Safari, K and Ghandehariun, S (2026) An integrative BIM-based life cycle assessment framework to address uncertainties: A mixed-methods study under real construction project context. International Journal of Construction Management, 26(1), pp. 54-75. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
A life cycle assessment (LCA) based on Building Information Modeling (BIM) can enhance the environmental performance of buildings from the early design phase. However, uncertainties in construction projects impact the reliability of initial LCA results. Despite growing research, a comprehensive framework to address BIM-LCA uncertainties remains absent. This study fills this gap by combining a structured literature review with scenario-based LCA analysis as a proof of concept to identify barriers and sources of uncertainty in current BIM-LCA practices. The Fuzzy Delphi method was employed with international experts to reach a consensus on 31 critical uncertainty factors. Case study results show that environmental impacts during construction vary, with uncertainties causing 2%–43% variations in the Global Warming Potential (GWP) indicator. These discrepancies stem from issues such as change orders, rework, and unexpected design modifications. The top five challenges identified by experts include limited data availability and quality, the absence of standardized BIM-LCA procedures, inadequate information flow and feedback mechanisms, inconsistencies in BIM-LCA model quality, and variability in construction materials and execution. To address these challenges, this study proposes an integrated five-phase framework designed to improve the accuracy and reliability of BIM-LCA by systematically addressing issues related to data quality, process standardization, and information flow. This study not only contributes an innovative framework for enhancing the reliability of BIM-LCA, but also lays a stepping stone towards its broader adoption in sustainable construction. Key among these is the identification of critical uncertainties, which enables more informed decision-making by designers, researchers, and policymakers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modeling; decision-making; life cycle assessment; sustainable construction; uncertainty and variability |
| Index terms: | construction material, standardization, design phase, fuzzy Delphi, variability, building information modelling, environmental performance, case study, design modification, change order, designer, construction project, variation, decision-making, environmental impact, sustainable construction, rework, life cycle assessment, literature review, information flow, global warming, accuracy |
| Subjects: | climate science, environmental impact, professional practice, operations management, design changes, sustainable construction, production management, sustainability assessment, decision-making and optimization, data collection methods, profession, data analysis and analytics, building materials, professional development, contractual condition, performance measurement, information systems, statistical analysis, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Sustainability, Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Contract Administration, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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