How digital platforms enable sustainability transitions in the built environment

Ninan, J; Zaharia, A and Bosch-Rekveldt, M (2026) How digital platforms enable sustainability transitions in the built environment. Construction Management and Economics, 44(4), pp. 300-317. ISSN 0144-6193

Abstract

Digital platforms are transforming sustainability transitions in the built environment by enabling collaboration, transparency, and efficiency. This study examines how these platforms are implemented, adopted by practitioners, and create value for industry stakeholders using the DART (Dialogue, Access, Risk-benefit, Transparency) co-creation framework. Using ethnographic methods and semi-structured interviews, we consider the case study of a Dutch digital platform provider specializing in modular wooden construction. The findings highlight major challenges in sustainability transitions, including industry complexities, inefficient practices, and resistance to change. Five key practices emerged: defining a clear platform vision, improving processes, leveraging digitalization, ensuring scalability, and fostering co-creation. These practices are synthesized into an iterative framework that extends the DART model, illustrating the interplay between digital, social, and physical elements in construction. By embedding DART within a sector-specific model, this study offers a novel perspective on digital platforms as enablers of sustainability. Ultimately, these platforms promote stakeholder collaboration, enhance transparency, and contribute to sustainability goals, such as carbon reduction and circular construction.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: built environment; co-creation; dart framework; digital platforms; sustainability transition
Index terms: complexity, practitioner, collaboration, digitalization, interview, transparency, co-creation, built environment, case study, platform, carbon reduction, efficiency
Subjects: data collection methods, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering, professional development, management, performance management, digital technology, practitioner, climate science, design process, digital design
Topics: Quality Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Information Management
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

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