Sustainable digital construction work futures

Pink, S.; De Silva, N.; Lyall, B. and Korsmeyer, H. (2026) Sustainable digital construction work futures. Construction Management and Economics, 44(7), pp. 518-536. ISSN 0144-6193

Abstract

The often-called "twin transitions" - to digital (e.g., automated, artificial intelligence (AI) and robotic) and sustainable (e.g., net zero, clean energy) futures - are likely to have key implications for work futures in the construction industry. Yet little is known about either how these transitions will intersect or what future work roles will emerge as they proceed. To investigate this question, a futures anthropology approach is taken, and two key futures anthropology concepts are introduced: anticipatory infrastructures and anticipatory realism. The article mobilises these concepts to analyse differences between visions of work futures associated with digital and sustainability transitions, and between portrayals of construction work futures in these visions and in the imaginaries of those working in the industry. It does so through the case of the Australian construction industry. The research found that dominant technology-driven visions of construction work futures in the twin transitions, and experience-based imaginaries of people actively working in the industry represent unaligned but sometimes overlapping sets of knowledge and future expectations. In response the article highlights the need for attention to forging realistic and plausible interfaces between a construction industry in transition and an emerging workforce.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: design ethnography; digital transition; futures anthropology; sustainability transition; work futures
Index terms: ethnography, digital construction, clean energy, artificial intelligence, construction industry, realism, construction work, net zero
Subjects: operations management, artificial intelligence, energy systems, information systems, industry analysis, qualitative and interpretive research, education and knowledge transfer
Topics: Project Management, Sustainability, Digital Applications, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

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