Page 57 - Read Online

Watts et al. Carbon Footprints 2025, 4, 27 https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/cf.2025.20 Page 15 of 16

5. DOI
30. Lekan, A.; Aigbavboa, C.; Babatunde, O.; Olabosipo, F.; Christiana, A. Disruptive technological innovations in construction field and
fourth industrial revolution intervention in the achievement of the sustainable development goal 9. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2022, 22,
2647-58. DOI
31. Mohy, A. A.; Bassioni, H. A.; Elgendi, E. O.; Hassan, T. M. Innovations in safety management for construction sites: the role of deep
learning and computer vision techniques. Constr. Innov. 2024. DOI
32. Yevu, S. K.; Yu, A. T.; Darko, A. Digitalization of construction supply chain and procurement in the built environment: emerging
technologies and opportunities for sustainable processes. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 322, 129093. DOI
33. Antai, I.; Lenka, S.; Achtenhagen, L. Digital platforms and the construction supply chain: trends and emerging themes in extant AEC
research. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2025, 43, 113-29. DOI
34. Wyk, L.; Kajimo-shakantu, K.; Opawole, A. Adoption of innovative technologies in the South African construction industry. Int. J.
Build. Pathol. Adapt. 2024, 42, 410-29. DOI
35. Li, X.; Liu, X.; Huang, Y.; Li, J.; He, J.; Dai, J. Evolutionary mechanism of green innovation behavior in construction enterprises:
evidence from the construction industry. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2024, 31, 159-78. DOI
36. TechUK. Unlocking value across the UK’s digital twin ecosystem. https://www.techuk.org/what-we-deliver/events/unlocking-value-
across-the-uk-s-digital-twin-ecosystem.html (accessed 2025-09-23).
37. Ramos, H. M.; Kuriqi, A.; Coronado-hernández, O. E.; López-jiménez, P. A.; Pérez-sánchez, M. Are digital twins improving urban-
water systems efficiency and sustainable development goals? Urban. Water. Journal. 2024, 21, 1164-75. DOI
38. Hassani, H.; Huang, X.; Macfeely, S. Enabling digital twins to support the UN SDGs. Big. Data. Cogn. Comput. 2022, 6, 115. DOI
39. Ketzler, B.; Naserentin, V.; Latino, F.; Zangelidis, C.; Thuvander, L.; Logg, A. Digital twins for cities: a state of the art review. Built.
Environ. 2022, 46, 547-73. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347920058_Digital_Twins_for_Cities_A_State_of_the_Art_
Review (accessed 2025-09-23).
40. Tzachor, A.; Sabri, S.; Richards, C. E.; Rajabifard, A.; Acuto, M. Potential and limitations of digital twins to achieve the sustainable
development goals. Nat. Sustain. 2022, 5, 822-9. DOI
41. Varriale, V.; Cammarano, A.; Michelino, F.; Caputo, M. The role of digital technologies in production systems for achieving
sustainable development goals. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2024, 47, 87-104. DOI
42. Saleeb, N. Digital twins and Sustainable Development Goals. In Architectural design and management in the digital age: international
perspectives. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2024;33-47. DOI
43. Oti-Sarpong, K.; Leringerm, R.; Zhang, S. A critical examination of BIM policy mandates: implications and responses. In
Construction Research Congress 2020. 2020. DOI
44. Borkowski, A. S.; Drozd, W.; Zima, K. The status of the implementation of the building information modeling mandate in Poland: a
literature review. ISPRS. Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2024, 13, 343. DOI
45. McAuley, B.; West, R.; Hore, A. The Irish construction industry’s state of readiness for a BIM mandate in 2020. In Proceedings of the
Civil Engineering Research in Ireland 2020 Conference, Cork, August 27-8, 2020, 2020;740-5. https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=schmuldistcon (accessed 2025-09-30).
46. Ganah, A.; Lea, G. A global analysis of BIM standards across the globe: a critical review. J. Proj. Manag. Pract. 2021, 1, 52-60.
https://jpmm.um.edu.my/index.php/JPMP/article/view/29153/13352 (accessed 2025-09-23).
47. Watts, G.; Mcdermott, P.; Kolo, S. Framing the barriers to construction industry transformation. Built. Environ. Proj. Asset. Manag.
2023, 13, 185-99. DOI
th
48. Gillespie, D.; McIlwaine, S. Reducing embodied carbon in the construction sector. In Proceedings of the 37 Annual ARCOM
Conference, UK, September 6-7, 2021; Scott, L., Neilson, C. J., Eds; Association of Researchers in Construction Management,
2021;744-53. https://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/b993b0702596b86a7056221aea3d0a64.pdf (accessed 2025-09-30).
49. Çıdık, M. S.; Boyd, D. Value implication of digital transformation: the impact of the commodification of information. Constr. Manag.
Econ. 2022, 40, 903-17. DOI
50. Chen, L.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, Z.; et al. Biomaterials technology and policies in the building sector: a review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2024,
22, 715-50. DOI
51. Zhang, J.; Chen, M.; Ballesteros-pérez, P.; Ke, Y.; Gong, Z.; Ni, Q. A new framework to evaluate and optimize digital transformation
policies in the construction industry: a China case study. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 70, 106388. DOI
52. Walsh, P.; Murphy, E.; Horan, D. The role of science, technology and innovation in the UN 2030 agenda. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Change. 2020, 154, 119957. DOI
53. Patel, U. R.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Burgess, A. Digital twin technology for sustainable urban development: a
review of its potential impact on SDG 11 in New Zealand. Cities 2024, 155, 105484. DOI
54. Cresswell, J. W.; Creswell, J. D. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 6th ed.; London: Sage
Publications, 2022.
55. Clark, T.; Foster, L.; Sloan, L.; Bryman, A. Bryman’s social research methods, 6th ed.; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021.
56. Byrne, D. UK sociology and quantitative methods: are we as weak as they think? Or are they barking up the wrong tree? Sociology
2012, 46, 13-24. https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1501754 (accessed 2025-09-23).
57. Phellas, C. N.; Bloch, A.; Seale, C. Structured methods: interviews, questionnaires and observation. In Researching society and
culture, 3rd ed.; London: Sage Publications, 2012; p. 182-205.