Ibrahim, A.; Badawy, M. and Hamdy, K. (2026) Modeling interdependent constraints on modular construction: A constraint theory and fuzzy-PLS-SEM approach for developing countries. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 24(3), pp. 734-754. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to develop an integrated analytical framework to evaluate the barriers limiting modular construction adoption in residential projects within developing countries, emphasizing a structured examination of their severity and interdependencies. Design/methodology/approach – A mixed-method research design was employed. The process began with a systematic literature review and a Delphi study to identify 20 key barriers, later refined to fifteen significant indicators. These were categorized using constraint theory into physical, financial, organizational and policy groups. The analytical approach integrated two techniques: fuzzy set theory (FST) was applied to convert linguistic expert assessments into calibrated quantitative scores, addressing uncertainty in judgments; followed by partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to examine structural interdependencies among barrier categories and generate a composite barrier index. Data were collected from 371 validated professional responses from the Egyptian construction industry. Findings – The analysis reveals that financial and physical constraints are the most influential. Key barriers include high capital costs, transportation challenges, design freeze and a shortage of experienced designers. Organizational and policy-related constraints, though comparatively weaker, also remain significant. The hybrid model effectively captured uncertainty in expert input while exposing latent structural relationships, producing a robust ranking of critical barriers. Originality/value – This study proposes a novel framework that innovatively integrates FST and PLS-SEM to model both uncertainty and interdependence. Methodologically, it develops a composite barrier index for systematic prioritization. Contextually, it is uniquely tailored to data-scarce environments in developing countries, providing a practical decision-support tool for policymakers and practitioners in the modular housing sector.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | barriers; constraint theory; construction innovation; developing countries; fuzzy set theory; modular construction; PLS-SEM; residential construction |
| Index terms: | fuzzy set theory, residential construction, partial least square, research design, methodology, residential project, interdependence, modelling, judgment, analytical framework, construction innovation, modular construction, composite, Delphi method, structural equation modelling, practitioner, modular housing, developing country, capital cost, designer, construction industry, systematic literature review |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, dispute resolution, decision-making and optimization, analytical methods, practitioner, economic development, building construction, research methods, data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, materials science, research evaluation and metrics, development economics, organizational analysis, industry analysis, construction integration, profession, data collection methods, accounting and finance |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Urban Studies, Construction Materials, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, International Construction |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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