Beach, T; Yeung, J; Ghoroghi, A and Rezgui, Y (2025) Moving automated compliance checking to the operational phase of the building life-cycle: analysis and feasibility study in the UK. International Journal of Construction Management, 25(7), pp. 840-849. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Construction regulations ensure a base level of safety of built assets. Formal checking of built assets against regulations happens at defined points in their life-cycle, and often there is limited automation involved. The movement towards digitising and automation elements of physical site inspections paves the way towards a whole life-cycle approach for compliance checking. This paper explores whole life-cycle compliance checking. It does this by extending current checking processes which are common in the design and construction phases into the operational phase of the building life-cycle, proposing that the best way to achieve this is through automated/semi-automated data capture and analysis. To test the feasibility of this concept, this paper will review existing academic literature, analyse existing regulations and conduct proof of concept testing. This paper has found that the concept of whole-lifecycle compliance checking is becoming increasingly important to better monitor and assure high risks elements of the built environment. When applied to the operational phase, it, however, becomes impractical and expensive when relying on solely manual inspections. Furthermore, there is a significant quantity of viable use cases for this approach and that there are viable technologies to leverage them.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | automated compliance checking; building management; construction digitisation; data capture |
| Index terms: | building management, feasibility study, compliance, movement, regulation, built asset, becoming, inspection, lifecycle, built environment, design and construction, automation, testing |
| Subjects: | health safety and environment, automation and robotics, asset management, quality assurance, philosophical process, health behaviours and lifestyles, contractual arrangements, professional practice, management, political science, infrastructure and transport systems, design stages, project delivery |
| Topics: | Procurement, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Quality Management, Governance, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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