Investigating the Constraints to Buidling Information Modeling (BIM) Applications for Sustainable Building Projects: A Case of China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper is improved since the previous submittal. The nature of the survey and number of respondents is much more clear. The conclusion that the Chinese government should mandate BIM has been softened.
This study is focused on the building industry in China, and the title correctly indicates this. Apparently the building industry in China is quite different than the US and Europe, where BIM is prevalent. China is a special case --- this is an interesting and important subject worth scholarly investigation.
Why is China behind? The authors conclude there are several reasons. These are spelled out in Section 5. In essence, more training is needed because managers and workers are inexperienced with BIM. Also there is not a clear "application standard." (I am not sure what this means.)
As before, the paper needs to be rewritten with a more fluent English writer. The introduction remains poor. Sustainable architecture was not created in Osaka. There is no basis for this claim. (The origin of sustainable architecture is not important to this study anyway.) the introduction should establish the importance of this subject in 1 or 2 paragraphs and then introduce the specific questions which will be answered by the study.
Section 2.2 on Constraints of BIM is all based on citations which are pretty old. Since industry practices in the US and Europe are changing so rapidly, I would suggest that this section needs some newer references, or needs to be rewritten. Also references #17, #18, #61 are likely out of date.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
I am so glad to receive your review report and thankful for hard work to my manuscript. There are detailed response report as follows.
Point 1：
Also there is not a clear "application standard." (I am not sure what this means.)
Response：
I am so sorry that I did not describe about it cleary .Actually, ''application standard" means the criteria of BIM application . A complete and good application standard will help workers and managers to use BIM technology in sustainable buidling projects fluently.
Point 2 :
As before, the paper needs to be rewritten with a more fluent English writer. The introduction remains poor. Sustainable architecture was not created in Osaka. There is no basis for this claim. (The origin of sustainable architecture is not important to this study anyway.) the introduction should establish the importance of this subject in 1 or 2 paragraphs and then introduce the specific questions which will be answered by the study.
Response:
I am so thankful to reviewer's advice to my introduction. I think it is very meaningful to improve the quality of my manuscript. Firstly, I have deleted several sentences about description to sustainable architecture in Osaka, which is irrelevant to my study. Secondly, in order to emphasize the importance of the subject, I have integrated Para 2 and Para 1 into one paragraph and changed previous sentence " Sustainabe building project can create enormous profits, due to their reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2), advanced technology, enviromental methods and cost savings " into "Due to their reductions in carabon dioxide(CO2), advanced technology , enviromental methods and cost savings".
Point 3:
Section 2.2 on Constraints of BIM is all based on citations which are pretty old. Since industry practices in the US and Europe are changing so rapidly, I would suggest that this section needs some newer references, or needs to be rewritten. Also references #17, #18, #61 are likely out of date.
Response：
I am very thankful to receive your comments. In term of your advice, I have changed several old citations in Section 2.2 of my manuscript.Also,we changed several out of date and useless references .
Once again, thank you very much for your constructive comments and suggestions which would help us both in English and in depth to improve the quality of the paper.
Kind regards
Chu Zhenwei(Corresponding author)
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
It is a well structured study with clear aims and objectives, I think the paper has developed from its original submission however I am not sure about the findings of this study in overall. They seem to be well known facts even though I think the area of the study is interesting and is very relevant to industry issues at the moment.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer：
I am very happy to receive your detailed review report and appreciate your hard work for my manuscript. There are my response report as follows.
Point 1:
It is a well structured study with clear aims and objectives, I think the paper has developed from its original submission however I am not sure about the findings of this study in overall. They seem to be well known facts even though I think the area of the study is interesting and is very relevant to industry issues at the moment.
Response:
The reviews about my findings are very thought-provening. However, I need to make an explanation about it. Actually, the constraints we selected are all possible to be key constraints to influence the BIM application in sustainable building projects.In our study, we did detailed survery and used good methods to analyze and get findings , which are key constraints to BIM appications in sustainable buiding projects. Certainly, the description of findings seem to be well konw, but compared with other constraits after detailed research, it will be meaningful .Therefore, I think the findings we got are not just well konwn ,but valuable. Thank you for your hard work and constructive comments and suggestions again
Kind regards
Chu Zhenwei(Corresponding author)
