IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i9p3893-d356192.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Institutional Approach to Digitalization in Sustainability-Oriented Infrastructure Projects: The Limits of the Building Information Model

Author

Listed:
  • Ermal Hetemi

    (Department of Industrial Economics and Management, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Lindstedtsvägen 30, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
    Departamento de Ingenería de Organizacíon, Administración de Empresas y Estadística, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, C/José Gutiérrez Abascal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain)

  • Joaquin Ordieres-Meré

    (Departamento de Ingenería de Organizacíon, Administración de Empresas y Estadística, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, C/José Gutiérrez Abascal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain)

  • Cali Nuur

    (Department of Industrial Economics and Management, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Lindstedtsvägen 30, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

The transport sector accounts for a large share of global Co2 emissions. To mitigate the impact of climate change, several sustainability-oriented large-scale infrastructure projects such as electric road systems and expanding rail systems have recently been on the policy agenda. A parallel development that is expected to accelerate the transition of the transport sector is digitalization, which, although ongoing for many decades, has recently been augmented by concepts such as artificial intelligence (AI) and smart city technologies. The integration of these digitalization tools at the organizational level poses not only opportunities but also some challenges for the actors involved in infrastructure projects. An approach that is currently promoted in the infrastructure sector is the Building Information Model (BIM), which is a decision-making instrument that leverages various digitalization tools and applications. However, although the economic implications of BIM are widely discussed in the literature, the (inter-) organizational dynamics involving multiple actors in infrastructure projects are not fully grasped. Large infrastructure projects are sociotechnical endeavors embedded in complex institutional frames; hence the institutional norms, practices and logics in them are significant. Responding to this, this paper adopted an institutional analysis and put the BIM approach in the (inter-) organizational context in infrastructure delivery. Drawing on empirical data from three organizations in infrastructure delivery in Spain, this paper analyzed the tensions among actors during BIM adoption and implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Ermal Hetemi & Joaquin Ordieres-Meré & Cali Nuur, 2020. "An Institutional Approach to Digitalization in Sustainability-Oriented Infrastructure Projects: The Limits of the Building Information Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:9:p:3893-:d:356192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3893/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3893/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Georgatzi, Vasiliki V. & Stamboulis, Yeoryios & Vetsikas, Apostolos, 2020. "Examining the determinants of CO2 emissions caused by the transport sector: Empirical evidence from 12 European countries," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 11-20.
    2. Mattias Jacobsson & Henrik C.J. Linderoth & Steve Rowlinson, 2017. "The role of industry: an analytical framework to understand ICT transformation within the AEC industry," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(10), pages 611-626, October.
    3. Bankole Awuzie & Thabiso Godfrey Monyane, 2020. "Conceptualizing Sustainability Governance Implementation for Infrastructure Delivery Systems in Developing Countries: Success Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-13, January.
    4. Eleni Papadonikolaki & Alexander Verbraeck & Hans Wamelink, 2017. "Formal and informal relations within BIM-enabled supply chain partnerships," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(8-9), pages 531-552, September.
    5. Joaquín Ordieres-Meré & Tomás Prieto Remón & Jesús Rubio, 2020. "Digitalization: An Opportunity for Contributing to Sustainability From Knowledge Creation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    6. Lei Zhang & Zhenwei Chu & Huanbin Song, 2019. "Understanding the Relation between BIM Application Behavior and Sustainable Construction: A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    7. Hongping Yuan & Yu Yang & Xiaolong Xue, 2019. "Promoting Owners’ BIM Adoption Behaviors to Achieve Sustainable Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Gulnaz Aksenova & Arto Kiviniemi & Tuba Kocaturk & Albert Lejeune, 2019. "From Finnish AEC knowledge ecosystem to business ecosystem: lessons learned from the national deployment of BIM," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(6), pages 317-335, June.
    9. Bethan Morgan, 2019. "Organizing for digitalization through mutual constitution: the case of a design firm," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 400-417, July.
    10. Johan Larsson & Lisa Larsson, 2020. "Integration, Application and Importance of Collaboration in Sustainable Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    11. Mattias Jacobsson & Henrik Linderoth, 2010. "The influence of contextual elements, actors' frames of reference, and technology on the adoption and use of ICT in construction projects: a Swedish case study," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 13-23.
    12. Tarja M�ki & Hannele Kerosuo, 2015. "Site managers' daily work and the uses of building information modelling in construction site management," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(3), pages 163-175, March.
    13. Julie Battilana & Bernard Leca & Eva Boxenbaum, 2009. "How actors change institutions : Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship," Post-Print hal-00576509, HAL.
    14. Anna Dubois & Lars-Erik Gadde, 2002. "The construction industry as a loosely coupled system: implications for productivity and innovation," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 621-631.
    15. Florence Crespin-Mazet & Malena Ingemansson Havenvid & Ase Linne, 2015. "Antecedents of project partnering in the construction industry : the impact of relationship history," Post-Print hal-02313278, HAL.
    16. Nicholas Berente & Youngjin Yoo, 2012. "Institutional Contradictions and Loose Coupling: Postimplementation of NASA's Enterprise Information System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 376-396, June.
    17. John Kunz & Martin Fischer, 2020. "Virtual design and construction," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 355-363, April.
    18. Laddu Bhagya Jayasinghe & Daniele Waldmann, 2020. "Development of a BIM-Based Web Tool as a Material and Component Bank for a Sustainable Construction Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, February.
    19. Anne Kokkonen & Pauli Alin, 2016. "Practitioners deconstructing and reconstructing practices when responding to the implementation of BIM," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(7-8), pages 578-591, August.
    20. Malena Ingemansson Havenvid & Kajsa Hulthén & Åse Linné & Viktoria Sundquist, 2016. "Renewal in construction projects: tracing effects of client requirements," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(11), pages 790-807, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emil Velinov & Milan Maly & Yelena Petrenko & Igor Denisov & Vasko Vassilev, 2020. "The Role of Top Management Team Digitalization and Firm Internationalization for Sustainable Business," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-11, November.
    2. Koc, Kerim & Ekmekcioğlu, Ömer & Işık, Zeynep, 2023. "Developing a probabilistic decision-making model for reinforced sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    3. Yali Chen & Dan Huang & Zhen Liu & Mohamed Osmani & Peter Demian, 2022. "Construction 4.0, Industry 4.0, and Building Information Modeling (BIM) for Sustainable Building Development within the Smart City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-37, August.
    4. Yingnan Yang & Yidan Zhang & Hongming Xie, 2020. "Exploring Cultivation Path of Building Information Modelling in China: An Analysis from the Perspective of an Innovation Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Christos Korkas & Asimina Dimara & Iakovos Michailidis & Stelios Krinidis & Rafael Marin-Perez & Ana Isabel Martínez García & Antonio Skarmeta & Konstantinos Kitsikoudis & Elias Kosmatopoulos & Christ, 2022. "Integration and Verification of PLUG-N-HARVEST ICT Platform for Intelligent Management of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-24, April.
    6. Konrad Nübel & Michael Max Bühler & Thorsten Jelinek, 2021. "Federated Digital Platforms: Value Chain Integration for Sustainable Infrastructure Planning and Delivery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Hanna Obracht-Prondzyńska & Ewa Duda & Helena Anacka & Jolanta Kowal, 2022. "Greencoin as an AI-Based Solution Shaping Climate Awareness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-25, September.
    8. Naif Alaboud & Adnan Alshahrani, 2023. "Adoption of Building Information Modelling in the Saudi Construction Industry: An Interpretive Structural Modelling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-21, April.
    9. Longhui Liao & Kaixin Zhou & Cheng Fan & Yuanyuan Ma, 2022. "Evaluation of Complexity Issues in Building Information Modeling Diffusion Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, March.
    10. Henryk Dzwigol & Aleksy Kwilinski & Oleksii Lyulyov & Tetyana Pimonenko, 2024. "Digitalization and Energy in Attaining Sustainable Development: Impact on Energy Consumption, Energy Structure, and Energy Intensity," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-17, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Papachristos, George & Papadonikolaki, Eleni & Morgan, Bethan, 2024. "Projects as a speciation and aggregation mechanism in transitions: Bridging project management and transitions research in the digitalization of UK architecture, engineering, and construction industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    2. Yingnan Yang & Yidan Zhang & Hongming Xie, 2020. "Exploring Cultivation Path of Building Information Modelling in China: An Analysis from the Perspective of an Innovation Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Kassem, Mohamd & Ahmed, Ahmed Louay, 2022. "Digital transformation through Building Information Modelling: Spanning the macro-micro divide," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    4. Susanna Vass & Tina Karrbom Gustavsson, 2017. "Challenges when implementing BIM for industry change," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(10), pages 597-610, October.
    5. Ola Henfridsson & Youngjin Yoo, 2014. "The Liminality of Trajectory Shifts in Institutional Entrepreneurship," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 932-950, June.
    6. Silvestri, Raffaele & Bocconcelli, Roberta & Carloni, Elisa & Pagano, Alessandro, 2022. "Interorganizational R&D projects in clustering contexts: A resource interaction perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 343-355.
    7. Pernilla Gluch & Stina Månsson, 2021. "Taking Lead for Sustainability: Environmental Managers as Institutional Entrepreneurs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, April.
    8. Sofia Lingegård & Malena I. Havenvid & Per-Erik Eriksson, 2021. "Circular Public Procurement through Integrated Contracts in the Infrastructure Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    9. Emil Velinov & Milan Maly & Yelena Petrenko & Igor Denisov & Vasko Vassilev, 2020. "The Role of Top Management Team Digitalization and Firm Internationalization for Sustainable Business," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-11, November.
    10. Carrilho-Nunes, Inês & Catalão-Lopes, Margarida, 2022. "The effects of environmental policy and technology transfer on GHG emissions: The case of Portugal," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 255-264.
    11. Mahzouni, Arian, 2019. "The role of institutional entrepreneurship in emerging energy communities: The town of St. Peter in Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 297-308.
    12. Richard Hunt & Lauren Ortiz-Hunt, 2018. "Deinstitutionalization through Business Model Evolution: Women Entrepreneurs in the Middle East and North Africa," Chapters, in: Ladislav Mura (ed.), Entrepreneurship - Development Tendencies and Empirical Approach, IntechOpen.
    13. Modell, Sven & Yang, ChunLei, 2018. "Financialisation as a strategic action field: An historically informed field study of governance reforms in Chinese state-owned enterprises," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 41-59.
    14. H.-Ping Tserng & Cheng-Mo Chou & Yun-Tsui Chang, 2021. "The Key Strategies to Implement Circular Economy in Building Projects—A Case Study of Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    15. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    16. Jayanti, Rama K. & Raghunath, S., 2018. "Institutional entrepreneur strategies in emerging economies: Creating market exclusivity for the rising affluent," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-98.
    17. Yu Cao & Cong Xu & Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman & Nur Mardhiyah Aziz, 2022. "A Systematic Review of Green Building Development in China: Advantages, Challenges and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-29, September.
    18. Pandza, Krsto & Ellwood, Paul, 2013. "Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1112-1125.
    19. Elert, Niklas & Henrekson, Magnus, 2017. "Entrepreneurship and Institutions: A Bidirectional Relationship," Working Paper Series 1153, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 05 May 2017.
    20. Emil Evenhuis, 2017. "Institutional change in cities and regions: a path dependency approach," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(3), pages 509-526.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:9:p:3893-:d:356192. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.