Biagi, Silvia (2025) BIM for public administration: Critical investigation of the European situation and implementation perspectives for the Italian case. PhD thesis, Università degli Studi di Pisa, Italy.
Abstract
The thesis presents the main activities carried out in the doctoral course to respond to the urgent need to implement the BIM method in Public Administrations (PA). The regulatory excursus at European and Italian level is outlined and analyzed, in the absence of authoritative sources converging on the subject. The centrality of the European Directive DE 24/2014 is recognized and argued, that is in the epicenter of the trigger - identified - that generated the spread of "something" that is not Charles Eastman's BIM. The relationship between BIM and Public Administration is examined and, together with the level of digitization, social and economic aspects emerge. Exhibiting the importance of the PA in the design-construction-management chain, a proposal for the implementation of the method was developed that could be extended to other European Countries.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Fiamma, Paolo |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modelling; public administration; regulatory |
| Index terms: | implementation, building information modelling, proposal, investigation |
| Subjects: | project planning, data collection methods, information systems, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Procurement, Project Management, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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