagonal that the six constructs exhibit adequate discriminant validity
entries display the AVE’s under root for each construct, [53]. Te maximum HTMT ratio observed is 0.434, indicating
whereas nondiagonal entries indicate relationships between a correlation between functional and procedural constructs.
diferent constructs [48]. A technique used to evaluate the However, this value remains below the established threshold
discriminant validity of constructs is the Fornell–Larcker of 0.9 [6, 83]. Tus, the research fndings suggest that the six
criterion analysis. Te results show that the constructs’ constructs employed in the investigation exhibit satisfactory
discriminant validity is adequate since their correlations are discriminant validity [42]. Te signifcance of this outcome
less than the under root of the AVE for each component lies in the indication that the constructs being evaluated are
[31, 64]. Te preceding remark suggests that each construct measuring distinct facets of the phenomenon being studied
is measuring a unique and specifc aspect of the overall and exhibit low levels of correlation with one another [52, 84].
construct of obstacles to the use of blockchain technology in Te aforementioned aspect enhances the dependability of the
signifcant scale construction projects. In general, the results research outcomes and corroborates the soundness of the
show that the research study’s constructs are reliable and measuring framework.
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 11

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Economic

Functional

Procedural

Social

Standardization

Technical
Cronbach's alpha Composite reliability (rho-c)
Composite reliability (rho-a) Average variance extracted (AVE)
Figure 4: Comparison of model reliability and validity statistics.

Table 7: Fornell–Larcker criteria results.

Constructs Economic Functional Procedural Social Standardization Technical
Economic 0.93
Functional 0.165 0.945
Procedural 0.236 0.364 0.911
Social 0.191 0.362 0.187 0.847
Standardization 0.106 −0.057 0.175 0.137 0.873
Technical 0.224 0.194 0.329 0.326 0.094 0.805

Table 8: HTMT statistics.

Constructs Economic Functional Procedural Social Standardization Technical
Economic
Functional 0.191
Procedural 0.288 0.434
Social 0.229 0.427 0.184
Standardization 0.137 0.081 0.237 0.178
Technical 0.269 0.255 0.421 0.412 0.207

Te cross-loadings of the items on each construct are as it implies that the item may not be efectively measuring
shown in Table 9, which also shows the degree to which each its intended construct [2]. In general, the fndings indicate
item measures the targeted construct. Te fndings indicate that a revision of the measurement model may be necessary
that a majority of the items exhibit robust cross-loadings on to enhance the validity of the standardization construct.
their respective constructs, thereby suggesting favorable Te fndings of the group impact analysis are presented
convergent validity. Te cross-loadings of items C15, C7, in Table 10, which aims to determine the constructs that
C16, C6, C1, C12, C4, C10, C17, C11, C13, and C18 are exert the most signifcant impacts on each group involved in
greater than 0.5 on their intended constructs, indicating that the research study. Te present analysis is predicated upon
they serve as reliable indicators of their respective constructs. two distinct criteria, namely, collinearity and loadings.
Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that two elements, namely, Collinearity pertains to the degree of association between
C14 and C8, exhibit cross-loadings that fall below the a variable and other variables among its construct, whereas
threshold of 0.5 on their respective intended constructs. Te loadings denote level of the variable gauges its intended
cross-loading of item C14 on the social construct is com- construct. Te group impact rank analysis reveals that the
paratively higher than on its intended construct (stan- technical construct exerts the most signifcant impact on
dardization), suggesting a possible overlap between these group 1, while the social and procedural constructs follow
two constructs. Te negative cross-loading of item C8 on its closely in terms of impact [56, 69]. Te constructs of social
intended construct (standardization) is a matter of concern and procedural have the most signifcant impacts on group
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
12 Journal of Engineering

Table 9: Cross loadings.

Variables Economic Functional Procedural Social Standardization Technical
C15 0. 3 0.156 0.249 0.19 0.101 0.248
C7 0. 2 0.152 0.185 0.165 0.096 0.163
C16 0.14 0. 41 0.351 0.351 −0.066 0.147
C6 0.172 0. 4 0.338 0.335 −0.043 0.217
C1 0.252 0.306 0.8 0.219 0.099 0.29
C12 0.182 0.355 0. 22 0.087 0.213 0.308
C4 0.124 0.271 0.249 0.826 0.071 0.224
C10 0.182 0.355 0.322 0.887 0.213 0.308
C17 0.175 0.286 0.046 0.827 0.041 0.29
C14 0.062 −0.007 0.214 0.186 0.856 −0.049
C8 0.12 −0.089 0.1 0.062 0.8 0.198
C11 0.18 0.209 0.308 0.31 0.117 0.85
C13 0.283 0.226 0.274 0.267 0.039 0.835
C18 0.034 −0.023 0.197 0.193 0.07 0.724
Bold values are very important, and these values indicate that the bold values are highest among all the values in same row.

Table 10: Group impact rank.

Variables Collinearities Loadings Constructs Group impact rank
C1 1.771 0.899
Procedural Rank 6
C12 1.771 0.922
C10 1.876 0.887
C17 1.661 0.827 Social Rank 2
C4 1.719 0.826
C11 1.526 0.85
C13 1.475 0.835 Technical Rank 1
C18 1.368 0.724
C14 1.38 0.856
Standardization Rank 4
C8 1.38 0.89
C15 2.143 0.939
Economic Rank 5
C7 2.143 0.92
C16 2.606 0.941
Functional Rank 3
C6 2.606 0.949

2, with standardization and economic constructs following while the standard errors signify the degree of accuracy in
closely behind. Group 3’s analysis indicates that the func- measuring the constructs. Te variance infation factor
tional construct exerts the most signifcant impact, with the (VIF) values are indicative of the degree of collinearity
economic and standardization constructs following closely among the constructs, while the P values refect the sta-
behind. tistical relevance of relevance among the constructs and
outcome variable. Te fndings indicate that the six con-
structs examined exhibit a favorable infuence on the
4.3.2. Structure Path Analysis. Te fndings of the path implementation of blockchain technology in extensive
analysis aimed at investigating the correlation between the building undertakings, with technical factors being the
six constructs and the implementation of blockchain in most prominent contributor [6, 52]. Te aforementioned
large-scale building works are presented in Table 11. data may prove benefcial for project managers and
Findings demonstrate the beta coefcients, mean scores, decision-makers in discerning the pivotal elements that
standard errors, VIF values, and P values for every con- infuence the implementation of blockchain technology in
struct. Te beta coefcients denote value along with ori- building projects, and subsequently, judiciously appor-
entation of the association among every construct and the tioning resources. Figure 5 indicates the model signifcance
dependent variable, namely, the implementation of and path coefcients while Figure 6 is presenting the t-stat
blockchain technology [5, 45]. Te positive beta coefcients of all variables in the model.
of all six constructs suggest a positive association with the Table 12 presents the model’s results for the predictive
implementation of blockchain. Te construct with the relevance evaluation. SSE stands for the summation of the
highest beta coefcient is technical (0.401), followed by squares of the anticipated values, whereas SSO stands for
social (0.309), functional (0.268), standardization (0.246), the summation of the squares of the observed values [8, 47].
economic (0.225), and procedural (0.180), as observed. Te Te proportion of SSO to SSE is subtracted from 1 to get the
mean scores denote the arithmetic mean of the constructs, Q2 metric, which measures the model’s predictive power.
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 13

Table 11: Path analysis results.

Variables to
β Mean (M) SE VIF P values
construct relation
Economic->blockchain implementation in large-scale building projects 0.225 0.225 0.025 0.225 <0.001
Functional->blockchain implementation in large-scale building projects 0.268 0.266 0.027 0.268 <0.001
Procedural->blockchain implementation in large-scale building projects 0.18 0.179 0.05 0.18 <0.001
Social->blockchain implementation in large-scale building projects 0.309 0.309 0.051 0.309 <0.001
Standardization->blockchain implementation in large-scale building projects 0.246 0.245 0.026 0.246 <0.001
Technical->blockchain implementation in large-scale building projects 0.401 0.4 0.027 0.401 <0.001

C12
0.922 (0.000)
Procedural
0.899 (0.000)
C1

C18
0.724 (0.000)
C11 0.850 (0.000) Technical
0.180 (0.000)
0.835 (0.000)
C13

0.401 (0.000)

C16
0.941 (0.000)
Functional Blockchain
0.949 (0.000)
C6 0.268 (0.000) Implementation
in Large Scale
Construction
C14
Projects
0.246 (0.000)
0.856 (0.000)

0.890 (0.000) Standardization

C8

0.309 (0.000)

C10
0.887 (0.000)
0.225 (0.000)
C4 0.826 (0.000)
Social
0.827 (0.000)
C17

C15
0.939 (0.000)
Economic
0.920 (0.000)
C7

Figure 5: Signifcant model route coefcients.

Te Q2 rating for the model that forecasts the use of responsible for 23.3% of the observed variability in the
blockchain in large-scale construction projects is 0.233, result variable. Te importance of technical construct is
indicating a medium degree of predictive power. As stated higher while standardization construct has achieved
above, the independent variables in the model are a higher performance index.
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
14 Journal of Engineering

C12
104.222
Procedural
C1
48.856

C18
14.177
C11 34.609 Technical
28.495 3.570
C13

C16 14.897
62.172
Functional
89.886
C6
9.770 Blockchain
Implementation
C14 in Large Scale
18.744 Construction
9.537
23.616 Standardization Projects
C8

6.058
C10
57.806
C4 24.888
Social 8.979
28.543
C17

C15
92.459
Economic
C7 47.070

Figure 6: Design t-stat.

Table 12: Model predictive relevance.

Predictive relevance analysis
SSO SSE Q2 (�1-SSO/SSE)
of model
Blockchain implementation in large-scale building projects 4320.000 3311.459 0.233

Table 13: Validation fndings. Table 14: Reliability of validation survey.

Respondents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Mean Questions Cronbach’s alpha Statistic Mode Sig
Q1 5 4 3 4 3 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 4.25 Q1 0.824 0.876 3 0.000
Q2 5 5 2 5 4 5 4 5 5 3 4 4 4.5 Q2 0.835 0.865 3 0.000
Q3 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4.75 Q3 0.877 0.843 3 0.000
Q4 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 3 2 4.75 Q4 0.862 0.842 4 0.000
Q5 5 4 3 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 2 2 4.25 Q5 0.774 0.853 4 0.000
Q6 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 2 3 5 4 4 4.08 Q6 0.867 0.848 4 0.000
Q7 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 2 5 4 3 4 4.42 Q7 0.876 0.839 3 0.000

4.3.3. Model Validation. Tables 13 and 14 display the out- implementation of blockchain technology in the building
comes of the validation survey that was carried out to industry [56, 69]. Te survey comprised seven inquiries that
evaluate the consistency and precision of the suggested SEM sought to evaluate the respondents’ concurrence with the
model, as well as the obstacles encountered in the recognized barriers, the pertinence and precision of the
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 15

identifed barriers in the building industry, and the prac- as the restricted range of implementations, as prominent
ticality and efcacy of the proposed SEM model. issues. Te discovery that blockchain technology in the
Te fndings indicate that a signifcant proportion of building industry can consume substantial amounts of en-
participants concurred with the recognized hurdles related ergy constitutes a distinctive contribution of this research
with the integration of blockchain technology in building study. Te aforementioned discovery implies that the in-
industry and deemed them pertinent and precise among the tegration of blockchain technology in the building industry
construction milieu. Furthermore, the Cronbach alpha co- necessitates a thorough evaluation of possible ecological
efcients demonstrate a substantial degree of dependability afairs that may arise from heightened energy usage [86]. Te
for each item, implying that the survey tool was both present study aims to verify the hypothesis that technical
consistent and dependable [2, 46]. barriers exert a substantial impact on the implementation of
Furthermore, the participants indicated that the SEM blockchain technology in large-scale building projects. Te
framework presented was valuable in evaluating the ob- results of the study ofer valuable vision in this critical
stacles encountered during the integration of blockchain in domain that requires attention to facilitate the integration of
extensive building ventures and profcient in forecasting the blockchain technology in the building industry [35].
acceptance of blockchain innovation in the building industry Te hypothesis, H3, is fully validated according to the
[85]. Notwithstanding, certain participants have posited that fndings. Te functional construct presents a dual challenge,
there could exist additional hurdles to the implementation of namely, the attainment of interoperability with pre-existing
blockchain technology among the building industry that systems and the absence of requisite infrastructure for the
were not discerned in the present investigation. implementation of blockchain technology. Te prior research
In general, the outcomes of the validation survey ofer study has also recognized comparable obstacles in the
backing for the recognized obstacles of blockchain in- implementation of blockchain technology, specifcally among
tegration in the building industry and the suggested SEM the domain of building. Te authors conducted a study that
framework [2, 52]. Te aforementioned discoveries may revealed the presence of noteworthy obstacles to the imple-
serve as a valuable resource for professionals in the industry, mentation of blockchain in the public industry, specifcally the
policymakers, and scholars alike, in their eforts to gain absence of infrastructure and interoperability. In the research
a deeper comprehension of the hurdles related with the study, the authors emphasized the need of interoperability
integration of blockchain technology among the building when using blockchain technology across construction pro-
industry, as well as to develop efective strategies to jects. Te fndings of the current research study provide
tackle them. a unique contribution to the body of the literature by focusing
on the practical challenges associated with the use of block-
5. Discussion chain technology in the construction sector [61, 68]. Te study
emphasizes the signifcance of tackling these obstacles to
Te procedural construct includes C12 and C1. Te hy- guarantee the prosperous integration of blockchain technology
potheses H1 is fully validated according to the fndings. Te in extensive building undertakings [34].
fndings of hypothesis testing indicate procedural obstacles Standardization construct includes C14 and C8. Te
exert a noteworthy impact on the execution of blockchain hypothesis, H4, is fully validated according to the fndings.
technology in extensive building undertakings. Te afore- Te present study’s validation of the hypothesis about the
mentioned discovery aligns with the prior research study construct of standardization aligns with the prior research
that has similarly recognized procedural difculties as study on the impacts of standardization on the imple-
a signifcant hindrance to the implementation of blockchain mentation of blockchain technology across diverse industry.
technology across diverse industries. Te study has identi- A signifcant barrier to the adoption of blockchain tech-
fed distinct barriers that are exclusive to the building in- nology is the lack of standards for its use, which breeds
dustry, including the requirement for modifcations to uncertainty and prevents collaboration between interested
current procurement protocols and concerns regarding parties. Te present discovery aligns with prior studies that
scalability. Tis underscores the signifcance of conducting have recognized the absence of uniformity as a crucial
research tailored to specifc industries to recognize and obstacle to the acceptance of blockchain technology in di-
tackle the distinct obstacles that may impede the imple- verse domains, such as healthcare, fnance, and supply chain
mentation of blockchain technology [21, 43]. Te statement administration. Te discovery of the insufciency in
underscores the signifcance of meticulous planning and addressing data security and privacy concerns among the
efective management to guarantee a seamless and pros- building industry is noteworthy, as it underscores a distinct
perous integration of blockchain technology among the obstacle that holds relevance to the building domain. Te
building industry. lack of established norms about data security and privacy
Te technical construct includes C18, C11, and C13. Te among the building industry may pose signifcant barriers to
results show that the hypothesis H2 is fully supported. Te the implementation of blockchain technology, as it engen-
study’s fndings about technical barriers to the adoption of ders apprehensions regarding the authenticity and secrecy of
blockchain technology across numerous businesses are data associated with projects [87]. Te identifcation of this
similar with earlier studies in this area. A prior research particular barrier emphasizes the need for industry-specifc
study has identifed signifcant technical obstacles in the laws to be established in order to support the use of
integration of blockchain with pre-existing systems, as well blockchain technology within the construction sector.
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
16 Journal of Engineering

Te social construct also states that C4, and C10. Te order to make educated choices, stakeholders need a com-
hypothesis, H5, is fully validated according to the fndings. plete understanding of the potential advantages of block-
Te results relate that the incorporation of blockchain chain technology in building projects. Standardized
technology in extensive building projects is signifcantly protocols for incorporating blockchain technology into
impacted by social obstacles. Tis assertion aligns with the building projects should be developed by organisations to
prior research study that has underscored the signifcance of guarantee that all relevant stakeholders are informed and on
tackling social obstacles while implementing novel tech- the same page. To ensure a favourable response, stakeholders
nology in professional settings. Te authors conducted should be educated on the merits of blockchain technology.
a study that revealed that the implementation of digital Invest in R&D to make blockchains more compatible with
technologies in the building industry can be impeded by the existing infrastructure and lessen their impact on the
cultural disparities. Te research studies’s standout aspect is environment. Clear procurement processes are vital for the
its identifcation of specifc societal barriers to the use of smooth incorporation of blockchain technology, minimising
blockchain technology in the construction sector, such as time and complexity.
ownership and intellectual property rights disputes [29, 65].
Te aforementioned proposition posits that efectively
tackling societal issues necessitates a sophisticated meth- 5.3. Limitations and Future Implications. One of the study’s
odology that factors in the distinctive attributes of block- faws is that it can only be used in very big building projects.
chain technology and the feld of building. Te research study also focuses only on problems without
Te economic construct includes C15, and C7. Te hy- considering solutions or best practises. Methods for over-
pothesis, H6, is fully validated according to the fndings. Te coming the stated barriers, the efectiveness of standardized
economic framework underscores the difculties associated processes, and stakeholder cooperation are all areas that
with the expenses and monetary adequacy of integrating need more investigation. More research is needed on how
blockchain technology in the building industry. Te hypothesis developing technologies such as AI and IoT afect block-
that has been validated indicates that the aforementioned chain’s use in the building industry. Prospective studies
barriers exert a considerable impact on building projects of might investigate the advantages of using blockchain for
signifcant magnitude. Tis discovery aligns with the prior supply chain management and quality assurance in the
research study that has recognized the fnancial obstacles as- building industry.
sociated with the implementation of blockchain technology
across diverse industry, such as the building industry. Te focus 6. Conclusion
on the challenges of demonstrating a clear return on investment
for the integration of blockchain technology in the construction Te current inquiry, which culminated in a concluding
sector, however, is what makes this notion stand out. Te statement, looked at the challenges and opportunities as-
decision-making process of stakeholders heavily weighs this sociated with integrating blockchain technology in large
element. Te aforementioned highlights the need for further construction projects. Tis study has identifed six discrete
research and ingenuity in creating economical resolutions and constructs, namely, procedural, technical, functional, stan-
commercial frameworks that can facilitate the implementation dardization, social, and economic, that can exert a sub-
of blockchain technology among the building industry. stantial impact on the efcacious implementation of
blockchain technology in building works. Te fndings have
fully validated the hypotheses formulated to examine the
5.1. Empirical and Teoretical Contributions. Tis study
correlation between these constructs and the implementa-
contributes considerably both practically and conceptually. It
tion of blockchain technology. Tis study has provided
confrms six basic structures as signifcant obstacles to
numerous theoretical and empirical advancements in the
blockchain deployment in large-scale construction projects and
domain of building and blockchain technology. Te author
ofers insights into how to overcome them. Professionals in the
has made theoretical contributions by creating a framework
sector will beneft from this empirical contribution since it
that identifes the barriers and opportunities that arise
makes it easier for them to identify and tackle these issues. Te
during the implementation of blockchain technology in
research study adds to theoretical knowledge by illuminating
large-scale building projects. Empirical contributions made
practical challenges associated with blockchain deployment in
in this study entail the identifcation of distinct barriers
large-scale building projects. Impediments in the areas of
which are related to implementation of blockchain tech-
procedure, technology, function, standardization, society, and
nology in the building industry. In addition, the study
economy were recognized, and their identifcation provides
validates certain hypotheses that can serve as a guide for
a theoretical basis for further study. Tis study lays the
future research projects in this domain. Tis research study
groundwork for future studies and improvements to block-
has yielded various pragmatic suggestions for executives
chain applications in the construction sector, providing a re-
operating among the building industry. Te aforementioned
source for academics and professionals alike.
requirements encompass the necessity to tackle technical
obstacles such as energy utilization, establish benchmarks
5.2. Managerial Suggestions. Te study’s results provide for the execution of blockchain technology, and furnish
management advice for overcoming obstacles to using education and assistance for individuals involved in the
blockchain technology in large construction projects. In process. Te research study also acknowledged the need for
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 17

a cost-beneft analysis to demonstrate the potential return on World Construction Symposium, Colombo, Sri Lanka, No-
investment related to the use of blockchain technology vember 2019.
within the construction sector. Future implications have [11] Z. Liu, T. Wu, F. Wang, M. Osmani, and P. Demian,
been suggested despite the study’s shortcomings, which “Blockchain enhanced construction waste information
include the small sample size and emphasis on large-scale management: a conceptual framework,” Sustainability,
vol. 14, no. 19, p. 12145, 2022.
construction projects. In conclusion, this study lays the
[12] S. Jadidoleslami and M. Azizi, “Blockchain for project and
groundwork for further research in this area by providing construction management; a systematic and scoping literature
important insights on the challenges and opportunities review,” Journal of Information Technology, vol. 108, 2022.
associated with the use of blockchain technology in the [13] V. Plevris, N. D. Lagaros, and A. Zeytinci, “Blockchain in civil
construction sector. engineering, architecture and construction industry: state of
the art, evolution, challenges and opportunities,” Frontiers in
Data Availability Built Environment, vol. 8, 2022.
[14] J. Li, D. Greenwood, and M. Kassem, “Blockchain in the built
Te data are not available for individual or public access environment and construction industry: A systematic review,
because of data protection agreement with participants, conceptual models and practical use cases,” Automation in
Construction, vol. 102, pp. 288–307, 2019.
complying with research ethics.
[15] M. Hamma-adama, H. Salman, and T. Kouider, “Blockchain
in construction industry: challenges and opportunities,” in
Conflicts of Interest Proceedings of the International Mechanical Engineering
Congress & Exposition, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, March 2021.
Te authors declare that there are no conficts of interest [16] D. Mahmudnia, M. Arashpour, and R. Yang, “Blockchain in
regarding the publication of this paper. construction management: Applications, advantages and
limitations,” Automation in Construction, vol. 140, Article ID
104379, 2022.
References [17] B. Hare, B. Kumar, and J. Campbell, “Impact of a multi-media
[1] R. Zhao, Z. Chen, and F. Xue, “A blockchain 3.0 paradigm for digital tool on identifying construction hazards under the uk
digital twins in construction project management,” Auto- construction design and management regulations,” Journal of
mation in Construction, vol. 145, Article ID 104645, 2023. Information Technology in Construction, vol. 25, pp. 482–499,
[2] Z. Wang, K. Wang, Y. Wang, and Z. Wen, “A data man- 2020.
agement model for intelligent water project construction [18] E. Papadonikolaki, A. Tezel, I. Yitmen, and P. Hilletofth,
based on blockchain,” Wireless Communications and Mobile “Blockchain innovation ecosystems orchestration in con-
Computing, vol. 2022, Article ID 8482415, 16 pages, 2022. struction,” Industrial Management and Data Systems, vol. 123,
[3] K. Kim, G. Lee, and S. Kim, “A study on the application of no. 2, pp. 672–694, 2023.
blockchain technology in the construction industry,” KSCE [19] K. Kang, X. Liu, Y. Jiang et al., “Blockchain opportunities for
Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 2561–2571, construction industry in Hong Kong: a case study of RISC and
2020. site diary,” Construction Innovation, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 443–
[4] M. Msawil, D. Greenwood, and M. Kassem, “A systematic 466, 2022.
evaluation of blockchain-enabled contract administration in [20] A. Cerić, “Blockchain strategy for minimizing information
construction projects,” Automation in Construction, vol. 143, asymmetry in construction projects,” in Proceedings of the
Article ID 104553, 2022. 14th International Conference on Organization, Technology
[5] A. Waqar, M. B. Khan, N. Shafq, K. Skrzypkowski, and Management in Construction and IPMA, Zagreb, Croatia,
K. Zagórski, and A. Zagórska, “Assessment of challenges to July 2019.
the adoption of iot for the safety management of small [21] Y. Celik, I. Petri, and M. Barati, “Blockchain supported BIM
construction projects in malaysia: structural equation mod- data provenance for construction projects,” Computers in
eling approach,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 5, p. 3340, 2023. Industry, vol. 144, Article ID 103768, 2023.
[6] A. Waqar, I. Othman, N. Shafq, and M. S. Mansoor, “Ap- [22] W. Lu, L. Wu, and F. Xue, “Blockchain technology for
plications of AI in oil and gas projects towards sustainable projects: a multicriteria decision matrix,” Project Management
development: a systematic literature review,” Artifcial In- Journal, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 84–99, 2022.
telligence Review, vol. 56, no. 11, 2023. [23] M. Ravanshadnia, A. Shahrayini, and P. Akhavan, “Block-
[7] J. J. Hunhevicz, P.-A. Brasey, M. M. M. Bonanomi, D. M. Hall, chain technology in the construction industry: integrating
and M. Fischer, “Applications of blockchain for the gover- bim in project management and IOT in supply chain man-
nance of integrated project delivery: a crypto commons ap- agement,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference
proach,” 2022, https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.07002. on Knowledge Management, Washington, DC, USA, October
[8] A. Waqar, A. H. Qureshi, and W. S. Alaloul, “Barriers to 2021.
building information modeling (BIM) deployment in small [24] M. Sadeghi, A. Mahmoudi, X. Deng, and X. Luo, “Prioritizing
construction projects: Malaysian construction industry,” requirements for implementing blockchain technology in
Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 3, p. 2477, 2023. construction supply chain based on circular economy: fuzzy
[9] Z. Liu, Z. Chi, M. Osmani, and P. Demian, “Blockchain and ordinal priority approach,” International Journal of Envi-
building information management (BIM) for sustainable ronmental Science and Technology, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 4991–
building development within the context of smart cities,” 5012, 2023.
Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 2090, 2021. [25] A. Mahmoudi, M. Sadeghi, and L. M. Naeni, “Retracted ar-
[10] T. Hewavitharana, S. Nanayakkara, and S. Perera, “Blockchain ticle: Blockchain and supply chain fnance for sustainable
as a project management platform,” in Proceedings of the 8th construction industry: ensemble ranking using Ordinal
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
18 Journal of Engineering

Priority Approach,” Operations Management Research, [41] A. Waqar, I. Othman, N. Saad, A. H. Qureshi, M. Azab, and
vol. 17, no. 2, p. 809, 2023. A. M. Khan, “Complexities for adopting 3D laser scanners in
[26] T. S. Elbashbishy, G. G. Ali, and I. H. El-adaway, “Blockchain the AEC industry: Structural equation modeling,” Applica-
technology in the construction industry: mapping current tions in Engineering Science, vol. 16, Article ID 100160, 2023.
research trends using social network analysis and clustering,” [42] C. Udokwu, A. Norta, and C. Wenna, “Designing a Collab-
Construction Management and Economics, vol. 40, no. 5, orative Construction-Project Platform on Blockchain Tech-
pp. 406–427, 2022. nology for Transparency, Traceability, and Information
[27] H. Liu, S. Han, and Z. Zhu, “Blockchain technology toward Symmetry,” International Conference Proceedings Series,
smart construction: review and future directions,” Journal of vol. 21, 2021.
Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 149, no. 3, [43] G. Blumberg, “Designing blockchain applications for con-
2023. struction project management,” in Proceedings of the 36th CIB
[28] S. Perera, S. Nanayakkara, M. N. N. Rodrigo, S. Senaratne, and W78 2019 Conference, Newcastle, UK, September 2019.
R. Weinand, “Blockchain technology: Is it hype or real in the [44] M. El Khatib, S. Bin Khadim, W. Al Ketbi, N. H. Al Kuwaiti,
construction industry,” Journal of Industrial Information and A. El Khatib, “Digital Transformation and Disruptive
Integration, vol. 17, Article ID 100125, 2020. Technologies: Efect of Blockchain on Managing Construction
[29] M. Khalfan, N. Azizi, O. Haass, T. Maqsood, and I. Ahmed, Projects,” in Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference
“Blockchain technology: potential applications for public on Cyber Resilience, Dubai, UAE, October 2022.
sector E-procurement and project management,” Sustain- [45] A. Waqar, N. Bheel, H. R. Almujibah et al., “Efect of coir fbre
ability, vol. 14, no. 10, p. 5791, 2022. ash (CFA) on the strengths, modulus of elasticity and em-
[30] Y. Ni, B. Sun, and Y. Wang, “Blockchain-based BIM digital bodied carbon of concrete using response surface method-
project management mechanism research,” IEEE Access, ology (RSM) and optimization,” Results in Engineering,
vol. 9, 2021. vol. 17, Article ID 100883, 2023.
[31] W. N. Suliyanti and R. F. Sari, “Blockchain-based imple- [46] A. Waqar, N. Bheel, N. Shafq et al., “Efect of volcanic pumice
mentation of building information modeling information powder ash on the properties of cement concrete using re-
using hyperledger composer,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 1, sponse surface methodology,” Journal of Building Pathology
p. 321, 2020. and Rehabilitation, vol. 8, no. 1, 2023.
[32] Y. Jiang, X. Liu, K. Kang, Z. Wang, R. Y. Zhong, and [47] A. Waqar, I. Othman, and K. Skrzypkowski, “Evaluation of
G. Q. Huang, “Blockchain-enabled cyber-physical smart success of superhydrophobic coatings in the oil and gas
modular integrated construction,” Computers in Industry, construction industry using structural,” Coatings, vol. 13,
vol. 133, Article ID 103553, 2021. 2023.
[33] X. Li, W. Lu, F. Xue et al., “Blockchain-enabled IoT-BIM [48] D. J. Scott, T. Broyd, and L. Ma, “Exploratory literature review
platform for supply chain management in modular con- of blockchain in the construction industry,” Automation in
struction,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Man- Construction, vol. 132, Article ID 103914, 2021.
agement, vol. 148, no. 2, 2022. [49] W. Lu, X. Li, F. Xue, R. Zhao, L. Wu, and A. G. O. Yeh,
[34] K. Adel, A. Elhakeem, and M. Marzouk, “Chatbot for con- “Exploring smart construction objects as blockchain oracles
struction frms using scalable blockchain network,” Auto- in construction supply chain management,” Automation in
mation in Construction, vol. 141, Article ID 104390, 2022. Construction, vol. 129, Article ID 103816, 2021.
[35] E. E. Ameyaw, D. J. Edwards, B. Kumar, N. Turairajah, [50] A. Waqar, I. Othman, and R. A. González-Lezcano, “Chal-
D.-G. Owusu-Manu, and G. D. Oppong, “Critical factors lenges to the implementation of BIM for the risk management
infuencing adoption of blockchain-enabled smart contracts of oil and gas construction projects: structural equation
in construction projects,” Journal of Construction Engineering modeling approach,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 10, p. 8019,
and Management, vol. 149, no. 3, 2023. 2023.
[36] A. Boonpheng, W. Kongsong, N. Usahanunth, and [51] J. J. Hunhevicz, T. Schraner, and D. M. Hall, “Incentivizing
C. Pooworakulchai, “Bringing blockchain technology to high-quality data sets in construction using blockchain: A
construction engineering management,” International Jour- feasibility study in the swiss industry,” in Proceedings of the
nal of Engineering Research, vol. 9, no. 1, 2020. 37th ISARC, Kitakyushu, Japan, October 2020.
[37] M. Khan, A. Waqar, N. Bheel et al., “Optimization of fresh and [52] A. Waqar and I. Othman, “Impact of 3D printing on the
mechanical characteristics of carbon fber-reinforced concrete overall project success of residential construction projects
composites using response surface technique,” Buildings, using structural equation modelling,” International Journal of
vol. 13, no. 4, p. 852, 2023. Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 20, 2023.
[38] A. Waqar, A. H. Alshehri, F. Alanazi, S. Alotaibi, and [53] A. Tezel, P. Febrero, E. Papadonikolaki, and I. Yitmen, “In-
H. R. Almujibah, “Evaluation of challenges to the adoption of sights into blockchain implementation in construction:
intelligent transportation system for urban smart mobility,” models for supply chain management,” Journal of Manage-
Research in Transportation Business and Management, vol. 51, ment in Engineering, vol. 37, no. 4, 2021.
Article ID 101060, 2023. [54] D. Lee, S. H. Lee, N. Masoud, M. S. Krishnan, and V. C. Li,
[39] A. Waqar, I. Othman, N. Hamah Sor et al., “Modeling relation “Integrated digital twin and blockchain framework to support
among implementing AI-based drones and sustainable con- accountable information sharing in construction projects,”
struction project success,” Frontiers in Built Environment, Automation in Construction, vol. 127, Article ID 103688, 2021.
vol. 9, pp. 1–21, 2023. [55] K. M. Wollin, G. Damm, H. Foth et al., “Critical evaluation of
[40] A. Waqar, A. Mateen Khan, and I. Othman, “Blockchain human health risks due to hydraulic fracturing in natural gas
empowerment in construction supply chains: Enhancing ef- and petroleum production,” Archives of Toxicology, vol. 94,
fciency and sustainability for an infrastructure development,” no. 4, pp. 967–1016, 2020.
Journal of Infrastructure Intelligence and Resilience, vol. 3, [56] F. Xiong, R. Xiao, W. Ren, R. Zheng, and J. Jiang, “A key
no. 1, Article ID 100065, 2024. protection scheme based on secret sharing for blockchain-
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Engineering 19

based construction supply chain system,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, components for enhancing hyperledger fabric performance,”
Article ID 126786, 2019. Blockchain: Research and Applications, vol. 2, no. 1, Article ID
[57] M. Sadeghi, A. Mahmoudi, and X. Deng, “Blockchain tech- 100009, 2021.
nology in construction organizations: risk assessment using [72] F. Elghaish, S. Abrishami, and M. R. Hosseini, “Integrated
trapezoidal fuzzy ordinal priority approach,” Engineering, project delivery with blockchain: An automated fnancial
Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 30, no. 7, system,” Automation in Construction, vol. 114, Article ID
pp. 2767–2793, 2022. 103182, 2020.
[58] M. Sadeghi, A. Mahmoudi, and X. Deng, “Adopting dis- [73] M. S. Kiu, F. C. Chia, and P. F. Wong, “Exploring the po-
tributed ledger technology for the sustainable construction tentials of blockchain application in construction industry:
industry: evaluating the barriers using ordinal priority ap- a systematic review,” International Journal of Construction
proach,” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Management, vol. 22, no. 15, pp. 2931–2940, 2022.
vol. 29, no. 7, 2022. [74] A. Mohammed, A. Almousa, A. Ghaithan, and L. A. Hadidi,
[59] Y. Celik, I. Petri, and Y. Rezgui, “Integrating BIM and “Te role of blockchain in improving the processes and
blockchain across construction lifecycle and supply chains,” workfows in construction projects,” Applied Sciences, vol. 11,
Computers in Industry, vol. 148, Article ID 103886, 2023. no. 19, p. 8835, 2021.
[60] M. Cheng and H. Y. Chong, “Understanding the determinants [75] A. Waqar, I. Othman, H. R. Almujibah et al., “Overcoming
of blockchain adoption in the engineering-construction in- implementation barriers in 3D printing for gaining positive
dustry: multi-stakeholders’ analyses,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, infuence considering PEST environment,” Ain Shams Engi-
Article ID 108319, 2022. neering Journal, vol. 15, no. 3, Article ID 102517, 2024.
[61] B. Amade, A. C. Ogbonna, L. C. Raphael, D. A. Obodoh, and [76] A. Waqar, I. Othman, N. Saad, M. Azab, and A. M. Khan,
O. L. Okore, “Willingness of users to adopt blockchain “BIM in green building: Enhancing sustainability in the small
technology on construction projects,” in Proceedings of the construction project,” Cleaner Environmental Systems, vol. 11,
Construction in the 21st Century Conference, Arnhem, Article ID 100149, 2023.
Netherlands, May 2022. [77] A. Waqar, L. A. Alharbi, F. Abdullah Alotaibi, I. Othman, and
[62] V. Hargaden, N. Papakostas, A. Newell, A. Khavia, and H. Almujibah, “Impediment to implementation of internet of
A. Scanlon, “Te role of blockchain technologies in con- things (IOT) for oil and gas construction project safety:
struction engineering project management,” in Proceedings of Structural equation modeling approach,” Structures, vol. 57,
the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Engineering,
Article ID 105324, 2023.
Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC), Valbonne, France,
[78] A. Waqar, I. Othman, M. Shafq Aiman et al., “Analyzing the
June 2019.
success of adopting metaverse in construction industry:
[63] M. Adaloudis and J. Bonnin Roca, “Sustainability tradeofs in
structural equation modelling,” Journal of Engineering,
the adoption of 3D concrete Printing in the construction
vol. 2023, Article ID 8824795, 21 pages, 2023.
industry,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 307, Article ID
[79] T. O. Olawumi, S. Ojo, D. W. M. Chan, and M. C. H. Yam,
127201, 2021.
“Factors infuencing the adoption of blockchain technology in
[64] M. G. Sharma and S. Kumar, “Te Implication of blockchain
the construction industry: a system dynamics approach,” in
as a disruptive technology for construction industry,” IIM
Kozhikode Society and Management Review, vol. 9, no. 2, Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Ad-
pp. 177–188, 2020. vancement of Construction Management and Real Estate,
[65] M. Das, H. Luo, and J.C.P. Cheng, “Securing interim pay- Hong Kong SAR, China, August 2021.
ments in construction projects through a blockchain-based [80] A. Waqar, K. Skrzypkowski, H. Almujibah et al., “Success of
framework,” Automation in Construction, vol. 118, Article ID Implementing Cloud computing for smart development in
103284, 2020. small construction projects,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 9,
[66] A. Cerić, Reducing Information Asymmetry and Building Trust p. 5713, 2023.
in Projects Using Blockchain Technology, Gradevinar, Zagreb, [81] A. Waqar, I. Othman, H. Almujibah, M. B. Khan, S. Alotaibi,
Croatia, 2021. and A. A. M. Elhassan, “Factors infuencing adoption of
[67] T. S. Elbashbishy, G. G. Ali, and I. H. El-adaway, “Role of digital twin advanced technologies for smart city develop-
transactional blockchain in facilitating procurement in in- ment: Evidence from Malaysia,” Buildings, vol. 13, no. 3,
ternational construction projects,” Lecture Notes in Civil p. 775, 2023.
Engineering, vol. 251, pp. 583–596, 2023. [82] J. H. Tan, S. C. Loo, N. Zainon, N. M. Aziz, and
[68] A. E. Amaludin and M. R. Bin Taharin, “Prospect of block- F. A. Mohd Rahim, “Potential functionality and workability of
chain technology for construction project management in blockchain within a building information modelling (BIM)
Malaysia,” ASM Science Journal, vol. 11, 2018. environment,” Journal of Facilities Management, vol. 21, no. 4,
[69] R. Yang, R. Wakefeld, S. Lyu et al., “Public and private pp. 490–510, 2022.
blockchain in construction business process and information [83] A. Waqar, I. Othman, D. Radu et al., “Modeling the relation
integration,” Automation in Construction, vol. 118, Article ID between building information modeling and the success of
103276, 2020. construction projects: A structural-equation-modeling ap-
[70] R. Singh, A. Gehlot, S. V. Akram et al., “Cloud manufacturing, proach,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 15, pp. 9018–23, 2023.
internet of things-assisted manufacturing and 3D printing [84] A. Waqar and W. Ahmed, Reimagining Construction Safety:
technology: Reliable tools for sustainable construction,” Unveiling the Impact of Building Information Modeling (BIM)
Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 13, p. 7327, 2021. Implementation, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2023.
[71] L. Hang and D. H. Kim, “Optimal blockchain network [85] M. A. Abuhussain, A. Waqar, A. M. Khan et al., “Integrating
construction methodology based on analysis of confgurable building information modeling (BIM) for optimal lifecycle
 3962, 2024, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/2442345, Wiley Online Library on [27/09/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
20 Journal of Engineering

management of complex structures,” Structures, vol. 60,

Article ID 105831, 2024.
[86] A. Waqar, N. Shafq, I. Othman et al., “Examining the impact
of BIM implementation on external environment of AEC
industry: A PEST analysis perspective,” Developments in the
Built Environment, vol. 17, Article ID 100347, 2024.
[87] Y. Zhou, H. Liu, Y. Liu, R. Duan, and Q. Li, “Simulation of
entropy layer in evacuated tube transport at supersonic
speed,” Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology, vol. 34,
pp. 775–780, 2014.