Jayawardana, J; Sandanayake, M; Jayasinghe, J A S C; Kulatunga, A K and Zhang, G K (2025) Life cycle economic and social sustainability aspects of prefabricated construction: A systematic review towards the holistic sustainability. Construction Innovation, 25(7), pp. 98-138. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to investigate the state-of-the-art in economic sustainability (EcS) and social sustainability (ScS) of prefabricated construction (PFC), addressing gaps in holistic life cycle perspectives. Design/methodology/approach: A bibliometric analysis and a content-based critical review were used to synthesise literature on EcS and ScS of PFC. Findings: Results reveal that life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), social life cycle assessment and additive manufacturing are emerging themes. EcS is more extensively researched than ScS, with developed regions dominating case studies. While PFC marginally outperforms conventional methods in most EcS and ScS evaluations, critical gaps persist in indicator diversity, stakeholder representation and data availability. Challenges related to methodological immaturity and data availability are discussed in depth, leading to an improvement strategy framework proposal. The discussion emphasises how holistic sustainability assessments, circular economy (CE) principles and alignment with sustainable development goals (SDGs) can position PFC as a driver for sustainable urban development. A future research agenda should prioritise methodological advancements, case-specific studies (e.g. CE), LCSA and SDG-aligned policies and decision support systems to enhance sustainability decision-making in PFC. Originality/value: Although environmental sustainability in PFC is well-examined, economic and social dimensions remain underexplored. A holistic life cycle approach that integrates CE principles and SDGs can better reveal performance, assessment methods, system boundaries and gaps, ultimately driving global sustainable development, construction innovation and technological progress.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | circular economy; economic sustainability; life cycle; life cycle sustainability assessment; prefabricated construction; social sustainability; sustainable development goals |
| Index terms: | decision support, case study, construction innovation, life cycle assessment, sustainable development goal, methodology, decision-making, proposal, social sustainability, research agenda, sustainability assessment, circular economy, additive manufacturing, dimension, systematic literature review, life cycle, economic sustainability, sustainable development, strategy, boundaries, environmental sustainability, sustainable urban development, state of the art, bibliometric analysis |
| Subjects: | sustainable design, decision analysis, sustainability assessment, research methods, sustainability and resilience, manufacturing engineering, building construction, value management, research evaluation and metrics, research dissemination and communication, communities and social development, economic analysis, management, research management, health monitoring assessment and metrics, property law, health safety and environment, data collection methods, environmental impact, project planning |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Urban Studies, Risk Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Health and Safety, Legal Issues, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here