Rathnayake, B; Gunathilake, L; Edirisinghe, R and Perera, S (2025) Ecoconstruct: A blockchain-based system for carbon trading in construction projects. Construction Innovation, 25(7), pp. 213-234. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: The construction industry, contributing approximately 39% of global carbon emissions, faces challenges to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Traditional methods for estimating and managing carbon emissions suffer from inaccuracies, low transparency and data integrity issues, highlighting the need for trustworthy and efficient solutions. This paper aims to demonstrate how blockchains can enhance the accuracy of tracking carbon emissions and streamlining carbon trading, providing a robust system to manage and reduce carbon emissions effectively. Design/methodology/approach: A case study-based approach is adopted to develop a blockchain-based system (EcoConstruct) to track carbon emissions and circularity of construction materials and facilitate carbon trading in the industry. The implementation uses smart contract technology and the Beneficial Assets Ownership protocol in the Tezos blockchain to validate carbon emission tracking, carbon trading and circularity criteria. The system was evaluated and validated through expert feedback, ensuring its practical applicability and effectiveness. Findings: EcoConstruct demonstrates advancements in transparency, data integrity and efficiency in carbon estimation and trading. The system’s immutable ledger securely stores carbon emissions and their compensations using non-fungible tokens called carbon rewards. This system facilitates transparent and accountable carbon trading among stakeholders (clients, contractors and material suppliers). The findings highlight the potential of blockchains to overcome current challenges in carbon emissions management and trading in the construction industry. Originality/value: EcoConstruct provides a novel blockchain-based solution for managing carbon emissions and promoting sustainability in construction, moving beyond conceptualisation by leveraging blockchain’s decentralisation, immutability, transparency and security to enhance carbon estimation accuracy and streamline carbon trading.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | blockchain; carbon emissions; carbon trading; construction materials; smart contracts |
| Index terms: | construction material, effectiveness, ownership, smart contract, implementation, construction industry, compensation, transparency, blockchain, efficiency, case study, decentralization, carbon emission, streamlining, integrity, circularity, estimation, methodology, construction project, estimating, face, accuracy |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, computing systems, dispute resolution, building materials, financial and cost management, performance management, economics, management, professional development, political science, industry analysis, climate science, sustainable materials, psychology, digital technology, contractual arrangements, research methods, production management, health safety and environment |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Quality Management, Health and Safety, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Sustainability, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Governance |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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