Towards an Integrated Socio-Ecological Approach in Green Building Transitions: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

In view of the growing interest in green building transitions (GBTs) over the past decade, various GBT frameworks have been developed. Concurrently, a comprehensive systematic review of GBT research is yet to be conducted, leaving ambiguity surrounding the evolution and adoption of diverse models in this field. In general, existing frameworks mainly adopt socio-technical or socio-institutional approaches. Focusing on different individual practices, these studies have resulted in fragmented results. There is a lack of an integrative understanding of the socio-ecology of the GBT system. Hence, this study aims to consolidate existing research works conducted in the GBT fields and develop an integrative GBT framework towards a socio-ecological approach. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining qualitative content analysis with quantitative bibliometric methods. The findings indicated that qualitative approaches (constituting 47%, encompassing 34 articles) and modeling techniques (comprising 37%, amounting to 27 articles) emerged as the predominant research methodologies employed. Evolutionary game theory and the multi-level perspective stood out as the most prevalent theoretical frameworks utilized in studies of GBT. Noteworthy contributions to the field were observed from China (with 29 articles) and the UK (with 17 articles). Notable keywords such as “barriers” (frequency = 16) and “energy” (frequency = 11) were identified as pivotal in the analysis. Furthermore, a total of ten co-occurrence clusters were identified to classify related keywords, enhancing content relevance and pinpointing key thematic groupings. The findings highlighted the need for a new direction in future GBT research, specifically focusing on the socio-ecological perspective. This perspective not only focuses on the human dimension of technical and institutional factors but also on the exchange between the ecosystem and society. It also emphasizes the resilience and adaptability to absorb disruptions and progress towards a more desired system state. This study offers valuable contributions to the existing body of GBT literature and has implications for researchers and research institutions in this field.

1. Introduction

Following the Industrial Revolution, the global economy has heavily leaned on the unsustainable exploitation of natural resources and the disruption of vital biogeochemical cycles and processes in the biosphere [1]. The escalating emissions of greenhouse gases worldwide have significantly hastened climate change, with the ongoing upward trajectory potentially threatening the equilibrium of the carbon cycle and leading to irreversible alterations in the climate system. Environmental crises are increasingly linked to the activities of various global industries [2]. Hence, sustainable development has become a global imperative, aiming to ensure the provision of abundant resources and conducive living environments for both present and future generations. These priorities have been integrated into the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, urging all countries to take action through a collaborative global partnership.

The architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry assumes a pivotal role in sustainable development given its significant contributions to resource consumption and pollution generation. Within this context, green building emerges as a critical concept in the AEC sector’s pursuit of sustainable development. Green building encompasses various definitions, with this study adopting the definition put forth by the US Environmental Protection Agency, which characterizes it as the practice of creating and utilizing healthier and more resource-efficient models of construction, renovation, operation, maintenance, and demolition. Thus far, green building has garnered substantial attention as an effective solution for achieving sustainable goals, resulting in its widespread implementation across many countries. Moreover, it has attracted considerable scholarly interest, prompting extensive research from diverse perspectives, including green building technology, management, and industrial practices [3].

Over the past decade, research focused on green building has shifted from examining fostering or hindering factors and outcomes of the development to analyzing the transition process. Transition research has emerged as a valuable perspective contributing to the field of green building among the numerous studies. Given the intricacy of the green building production process, transition research offers a theoretical framework for investigating the underlying changes in technology and society. Green building transition (GBT) involves the transformation of socio-technical systems across various dimensions and prolonged periods with the aim of achieving more sustainable modes of production and consumption, where green buildings serve as their ultimate products [4]. GBT studies are dedicated to identifying the intrinsic drivers and barriers that shape the greening process, emphasizing the imperative of radical and fundamental changes in the long term [5]. Despite the growing recognition of the transition perspective in green building studies, the field itself remains emerging, characterized by fragmented studies that lack a comprehensive overview. Therefore, there is an urgent need to critically examine the current state of GBT, identify prominent areas of focus, analyze emerging trends, and pinpoint research gaps to develop a comprehensive knowledge map in this domain. Remarkably, of all the accomplishments in GBT studies, outcomes related to conceptual framework and modeling approaches have garnered interest. The use of conceptualizing and modeling methods has demonstrated superiority and has gained increasing attention in GBT research. These methods facilitate the inference of dynamics in complex systems, understanding of emergent phenomena, and systematic experimentation [6]. Several notable theoretical frameworks and models, including the multi-level perspective (MLP), strategic niche management, transition management, and innovation systems, have been progressively explored. Though fragmented, scholars have vigorously discussed these transition frameworks and models from various perspectives, including their advantages, shortcomings, and practical applications in GBT.

Scholars have initially directed their focus towards the methodologies and technologies involved in green building development in previous research. For instance, Blackburne et al. [7] investigated the impact of green materials and sustainable design on the performance of high-rise constructions through energy simulations. However, the study omitted the discussion of specific strategies or measures aimed at enhancing the effective implementation of their materials within industrial green building projects. Scholars have also discussed regional technological advancements and transformation, exploring the driving forces, impediments, and outcomes in regions such as India [8], Australia [9], and China [10], among others. The research mainly concentrated on the technical factors influencing green building projects or delineated issues without delving into the underlying mechanisms and offering comprehensive solutions. For instance, an unresolved question related to the strategies for fostering mutual interests, engaging key stakeholders, and expediting the theological transition of green building through interactive measures [9]. Furthermore, these studies lacked a deep correlation between technology and policy evolution, as well as ecosystem dynamics, containing the transformative impacts of innovative techniques on societal and environmental conditions and, reciprocally, how societal and environmental factors influence the technological revolution.

Other studies also research social institutions’ issues within the GBT field. Applicable topics in this domain include policy, agency networks, green economy, etc. For instance, O’Neill and Affolderbach [11] examined Vancouver’s GBT policy through the lens of the MLP, explaining the interconnectedness and relational dynamics of GBT practices within localized contexts. Similarly, Jiang and Payne [12] applied the MLP theory to dissect the regime complexity in China’s transition towards green housing, investigating the attitudes and motivations of Chinese developers. Albino and Berardi [13] explored the inter-firm relationships between Italian general contractor firms and other entities to support GBT. Furthermore, Li et al. [14] employed a three-party evolutionary game model to analyze the interaction and co-evolution among financial institutions, developers, and consumers within the context of green finance. Nonetheless, like studies in technological domains, research on the social–institutional aspects of GBT remains constrained by its fragmentation. Consequently, these fragmented outcomes often fall short of enclosing all relevant factors within the GBT system and may not declare the inside connection among all these technology, society and environment sections.

It is observed that there are actually some limitations found in the current GBT research. To further identify such an existing gap in the examination of the GBT field, as well as explore the future research direction, this study undertook a critical review to assess the current state of GBT using both quantitative bibliometric review and qualitative contextual review methods. The study aims to develop a knowledge map for GBT research through investigating major theoretical developments in this field. To achieve this aim, the objectives of the study are set as below:

• Obj. 1: To identify theoretical frameworks and models adopted in GBT research;
• Obj. 2: To examine research methods employed in the GBT studies;
• Obj. 3: To identify major areas or topics in GBT research;
• Obj. 4: To recognize the emerging trends in GBT research.

This is the first known study which seeks to contribute to the in-depth understanding of theoretical developments, methodologies, focal areas, and emerging trends within the GBT field. Specifically, the mixed-methods approach provides a comprehensive and systematic analysis of the existing literature on GBT.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Collection

A systematic literature review approach was implemented to gather data. A thorough literature search was conducted across two prominent academic databases: Scopus and Web of Science. These databases were chosen for their widespread use in citation tracking and their capability to facilitate comprehensive literature analysis. With their extensive coverage of peer-reviewed papers and a plethora of precise search functions, Scopus and Web of Science have been proven to outperform other databases such as JSTOR, EBSCOHost, and PubMed in terms of accessibility to bibliometric data [15].

The data selection process adhered to the guidelines outlined in the PRISMA 2020 checklist [16], as depicted in Figure 1,

Table 1. PRISMA 2020 item checklist for research method.

Methods	Approach
Eligibility criteria	Scopus	(TITLE-ABS-KEY (“green building”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“green architecture”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“green construction”)) AND (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“transition”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“transformation”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“shift”))
	WOS	TS = (“green building” OR “green architecture” OR “green construction”) AND TS = (transition OR transformation OR shift)
Information sources	Scopus and Web of Science
Search strategy	Peer-reviewed journal articles published in English with digital availability before April 2025.
Selection process	Two reviewers manually screened the outcomes of the publications retrieved, including title, keyword, abstract, and full text. Each reviewer worked independently before combining their findings.
Data collection process	Data from the publications were collected by manually reviewing the publications for the research theoretical frameworks, aims, methodologies, focus, findings, and limitations.
Data items	A table was created listing all outcomes for which data were sought in terms of GBT research.
Study risk of bias assessment	Two reviewers manually screened the outcomes of the publications retrieved, including title, keyword, abstract, and full text. Each reviewer worked independently before combining their findings. This process was used to eliminate bias.
Effect measures	The effect measures were produced using percentage values
Synthesis methods	The tabulation of the study featured theoretical frameworks and research focus of GBT publications. The networking and timeline figures presented research themes, hotspots, and trends in the field.
Certainty assessment	The assessment certainty was measured through the modularity Q value and the mean silhouette score of cluster analysis, as well as comparisons with previous studies

and

Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria used for PRISMA screening.

No.	Inclusion Criteria	Exclusion Criteria
1	Journal articles	Non-journal articles
2	Articles available in full/Articles with full text	Articles with only the abstract
3	Articles in English	Articles in languages other than English
4	Article with a relevant subject of green building transition (e.g., Environmental Sciences and Construction Building Technology)	Article with an irrelevant subject within Subject area/categories (e.g., chemistry, toxicology and pharmacology)
5	Non-duplicate records	Duplicate records
6	All published articles (2011–2024)	-
7	The title, keywords and abstract of the article related to green building projects or green construction	The title, keywords and abstract of the article not related to green building projects or green construction
8	The title, keywords and abstract of the article based on the transition lens (long-term and underlying changes)	The title, keywords and abstract of the article not based on the transition lens (long-term and underlying changes)
9	The full article related to green building projects or green construction	The full article not related to green building projects or green construction
10	The full article discusses the transition lens (long-term and underlying changes)	The full article does not discuss based on transition lens (long-term and underlying changes)

. A SPIDER framework was employed to design the search strategy:

🡒

Sample: Peer-reviewed journal articles published in English with digital availability before April 2025;

🡒

Phenomenon of Interest: Transition related to green building, encompassing technology, policy, economy, etc.;

🡒

Design: Published literature of any research design;

🡒

Evaluation: Theoretical frameworks, research aims and methodologies, research focus and findings, and research limitations;

🡒

Research Type: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods peer-reviewed journal articles.

The paper selection process was rigorous, with only peer-reviewed journal articles published before April 2025 being considered. The earliest paper was published in 2011. Conference papers were excluded from the study. Additionally, papers not written in English or lacking digital availability as full texts were also omitted. Irrelevant papers, such as those pertaining to chemistry, medicine, psychology, and mathematics, were deleted. No cross-disciplinary studies were found during the review process. Redundancy was also eliminated when merging papers from the two databases. The titles, keywords, and abstracts of the 518 extracted articles were then examined to determine if the original research included data related to GBT. Subsequently, the full-text version of relevant articles was selected, resulting in a final sample size of 72 (Appendix A).

2.2. Data Analyses

2.2.1. Qualitative Content Analysis

Qualitative content analysis was conducted inductively by thoroughly examining the accepted records. The qualitative method comprises five steps: compiling, disassembling, reassembling, interpreting, and concluding. A structural framework was developed based on previous studies, e.g., [17], to conduct the qualitative analysis (shown in

Table 3. Structural dimensions of qualitative content analysis.

Structural Dimensions	Criteria of Analysis
Publication details	Article title Year
Theoretical frameworks	3. Theoretical frameworks (MLP/strategic niche management/transition management/innovation systems/…)
Research aims and methodologies	4. Design (exploratory/descriptive/causal) 5. Approach (qualitative/quantitative/mixed) 6. Procedure (case study/survey/modeling/narrative qualitative research) 7. Data source (primary/secondary/both) 8. Data collection (bibliographic/interviews/focus group/questionnaires/simulation)
Thematic data	9. Research aims/questions 10. Research focus 11. Research topics 12. Key findings 13. Research gaps

). Initially, metadata pertaining to each paper, including the publishing details, research methodologies, thematic data, and adopted theoretical frameworks, were extracted and compiled. These metadata were then systematically coded and recorded on a summary sheet. They were then put into context with each other to create themes for the foundation of the descriptive and thematic analysis, and finally they contributed to developing a concluded knowledge map.

2.2.2. Bibliometric Analysis (Quantitative Method)

CiteSpace is an analytic visualization tool commonly used for citation tracking that enables the analysis of trends and patterns in the scientific literature. It has been widely adopted to explore potential knowledge and map knowledge domains within different research fields [18]. CiteSpace enables researchers to utilize quantitative methods based on betweenness centrality metrics to identify and track the essence of a research front as it evolves, along with the highest keyword–time trends and the strongest citation bursts. In this study, CiteSpace (version 6.3.R1, 64-bit) was adopted for bibliometric analysis, producing visualized graphs and networking for GBT studies.

CiteSpace is primarily designed to handle records from Web of Science. Although the software offers a tool to convert metadata from other databases to Web of Science format, the automatic conversion did not efficiently generate data for visualization. Therefore, all records were searched in Web of Science for a second time, and papers included in Scopus but excluded in Web of Science were added to the dataset manually. This approach also helped eliminate duplicated records with spelling differences between the two databases.

For the analysis parameters, the time slicing was set to “2011 JAN–2024 DEC” to include all papers in the sample data, as the first article was published in January 2011. Each time slice represented one year. The “Cosine” method was used to calculate network connection strength. Other default settings in CiteSpace were adopted, such as “K = 25”, “Top N = 50 per slice”, and “Top 1% in each time slice”.

To achieve the research aim, the following analyses were included in the study:

• Institution and country analysis: Explore the contributions and collaboration relationships among different institutions and countries to show the geographical distribution;
• Keyword analysis: Examine the distribution and frequency of occurrence of keywords to reflect the disciplinary structure and focus. This includes keywords co-occurring analysis, cluster analysis, and timeline visualization;
• Research process analysis: Identify the keywords with the strongest citation burst to reflect the historical development of research hotspots and highlight current research focuses. This can inspire scholars to conduct follow-up studies.

Figure 2 provides an overview of the review procedures, where Obj. 1–4 represent the fulfillment of Objectives 1–4 as introduced in Section 1.

3. Results

3.1. Trend of Publications

Figure 3 illustrates the number of annual publications in studies related to GBT (as of the end of March 2024). As a relatively new research field with few studies, GBT only emerged in the last decade. Since 2010, when green building development entered into the phase known as transition and reorganization, GBT studies have gained momentum in response to green building development. In the initial six years (2011–2016), GBT studies received little attention, with at most three publications per year. Papers published in this period mainly aimed to investigate isolated issues in green building developments or describe specific phenomena. For example, Ahn et al. [19] conducted a study focusing on the experience levels, abilities, and expectations related to green building in American construction companies. Mellross and Fraser [20] examined Edmonton’s green building plan and policy in 2012. Similarly, Chang et al. [21] conducted a review of policy systems aimed at facilitating the sustainability transition in the construction sector in China. These studies tend to adopt a qualitative approach. Subsequently, in 2017, there was a sharp increase in GBT publications when the innovation and knowledge perspective was introduced for the first time. This situation could be explained by the adoption of the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda in 2015, which proposed 17 Sustainable Development Goals for every sector, including the AEC industry, calling for a transformative change with a radical structural transition. Therefore, it is reasonable that GBT studies experienced a boom in acclimating to the trend of green building development. Finally, the last seven years (2018–2024) have witnessed a generally rising trend in publication numbers, with more quantitative research conducted. This period has also seen the adoption of various transition frameworks, models, and perspectives to study GBT, including government policy, e.g., [22,23], and actor relations, e.g., [14,24].

3.2. Publications by Research Method

Figure 4 presents the methodological procedure employed in the field of GBT studies. The majority of the papers (47%, 34 articles) adopted a qualitative approach, while the remaining articles were divided between quantitative and mixed methods (32%, 23 articles and 21%, 15 articles, respectively). In terms of research design, descriptive research constituted the largest proportion of the records (50%, 36 articles), followed by causal research (40%, 29 articles) and exploratory research (10%, 7 articles). This distribution can be attributed to the fact that GBT is a relatively nascent research area, while green building and social–technical transition studies have been established for a longer period. Instead of starting from scratch to generate research questions, scholars tend to leverage existing transition theories and knowledge to gain deeper insights into the works of green building development and the factors associated with specific outcomes. However, the identification of precise cause-and-effect relationships in this context remains limited, necessitating further exploration. Furthermore, modeling emerged as the most popular procedure (37%, 27 articles), followed by case studies (29%, 21 articles) and narrative qualitative research (24%, 17 articles). These procedures were frequently employed to provide detailed descriptions of GBT phenomena. Conversely, only seven articles (10%) adopted survey investigations to examine variable causality.

In relation to the sources and collection of data, the majority of the examined literature is predicated upon secondary data (50%, 36 articles). Conversely, 21 articles (29%) utilized primary data, while 15 articles (21%) adopted both sources. Regarding data collection, the most prevalent methods used were literature reviews (26%, 19 articles). The approach also served as a foundation for mixed-methods approaches, which were combined with other qualitative or quantitative investigations. Simulation approaches (24%, 17 articles) were typically employed in conjunction with modeling studies. Additionally, fifteen articles (21%) adopted interviews, and three articles (4%) utilized questionnaires to collect data. It is noteworthy that one article employed focus groups as a data collection approach, which also sought to explore innovative tools or approaches to studying GBT.

The following sections of this review will present a further discussion of the research methodologies utilized in studies related to GBT. This analysis will be approached with a particular focus on the thematic and topical relevance of each article, enabling a comparative evaluation of their efficacy in addressing specific research questions or objectives. Additionally, this analysis aims to identify existing gaps in the current literature by highlighting underutilized or overlooked research methodologies within the field of GBT.

3.3. Theoretical Frameworks Adopted in GBT Literature

Transition is a co-evolutionary process that takes place within various framework conditions and contexts. It necessitates the implementation of diverse strategies, abilities, and resources, and the domain of GBT is no exception. GBT exhibits distinct characteristics, such as complexity, the involvement of multiple stakeholders, and the integration of different sectors. Consequently, research in this field greatly benefits from the application of modeling approaches. Conceptual frameworks and models serve as simplified, stylized, and formalized representations of the GBT reality, offering valuable insights into its dynamics. The utilization of theoretical models in GBT studies is summarized in

Table 4. Theoretical frameworks and models adopted in GBT study.

Models	Articles	Research Methods	Focuses	Contents
MLP	O’Neill and Affolderbach [11]	Case study	Specific practice	Adopt MLP to explain capitalist logistics of place-based GBT practices.
	Zhang and He [24]	Case study	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	How actor roles and their power relation influence GBT.
	Jiang and Payne [12]	Survey	Policy and government governance	Regime complexity, drivers, and barriers of China’s green housing transition from the developers’ perspective.
	Friedman and Rosen [25]	Case study	Policy and government governance	Interurban coalition enables urban actors to facilitate GBT.
	O’Neill and Gibbs [22]	Case study	Policy and government governance	Analysis of the failure of the zero carbon homes agenda in the UK.
	Gibbs and O’Neill [26]	Narrative qualitative research	Policy and government governance	The recent development of national UK policy on green building.
	O’Neill and Gibbs [27]	Narrative qualitative research	Actor: Green entrepreneurs	The role of green entrepreneurs in socio-technical transitions of the green building sector.
Strategic Niche Management	Ornetzeder and Sinozic [28]	Case study	Sector coupling	How protection in such a niche, in combination with organizational path dependency, supports the integration of renewable energy in residential buildings.
Innovation Systems	Jain et al. [29]	Case study	Policy and government governance	Assessing governance of sectoral innovation and niche formation of green buildings and other low-energy buildings.
	Siva et al. [30]	Case study	Policy and government governance	Benefits and limitations of Singapore’s sectoral innovation system in spurring an energy transition in the building sector.
Evolutionary Game Theory	Li, Zheng and Zeng [14]	Modeling	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	How green finance impacts the behaviors of bank and financial institutions, developers, and consumers to drive GBT.
	Yin et al. [31]	Modeling	Policy and government governance	Assessing the governance mechanism of the green transformation of the building material industry among building material enterprises, government, building developers and building consumers.
	Lu et al. [32]	Modeling	Policy and government governance	Evaluate the impact of incentive policies in China on developers during the transition to green building.
	Zhang et al. [33]	Modeling	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	Explores the strategic interactions among government, enterprises, and consumers within the green building supply chain.
	Yang et al. [34]	Modeling	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	The dynamic interaction process between the enterprise, government, and consumer during the green transformation of construction enterprises.
	Mei et al. [35]	Modeling	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	The interactions of small- and medium-sized building material enterprises, banks, and third-party intermediaries within the intellectual property pledge financing framework.
	Wang et al. [36]	Modeling	Technology and technique	Dynamic strategic evolution between the government and manufacturers to develop intelligent technology that promotes prefabricated building.
	Si et al. [37]	Modeling	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	The strategic interactions among the government, shopping center investors, and tenants in green building design and the global energy-saving renovation market.
	Zhao et al. [38]	Modeling	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	How different carbon tax policies influence the engagement of government, suppliers, and developers in the low-carbon development of green buildings.
	Wang and Zhu [39]	Modeling	Actor: Relationship and coordinate	How strategies of government and developers in promoting green buildings change and affect consumer acceptance.
Dissipative structure	Xue et al. [40]	Modeling	Specific practice	Examines whether China’s green building industry can transform from a disordered state to an ordered state by continuously exchanging material, energy, and information with the external environment.
Ecological footprint model	Li [41]	Modeling	Specific practice	The impact of green financing on the green transformation of urban housing projects of small and medium-sized enterprises in Guangdong Province.
Agent-Based Model	Khansari and Hewitt [42]	Modeling	Actor: Occupants	Builds an agent-based model for the simulation of occupants’ choices and behaviors in GBT.
	Meng et al. [43]	Modeling	Actor: Customers	How customer behavior related to green building products can be transitioned to manufacturers.

, which provides an overview of the models adopted in the reviewed literature. Despite the potential benefits, it is worth noting that conceptualizing and modeling approaches have not yet gained widespread popularity in this area. This can be attributed to previous research primarily focusing on specific practices rather than considering GBT as a process of structural changes embedded in a holistic system. However, an increasing number of scholars are now inclined to employ conceptualized frameworks and models to enhance their understanding of structural changes in GBT systems and to examine and facilitate specific outcomes in the field.

3.3.1. Multi-Level Perspective

The MLP is a theoretical framework that draws on middle-range and market theories, conceptualizing the dynamic patterns of transition as a non-linear process that involves the interaction effect of three levels: niche, region, and landscape [44,45]. Figure 5 provides a basic representation of the MLP. The MLP has emerged as an effective framework for analyzing socio-technical transitions to sustainability and has become one of the most widely used models in the GBT field. Its application has contributed significantly to the advancement of knowledge in the field by providing a comprehensive and systematic understanding of the complex interactions between different levels and actors in the transition process. Research utilizing the MLP framework in the field of GBT has undergone continuous development since its inception, with a primary focus on policy and agencies. The research procedure typically involves the integration of qualitative methods. Notably, David Gibbs and Kirstie J O’Neill have made significant contributions to this field of study. Their work employed the MLP framework to analyze GBT in the UK, exploring various aspects such as the role of the green economy, entrepreneurs, and government policy.

3.3.2. Strategic Niche Management

The strategic niche management framework is an extension of the MLP, with a specific focus on transformations at the niche level [46]. This framework was developed to gain insights from experiments and understand the necessary conditions for niches to break through into the mainstream and replace the existing regime. In GBT, the strategic niche management framework was adopted to emphasize the practical implementation of a specific scenario. Reference [28] explored strategies to protect and nurture niches within sector coupling, with the aim of facilitating and accelerating the overall transition process of green residential buildings. The research findings demonstrate that the implementation of protective niche management, supported by path dependency in organizational routines and culture, can provide favorable conditions for inter-sectoral innovation.

3.3.3. Innovation Systems

The innovation systems framework is an approach developed to understand innovation, dating back to the 1980s [47]. In transition studies, the innovation systems approach posits that change can be attributed to both collective and individual actions within innovation systems [48]. By identifying the elements that impede the development of the entire system, the innovation systems framework enables the analysis of transition dynamics from an innovation perspective. In the context of GBT studies, the innovation systems framework has been employed to analyze sectoral innovation, thereby examining the role of government institutions and governance in facilitating GBT [29,30].

3.3.4. Evolutionary Game Theory

The adoption of evolutionary game theory in GBT research has enabled the analysis of agencies’ interactions in various sector contexts. Evolutionary game theory, in contrast to classical game theory, emphasizes the dynamics of strategy change during the long-term transition process. This is typically achieved through mathematical simulation, which allows for a deeper understanding of the co-evolutionary mechanism of GBT. In the last five years, there has been a notable rise in the utilization of evolutionary game theory, with a particular emphasis on the relationships and coordination of key stakeholders throughout the process of green transformation in the construction sector, as well as the impacts of these interactions on technological advancements [36] and strategic evolution [31,32]. One notable advantage of evolutionary game theory is its ability to include multi-party relationships in research, unlike traditional bilateral relations. Additionally, evolutionary game theory provides a quantitative approach to GBT research, thereby enhancing the precision of measurements and objectivity in analysis. For example, Li, Zheng, and Zeng [14] have constructed a three-party evolutionary game model aimed at quantifying the conditions for achieving an evolutionary stable equilibrium among a tripartite relationship of financial institutions, green building developers, and consumers. Through their research, they have discovered the cooperative behavior and developmental patterns of these entities.

3.3.5. Dissipative Structure

From the thermodynamics concept, dissipative structures refer to open systems that require input to sustain work. In the context of GBT, this theory has been utilized as a reference to explore how the green building industry can transit from a disordered state to an ordered state through a continuous exchange of material, energy, and information with the external environment. This perspective offers a groundbreaking approach to studying the dynamic characteristics and mechanisms of GBT by considering the industry as a complex and open system. The application of dissipative structures also provides a quantitative analysis that allows for the measurement of the industry’s development status. However, it is important to note that this model has primarily been adopted within the specific context of China, addressing a binary question of “Yes or No” at present, i.e., to assess whether the current green building industry in China can be classified as a dissipative structure [23,40]. Further development is needed to explore its potential in future research.

3.3.6. Ecological Foot-Print Model

The ecological footprint serves as a resource-accounting instrument designed to quantify the extent of the Earth’s regenerative capacity required by a specific activity. Different from conventional transition frameworks, the ecological footprint model emphasizes both societal and biospheric conditions, calculating resource exchanges between human activities and the natural environment. Consequently, scholars are empowered to measure the total ecological carrying capacity of cities and determine the current GBT process. Notably, within the extant literature, only Li [41] introduced an ecological-footprint-based model for evaluating the green transformation of urban housing initiatives in Guangdong Province, exemplifying the novelty of the ecological footprint model within the realm of GBT.

3.3.7. Agent-Based Model

The agent-based model focuses on the behavior of human agents at the individual level, providing a platform to incorporate heterogeneity when predicting agents’ responses to interactions between individuals or external conditions [49]. Similar to evolutionary game theory, the agent-based model offers a quantitative and predictable modeling tool to describe phenomena within complex GBT systems [42,43]. However, the agent-based model specifically emphasizes the role of occupants and customers and how their behavior interacts with external conditions, adopting a perspective of technology adoption and diffusion research.

In summary, in addition to the traditional models that are widely used in transition studies, various interdisciplinary modeling approaches have been introduced into the GBT area to understand the underlying mechanisms of the dynamic transition process. In the discussion section, we will further explore the relationship between the adoption of models and the research focus.

The shift from qualitative to quantitative research in the GBT domain necessitates the application of quantification methods to measure GBT dynamics and interactions. Consequently, interdisciplinary models such as evolutionary game theory and dissipative structure theory have gained increasing prominence in the past five years. However, these models are still in the early stages of development and are primarily utilized to explain specific outcomes rather than forming a comprehensive knowledge system. It is anticipated that an increasing number of new models, derived from various disciplines such as sociology, eco-systematics, and economics, will be adopted in GBT research. This trend may potentially lead to the emergence of novel theoretical systems in the field.

3.4. Main Contents of GBT Research

After conducting a thorough analysis, the research keywords, research objectives, and significant findings were systematically coded and examined. Given the intricate nature of the transition process and the involvement of multiple sectors, research on transitions is conducted across various disciplines, domains, and research fields. This broad scope offers scholars multiple entry points and approaches to investigate this large-scale societal change. Consequently, GBT studies have developed different angles and dimensions, drawing from diverse epistemological and disciplinary backgrounds. Loorbach et al. [50] have succinctly summarized three prominent perspectives on sustainability transition: (1) socio-technical perspective, (2) socio-institutional perspective, and (3) socio-ecological perspective, which can serve as valuable references in the context of the GBT review.

From the socio-technical perspective, scholars directed their attention towards the iterative nature of technology and its evolution within the context of green building construction, covering an exploration of technological advancements, barriers and facilitators to adoption, and mechanisms for knowledge dissemination. Noteworthy contributions by Blackburne et al. [7], Wang et al. [36], and Yang et al. [51] shed light on the transformative impact of specific cutting-edge technologies on the AEC industry with regard to green building practices. Nykamp [48], Abuzeinab et al. [52], Martek et al. [9], Bijivemula et al. [8], and Fastenrath [53] delved into the challenges faced by both developed and developing nations, elucidating the technological hurdles impeding the widespread adoption of GBT. Siva et al. [30], Ornetzeder and Sinozic [28], and Wang et al. [54] undertook research to explore the trajectory of innovation in green building technology within collaborative sectoral frameworks. Lastly, Preller et al. [55] delved into the dynamics of interactive knowledge generation within the realm of GBT in urban settings.

Then, based on a socio-institutional perspective, three sub-subjects were identified: (1) politics and governance, (2) politics and governance, and (3) transition geography. The topic of green building policy, incentives, and the governance of public agencies in various developed and developing countries is widely discussed. Research conducted by Chang et al. [21], Mellross and Fraser [20], Wu et al. [56], Nykamp [57], and Porfiriev et al. [58] have presented comprehensive summaries of regional green building policies, their evolution, and the mix of initiatives through literature reviews and narrative research. Studies by Gibbs and O’Neill [26], Fan and Wu [59], MacAskill [60], Xie et al. [61], and Gyimah et al. [62] have quantitatively analyzed the causal relationship between green policies and economic development, as well as the financial performance associated with green building practices. Furthermore, the works of Adamson and Medeiros [63], Lu et al. [32], and Simpeh and Smallwood [64] have demonstrated how government incentives serve as catalysts for promoting green building production.

The socio-institutional perspective delved into the intricate dynamics among diverse stakeholders and actors within the GBT system, including their interactions, collaborations, and mutual influences. Scholars frequently employed evolutionary game theory to model and analyze these research inquiries pertaining to two- or three-party interactions across diverse economic and political scenarios, e.g., [14,32,33,34,35,37,38,39]. Moreover, scholars have also examined the individual actions of various isolated entities, such as developers [12], green entrepreneurs [27,65], occupants [42,66], among others.

Transition geography has surfaced as a cutting-edge subject in the past five years, integrating socio-spatial and multi-scalar interrelations within the GBT processes. Notably, scholars such as Friedman and Rosen [25], Strambach [67], and Faulconbridge [68] have investigated the dissemination of green knowledge across diverse spatial dimensions, exploring influential factors and the concept of path dependence.

Lastly, the socio-ecological perspective is a relatively new angle in GBT research, also gaining prominence in the past five years. Li [41] explored the influence of green financing on the green evolution of small and medium-sized enterprise urban housing projects in Guangdong Province, employing ecological footprint assessment and a double difference model. Additionally, Xue et al. [40] investigated the transition of the green building industry in China through dissipative structure theory, highlighting obstacles and suggesting sustainable development strategies informed by entropy calculations and modeling.

A detailed examination of the distribution of research themes in the field of GBT is further discussed in Section 4.1.

3.5. Contributing Regions and Cross-Country Collaborations

Figure 6 depicts the networking of countries, providing a view of the geographic distribution of GBT studies. To optimize the graph’s readability and conciseness, the label threshold value of 2 was implemented to hide labels associated with low-frequency nodes. This was able to accentuate the significance of key nodes within the graph. This network encompasses 29 nodes and 37 links. The nodes symbolize various countries, with the size of each node signifying the number of articles published in the region during the selected period. The links illustrate the collaborative relationships between countries, with the thickness of each line indicating the intensity of such cooperation. The color scheme in the network corresponds to the timeline in the unit of year. The concentric rings on the nodes signify the year of citation, while the colors on the links represent the temporal orders of co-occurrence for the first time. Additionally, betweenness centrality measures the percentage of shortest paths in a network to which a given node belongs, highlighting the pivotal positions these countries hold in the research area. Nodes with high betweenness centrality are marked in the purple rings in the network.

As indicated by Figure 6, China (with 29 articles) and the UK (with 17 articles) are the leading contributors to the field of GBT research, with high betweenness centrality scores of 0.18 and 0.38, respectively. Construction is one of the pillar industries having significant environmental impacts in China. This could explain the country’s heightened academic attention to GBT.

In terms of institutions actively involved in GBT research, the University of Hull and Cardiff University have made the most significant contributions, with a total of 5 articles and 3 articles, respectively. Notably, both of these institutions are located in the UK, which aligns with the observed geographical distribution of regional contributions. Though China boasts the highest frequency of publications on the topic at hand, it is important to highlight that no significant contributing institutions have been observed. This can be attributed to the dispersed nature of research in China, which is often conducted across various universities and institutions. The concentration of publications in relation to geography and timeline reveals that in the early stages, the majority of studies were generated in developed countries such as the UK, Australia, and the USA. However, in China, most articles have been concentrated in the years 2022–2023, indicating a growing interest in GBT research among Chinese scholars. While developed countries have occupied a pioneer status, recent studies from China have surpassed their counterparts in number, whereas there is still a research gap in other developing countries, with a low frequency of GBT studies. Furthermore, the results show weak collaboration links between developed and developing countries in the GBT field. Cities have been acknowledged as the most appropriate scale for addressing environmental and climate issues, and are frequently used as units for analyzing policy, economy, and social activities in GBT academic discourse [44]. Nonetheless, cities that have implemented initiatives and social contexts exhibit considerable variation both within and across countries, resulting in varying degrees of success in promoting green building practices at the local level [5]. These discrepancies may present challenges for cross-regional collaborative efforts in GBT academic circles.

3.6. Research Hotspots (Keywords)

Within the constraints of the sample size, this study employed keyword analysis as a means to investigate the disciplinary structure and focus within the field of GBT. Specifically, three distinct methods were utilized: co-occurring analysis, cluster analysis, and timeline visualization.

Table 5. Top 9 high-frequency keywords.

No.	Keyword	Frequency	Centrality
1	Barriers	16	0.63
2	Energy efficiency	11	0.29
3	Evolutionary game	9	0.11
4	Policy	9	0.12
5	Socio-technical transition	8	0.1
6	Technology	8	0.13
7	Multi-level perspective	7	0.06
8	Energy	7	0.08

presents a comprehensive overview of the top eight high-frequency keywords and their corresponding centrality values. In this table, keywords that were deemed low pertinence, such as “green building”, “sustainability”, and “industry”, have been excluded. Furthermore, identical words with slight variations, such as “socio-technical transition”, “socio-technical transitions”, “sociotechnical transition”, and “sociotechnical transitions” have been merged. The analysis reveals that the most frequently mentioned keywords include “barriers” with a frequency of 16, followed by “energy efficiency” with a frequency of 11. Other frequently mentioned keywords include “policy”, “evolutionary game”, “socio-technical transition”, and “technology”. Notably, “barriers” exhibits the highest betweenness centrality value of 0.63, indicating its significance within the research field under investigation. These keywords have been identified as pivotal elements within the realm of study.

In order to more effectively analyze discrete data and identify the relevance of keywords, cluster analysis was performed to classify and rank them. Cluster analysis is a commonly employed data-mining procedure within bibliometric research to determine latent patterns and groupings within a dataset [69,70]. It serves as a statistical technique for performing content analysis, as opposed to testing relationships among variables as in regression analysis [71]. In the field of bibliometrics, CiteSpace utilizes a clustering algorithm founded on modularity [72] and silhouette [73]. This software is capable of automatically detecting sets of closely associated keywords and organizing them into clusters based on their interconnections, with each cluster representing a distinct research domain. Figure 7 showcases the essential clusters, which are depicted according to both their contour and size. The modularity Q value was found to be 0.5989, which is greater than 0.3, and the mean silhouette score was 0.8511, which is greater than 0.5. These values indicate a high level of credibility in the clustering effect and results obtained. The 10 clusters have been numbered in descending order of size and include #0 green building sector, #1 SEIR model, #2 achieving green building, #3 sustainable building design, #4 decoding strategies, #5 government building, #6 green building production decision, #7 dynamics, #8 integrating governmental intervention, #9 knock-out effect, and #10 path.

To provide a visual representation of the co-occurrence of keywords, a timeline visualization was created (Figure 8). In this visualization, the Y-axis represents the cluster number, while the X-axis denotes the publication year. Keywords within each cluster are represented by cross-nodes. The size of a node corresponds to the frequency of the keyword. The co-occurrence relationship between keywords is illustrated by lines connecting the nodes. The timeline visualization offers insights into the time span and research evolution of each cluster, showcasing the progression and development of research within the field.

Researchers initially focused on topics within the clusters of #0 green building sector and #3 sustainable building design (2011–2015). The high-frequency keywords describe the primary focus of this period, encompassing barriers, technology, energy, and climate change, thereby indicating the construction sector’s initial response to environmental concerns. These initiatives predominantly correlate with specific technical advancements and sustainable building practices. Subsequently, a discernible surge in the volume of keywords within clusters of #1 SEIR model, #2 achieving green building, #4 decoding strategies, #5 government building, and #7 dynamics was observed. This observation suggests a shift in GBT research from static and fragmentary issues, such as analysis of specific outcomes, e.g., [19,20,21] and isolated hindrance or driving factors, e.g., [74], towards a more comprehensive exploration of collaborative dynamics among various actor groups. The examination of the government’s strategies on the evolution of stakeholders’ interactions emerged as an essential focus, while analytical tools like the SEIR model, agent-based modeling, and evolutionary game analysis were extensively employed to illuminate the interplay among diverse stakeholders. Post-2022, the cluster of #8 integrating governmental intervention began to emerge. The prominent terms in this cluster, as per Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI), encompass green construction supply chain management, ecological modernization, public–private partnerships, and the integration of governmental interventions. This trend underscores a research trajectory towards a more comprehensive and integrated understanding of system dynamics within the GBT domain in recent years. Then, the emergence of cluster #9, the knock-out effect, was only observed in 2022. This cluster garnered significant attention, as it explored the consequences of removing specific components or barriers on the success and effectiveness of transitioning towards green building practices. This concept plays a crucial role in helping researchers comprehend the critical factors and elements required to achieve sustainable and environmentally friendly building practices. Cluster #10 path existed during the whole 25-year period; however, no high-frequency keywords were identified. This may be due to the similar intrinsic concepts of the terms “path” and “transition”. Therefore, “path” has consistently been present as a cluster in the study of GBT.

3.7. Frontiers of Research

The concept of “research frontier” originated in the field of information science and was first introduced by the bibliometrician Price in 1965. It is used to depict the dynamic nature of a research field [75]. The identification of research frontiers in the realm of GBT research was accomplished by the burst detection algorithm in CiteSpace. Burst terms, characterized by their significant surge of keyword frequency within specific timeframes, serve as valuable indicators of research trends during those periods, as well as the shared interests of academic communities. To ensure the production of readable results of high quality, we established a minimum duration of 2 and set the γ value to 0.5. Figure 9 visually represents the top eight explosive keywords acquired as a result of this analysis.

The results indicate that the research process in the field of GBT lacks clear division periods based on different research emphases. However, certain research trends can still be identified. Firstly, the exploration of technical feasibility and technology transition remains consistent throughout the research process, as evidenced by the keywords “innovation”, “technology”, and “energy”. Nevertheless, the discussion regarding this aspect shows a concentration in the first half of the previous decade, while the keyword “dynamics”, indicating the research focus on more comprehensive systematic evolution, shows a concentration in the second half. From 2014, scholars shifted their focus towards a social–institutional perspective in GBT studies, as indicated by the burst keyword “multi-level perspective”. Since 2017, there has been a growing emphasis on the regime side within this social–institutional research, highlighted by the keywords “policy” and “incentives”. The most recent burst terms indicate a future research direction in the field of GBT. The most recent burst terms indicate a future research direction in the field of GBT. In addition to regulatory considerations, the inclusion of the keyword “sustainable development” highlights the positioning of green building production within a comprehensive framework of sustainable transformation, e.g., [35,37]. This integration of social and ecological perspectives aims to drive the progress and transition towards sustainable green building practices.

4. Discussion

4.1. A Perspective–Focus Framework

Based on the findings obtained from the thematic analysis, a perspective–focus framework has been developed to present a more systematic and comprehensive summary of research in the field of GBT (as depicted in Figure 10). The X-axis of the framework represents the GBT research focus, which progresses from fragmentary to integrative issues. Conversely, the Y-axis represents research perspectives that progress from micro to macro. This framework serves to identify the distribution of GBT studies and to discern current trends and gaps in research.

4.1.1. Socio-Technical Perspective

The socio-technical perspective is rooted in science and technology studies, which provides a framework for understanding transitions in socio-technical regimes associated with dominant technologies. This perspective emphasizes the analysis of technology within its social context, specific practices, innovation journeys, and the generation of knowledge during transitions. It focuses on the historical dynamics of transition processes on a micro level, examining the trajectory of developments over time. Commonly employed transition models within this perspective include the MLP, strategic niche management, and innovation systems, among others. Within the realm of GBT, two prominent themes emerge from the socio-technical perspective: Firstly, the exploration of technology and techniques encompasses issues related to technology and practical solutions for implementation, e.g., [7,9,57]. Secondly, the examination of innovation pathways and knowledge generation encompasses studies on innovation systems, knowledge production, and related subjects, e.g., [28,76].

Figure 10. Perspective–focus framework for GBT study.

Figure 10. Perspective–focus framework for GBT study.

4.1.2. Socio-Institutional Perspective

The socio-institutional perspective primarily originates from the social sciences and aims to comprehend systemic changes within complex societal systems. It focuses on the meso-regime level, encompassing networks, social governance, policies, power dynamics, and the agency of various actor groups. The socio-institutional perspective seeks to understand recent transitions by identifying underlying patterns and dynamics within historical trajectories, with the intention of identifying future patterns. However, it is often constrained to specific sectors or geographical areas that encounter persistent challenges. Notable transition models employed within this perspective include transition management, MLP, multi-actor perspective, and evolutionary game theory, among others. In the context of GBT, several prominent themes emerge within the socio-institutional perspective: Firstly, the exploration of politics and governance delves into the social transition from a governmental standpoint [59,61,64]. Secondly, the agency of actor groups examines the interaction and collaboration among actors from various sectors that influence the transition e.g., [42,65,77]. Finally, transition geography investigates the similarities or differences in transitions across locations and the transfer of transitions between places and across different scales e.g., [25,67,78].

4.1.3. Socio-Ecological Perspective

The socio-ecological perspective is derived from ecology and resilience theory, providing insights into the transition context as an ecological system. It elucidates the non-linear shifts from one dynamic equilibrium to another on a macro level. The socio-ecological perspective places emphasis on understanding system vulnerability and transformative capacity. Vulnerability and resilience assess the system’s ability to withstand repeated natural and human disturbances, maintaining reorganization rather than deterioration or transition to less desirable states [79]. Firstly, the socio-ecological perspective on sustainability highlights the inseparable coupling between society and ecosystems [80,81]. In addition to the human dimension, such as economics, institutions, and social networks, natural ecosystem dynamics also constitute crucial elements of a socio-ecological system [82,83,84]. A common approach and framework is the concept of societal metabolism, which views society as a unified entity and examines the flow of materials and energy between human activities and the natural environment [85]. In this context, the maintenance and build-up processes, and in-use stocks of buildings and other infrastructures, are integral components of metabolism. By improving the exchange process, the framework promotes the reduction of adverse social impacts on the environment and ensures sustainability. Within this perspective, the ecological sector requires consideration in GBT studies and the GBT framework, such as climate change and ecosystem services (e.g., natural resources and regulatory capacity) [86]. This aspect has not been sufficiently addressed in the extant GBT research. Li [41] is the sole contributor to exploring the resource exchange between the biosphere and human activities within urban housing projects. It will be possible to develop additional frameworks and measurement tools to investigate the interplay between the social system and ecosystem throughout the GBT process.

The socio-ecological perspective also allows for drawing an analogy between social regime change and ecosystems, where disturbance can be absorbed to retain the system’s structure and function without decline, or flipping to another desired or undesired state. Specifically, the existing regime can be conceptualized as a meta-stabilization, commonly referred to as “lock-in” [87], whereby the complex social system typically follows historical trajectories towards the current equilibrium. Nonetheless, certain factors, such as innovation [88], can disrupt this movement, leading to a departure from the “lock-in” state and subsequent shifts in the system, thus initiating a next-order cycle of trajectories [89]. From a socio-ecological perspective, studying these equilibriums and shifts enables us to unravel the origins and mechanisms of dynamics within the social system. Furthermore, this understanding opens up possibilities for guiding and promoting GBT progress by effectively managing system shifts towards desired equilibrium.

Socio-ecological approaches have been widely developed over the past thirty years [50]. They are information-intensive and require interdisciplinary work, requiring knowledge from various sources [90]. However, there are a limited number of theoretical frameworks and models from other disciplines that have embraced the application of the socio-ecological perspective in the context of GBT. Xue, Zhu, Wang, Wang, and Xu [40] have adopted thermodynamic concepts to build a macro-level dissipative structure of the green building industry. It regarded the entitled industry as a complex system, examining its continuous flow of energy and matter between internal and external environments. The research can be comprehended as an attempt towards a socio-ecological perspective on GBT. Still, certain limitations exist within the study. For instance, Xue, Zhu, Wang, Wang, and Xu [40] failed to incorporate natural environmental and resource factors into their model. Additionally, the research was confined to a specific Chinese context; therefore, the study’s outcomes may not be readily applicable to directly advancing green building in other nations. It is important to note that these adoptions are still in the experimental stage and require further exploration and refinement.

Likewise, on the X-axis, there is a shown trend of research focus within the GBT area from fragmentary to integrative. Transition practice aims to solve the most specific issues of GBT, studying practices and problems in particular sectors or geographical areas in transition, which may lead to fragmented results. Understanding transition seeks to explore integrative issues of GBT, focusing on conceptual frameworks and methodological underpinnings in transition, including their application, limitations, and ontological assumptions.

Figure 11 depicts the temporal distribution of the GBT articles within the thematic framework, revealing a noticeable alignment with the patterns observed in the keyword timeline and research frontier analysis. The majority of research focuses on practical issues related to politics and governance (22 articles), followed by understanding transition through the agency of actor groups (18 articles) and technology and technique practices (10 articles). The socio-institutional perspective attracts exploration in both integrative and fragmentary problems, while the social–technical perspective primarily focuses on isolated practices. There are only two articles that discuss GBT in the socio-ecological context.

During the initial stages of each research lens, practical issues garnered attention, while subsequent studies emerged to understand the transition system with a focus on conceptual frameworks and methodological foundations. In recent research efforts, scholars have directed their focus towards the examination of system dynamics involving diverse actors, as evidenced by the prominent dark red points located within the “Understanding Transition-Agency of actor groups” dimensions in Figure 11. Moreover, an expanded emphasis on the social–ecological perspective has surfaced within GBT studies over the last two years. This trend illustrates a notable transition in GBT research priorities, moving away from fragmented and isolated practices towards a more holistic and integrated systemic evolution.

Regarding research perspectives, the findings indicate a predominant focus on studies at the meso-regime level, which garnered attention throughout the research process. However, there is a research gap in understanding the socio-ecological perspective that necessitates further investigation into the equilibrium and shifts within the GBT system. Additionally, it is imperative to develop macro-models to comprehensively understand the dynamics of the GBT in terms of system vulnerability and transformative capacity. To fill the current gap, it is valuable to explore GBT from a socio-ecological perspective in the future.

In terms of research methodology, there is an increase in the adoption of quantitative methods such as surveys and modeling as research transitions from fragmented to integrated approaches. In the past five years, there has been a notable surge in the utilization of modeling approaches within the GBT field. Notably, in 2024, there was a significant uptick in the number of publications employing evolutionary game theory to model stakeholders’ interactions. This shift shows the requirements to comprehend the dynamics within the transition system. However, there remains an absence of established techniques for quantifying dimensions and variables in the dynamics of GBT. Social–ecological research, which involves the consideration of both social and ecological variables and their connections, demands a greater emphasis on quantitative approaches [91]. Common techniques for integrating human and ecological factors include modeling, causal loop diagrams, quantitative correlations, etc. [92]. Despite this, the majority of current GBT research continues to rely on qualitative methodologies. The future path of GBT studies not only involves a transition towards an integrated social–ecological perspective but also entails methodological progression from qualitative to quantitative approaches.

The details of the reference are shown in Appendix A.

4.2. Critique for Existing Theoretical Frameworks in GBT

Criticism of popular frameworks adopted in GBT research has persisted. Among these models, the MLP is the most commonly applied transition framework. However, its limitations have received extensive discussion in the literature [93]. One prominent criticism is that the MLP inadequately explains the relationships between the niche, regime, and landscape levels. Consequently, the distinctive boundaries, interactions, and evolutionary mechanisms among the three levels are less clear empirically. Since the concepts have vague boundaries, it is likely to create ambiguity and difficult categorization of phenomena. Additionally, the MLP mainly describes how historical developments spread, but it remains unknown where, how, and which actor group innovations come into being. On the other hand, the strategic niche management and transition management frameworks primarily concern themselves with management on the niche level instead of the entire transition process [94]. As such, the task in the transition process is simplified, leading to the neglect of factors that influence the transition, such as culture, political interests, and belief systems [95]. Furthermore, it is difficult to verify these two frameworks’ effectiveness in practice. Critiques of innovation systems research have highlighted its insufficient consideration of systemic changes and dynamics [96]. Innovation systems primarily focus on the functioning of elements within a system, rather than delving into the underlying mechanisms that explain the emergence of weaknesses; furthermore, innovation systems tend to overlook the role of small actors, including individuals, in driving the transition towards green building practices [94,97].

There are several limitations associated with transition frameworks and models. Firstly, these frameworks and models are often heavily influenced by the context and conditions in which they were developed. Current research frameworks developed in GBT studies were commonly conceived in conditions of developed countries [94]. As such, these frameworks and models conducted in developing countries should be referenced and implemented with special caution. Exploring the applicability of these transition frameworks and models in various contexts would be advantageous. However, as highlighted in the analysis in Section 3.4, there is a lack of academic collaboration among different countries, with China being the only developing country where GBT studies are flourishing. Consequently, experiences and results derived from one region may not be easily adapted to another region when utilizing transition frameworks and models for research purposes. Secondly, transition frameworks tend to exhibit bias towards the institutional or industry side, focusing predominantly on producers and suppliers, while neglecting the social aspects such as consumer and user behavior [98]. In the GBT domain, this omission is particularly noteworthy, as traditional transition frameworks fail to consider the role of third sectors, such as green building councils and building occupants. Lastly, there are inherent limitations associated with the modeling approach itself, specifically concerning conceptualization and implementation issues. The heuristic nature of models often poses challenges in translating them into formal descriptions, while a single model struggles to achieve both completeness and detailedness simultaneously [99]. In other words, striking a balance between simplification and comprehensiveness becomes essential when employing models to understand complex transition systems.

Based on the above, several potential future directions can be identified. Firstly, there is a need for GBT frameworks and models to possess universality, enabling them to surpass region-specific conditions. Developing a model that can serve as a prototype for scholars to improve upon and adapt to various GBT systems, including both developed and developing countries, would be valuable.

Secondly, a socio-ecological perspective is required to augment existing transition frameworks and models, which predominantly focus on historical and current developments. Emphasizing the significance of feedback loops and interactions among all involved stakeholders, a reflexive model enhances individual self-awareness and considers contingency, providing insights into the intrinsic mechanisms and motivations behind complex system dynamics.

Thirdly, future GBT frameworks and models should strive for expressivity by utilizing a clearer and more concise framework to summarize the intricate transition process. Readability and ease of comprehension are key objectives in achieving this goal.

4.3. Knowledge Map

Based on the aforementioned literature review of GBT studies, a comprehensive graphical representation in the form of a knowledge map has been formulated (see Figure 12). This knowledge map illustrates the existing framework of knowledge and its subsequent development process.

The knowledge base comprises topics in GBT studies among thematic distribution. These topics reflect the focal points of articles, as well as the disciplinary structures. The knowledge base serves as the foundation of the entire GBT research structure, offering insights and understanding of GBT to construct the transition framework.

Then, the GBT dynamics frameworks, based on three perspectives, reveal the distribution and functions of various themes explored in current GBT research, forming the knowledge pillars that underpin further green building development. The socio-technical perspective focuses on science and technology at a micro level, playing a crucial role in policy development. The socio-institutional perspective investigates changes in networks, social governance, policies, and power dynamics, supported by the science and technology revolution. Conversely, regime transition influences technological evolution. Both the socio-technical and socio-institutional perspectives explain the human dimension of the social–ecological system. Meanwhile, factors pertaining to the Earth’s biosphere, such as climate change and ecosystem services, dictate the ecological dimension of the social–ecological system. This ecological dimension interacts with human society through the exchange of energy and matter. Lastly, the socio-ecological perspective represents a complex ecological system with resilience. This system not only drives the transition towards green building development but also receives feedback, both positive and negative, from development, influencing whether there is a “lock-in” or a shift to another system state. The knowledge map implies that the existing research of socio-technical and socio-institutional perspectives will benefit the establishment of the GBT socio-ecological framework.

It is crucial to acknowledge that the field of GBT is characterized by rapid development and constant evolution. The interdisciplinary nature of GBT contributes to an expanding knowledge base, incorporating emerging concepts, opinions, and perspectives that continually drive knowledge development and integration within the realm of GBT. Based on the current trajectory and research gap of GBT, the knowledge map is anticipated to progress from fragmentation towards a more integrated socio-ecological perspective. In order to achieve this, future research objectives should prioritize gaining a better understanding of the dynamics and mechanisms inherent in the complex GBT system. This can be accomplished by adopting a universalized and reflexive research approach based on the socio-ecological that actively involves multiple stakeholders, thus fostering a more comprehensive and inclusive analysis of GBT.

4.4. Dilemma and Future Research

It is evident that significant efforts have been devoted to the study of GBT within the academic realm over the past decades, particularly in the areas of GBT policy formulation and multi-sectoral interactions. The existing research has yielded valuable insights into regional policies, governance structures, their respective strengths and weaknesses, practical applications, implementation outcomes, and recommendations for enhancement. However, the field of GBT policy appears to be confronted with global dilemmas.

For instance, in the United Kingdom, a leading proponent of sustainability transition, the Climate Change Committee, reported that operational emissions from buildings decreased by less than 1% annually from 2014 to 2022. This trend suggests a substantial risk of failing to achieve the legally binding net-zero emissions target by 2050 unless significant reductions are swiftly implemented. Despite receiving widespread normative endorsement, the domain of GBT policy has suffered from diminished political priority, often overshadowed by considerations like the economy [100]. Notably, certain climate initiatives have been rolled back at the national level in the UK [101], while anti-net-zero sentiments have emerged, attributing the costs of climate action to the populace due to perceived elite imposition [102].

Furthermore, a prevalent viewpoint in environmental regulatory frameworks posits that most stakeholders are unlikely to undertake environmentally beneficial initiatives without regulatory mandates from governing bodies [103]. When confronted with various obstacles, such as high costs, project complexity, and associated risks [104], stakeholders often exhibit reluctance towards GBT implementation. Even in instances where regulatory pressures and initiatives are exerted, businesses struggle to navigate available support mechanisms and access resources efficiently, as evidenced in a report by the UK parliament.

Therefore, the focus of GBT research should not solely center on prevailing policy paradigms. To address the existing dilemmas within the sector, academia must pivot towards investigating the deeper social mechanisms underpinning GBT, viewing governmental entities as organic participants alongside stakeholders from diverse sectors such as markets and communities. Emphasizing collaborative interactions rather than authoritative directives, research should delve into the underlying motivations driving GBT policy agendas, offering a holistic perspective on the dynamic system of GBT. This shift towards exploring the “why” behind policy formulation and implementation, rather than the “what” and “how”, can illuminate the intrinsic drivers of GBT policies and foster a comprehensive understanding of the system’s dynamics.

4.5. Practical Implications

A socio-ecological transition holds promise as a solution for the future development of green building. According to Olsson et al. [105], there are three primary phases of socio-ecological transition: preparation, navigation, and the establishment of resilience in the new direction. To facilitate this transition through governance systems and adaptive co-management, the initial step involves enhancing the knowledge and comprehension of the socio-ecological dynamics within the green building sector [106]. Therefore, prior to establishing a resilient and manageable system, it is in demand to develop an integrative GBT framework that embraces a socio-ecological approach. This addresses the existing gap in conventional transition frameworks.

An effective example of the application of the social–ecological approach to transitional processes can be found in the governance of a wetland landscape project in southern Sweden [105]. This initiative was instigated by a self-organizing process, culminating in establishing a framework rooted in an understanding of local natural and ecological conditions and culture to foster a shared vision and objectives. Consequently, pivotal stakeholders and social networks spanning various levels of influence were mobilized to facilitate the generation of knowledge, the adoption of effective management strategies, and the transition of municipal policies. Concurrently, the establishment of a non-governmental entity, the Ecomuseum Kristianstads Vattenrike, emerged as a pivotal intermediary that facilitated the harmonization and coordination of stakeholders from governmental bodies, academic institutions, grassroots organizations, and the general public. Through the implementation of adaptive co-management strategies, this social–ecological transformation not only succeeded in protecting the wetland ecosystems but also maintained their inherent resilience in a sustainable manner.

Furthermore, socio-ecological models possess the capacity to provide guidance to policymakers in formulating decisions that span from localized actions to overarching global sustainable visions [107]. On the one hand, the socio-ecological perspective offers a comprehensive insight into complex relationships and scale interactions, i.e., global, regional, and local processes, and the systemic processes between human activities and the ecosystem, as well as introducing various innovative interdisciplinary accounting and modeling methods [108]. These resilience-focused models and tools facilitate the integration of human society with the natural environment, enabling the effective management of both the short-term and long-term evolution of the GBT system [109]. On the other hand, by dissecting the mechanism of “expectation” for the subsequent cycle of trajectories, the socio-ecological perspective presents a temporal viewpoint distinct from social–technical or institutional time [110]. These new concepts introduce an advanced strategy for policymakers to formulate policies based on the potential future states of the GBT system, rather than history.

In summary, the social–ecological framework sheds light on the complex relationship between human activities and the environment throughout the production of green buildings. It provides a potential guiding structure for actions and policymaking aimed at advancing GBT, bringing profound significance to green building revolution practices and more effective solutions to propel future green building initiatives.

However, challenges still persist in the adoption of the socio-ecological framework within sustainable transition practices. The inherent complexity and dynamic nature of ecosystems pose significant obstacles, as socio-ecological strategies often struggle to achieve long-term sustainability when the initial regulatory framework fails to align with local natural conditions [111]. Additionally, while the socio-ecological framework holds promise for application across diverse regions and scales with various conditions, there remains a gap in translating GBT research into actionable solutions for development contexts to address their practical challenges [50]. Moreover, while the socio-ecological framework introduces resilience concepts to the GBT system, serving as a basis for experimentation and analysis, its efficacy may be compromised when confronted with large-scale disruptive changes [50]. Practitioners are tasked with managing real crises and shocks that arise during the GBT process. Therefore, ongoing adaptation and expansion are essential to enhance the socio-ecological framework’s contribution to the advancement of green building development.

5. Conclusions

The transition lens has gained significant traction in research as a means to investigate the development of green building practices, elucidate specific outcomes, and analyze the dynamics involved. This literature review has provided a comprehensive overview of the current state of research in the field of GBT, identifying key research focuses, emerging trends, and existing research gaps. Employing a mixed-methods approach involving qualitative analysis and bibliometric research utilizing CiteSpace, 72 articles within the GBT realm were thoroughly reviewed, addressing four fundamental research inquiries: theoretical frameworks, methodologies, focal areas, and research frontiers. Despite emerging only within the past decade with limited studies published, research on GBT has seen a marked increase in attention and development. Our main findings can be summarized as follows:

(1)

Transition frameworks such as MLP, strategic niche management, and innovation systems have been widely applied in GBT research. Moreover, other models emerging from interdisciplinary concepts, including evolutionary game theory, agent-based model, and dissipative structure, have also been employed to investigate GBT issues. Among these theoretical frameworks and models, evolutionary game theory and the MLP have been the most commonly adopted.

(2)

In terms of methodology, the majority of GBT articles have employed a qualitative approach, with a focus on descriptive research. Scholars in this field have tended to utilize case studies and qualitative research as primary procedures, while quantitative research has often been conducted through modeling methods.

(3)

The graphical distribution of GBT research reveals that China and England have significantly contributed to the field, producing the majority of published articles. However, academic collaboration and communication between different regions remain limited, and most studies have been conducted in developed countries. In the analysis of keywords, terms such as “barriers”, “energy“, and “evolutionary game” have been identified as crucial, frequently appearing in GBT research. To help locate the various themes and topics within GBT studies, a perspective–aim framework has been proposed. This framework identifies GBT research topics from three perspectives: social–technical, institutional, and ecological. It also addresses two research aims, ranging from practical applications to in-depth understanding.

(4)

The keyword co-occurrence cluster timeline, in conjunction with research process analysis, illustrates a trend in GBT studies from technical, specific issues to a more systematic exploration of dynamics.

The limited sample size of the studies analyzed may have restricted the accuracy of the co-occurrence network, thereby reducing the reliability of the bibliometric analysis. To address this limitation, future research should expand the data sources and search parameters to improve the scope and depth of the review. Despite the limitations, this study provides a valuable contribution to the literature on GBT and serves as a foundation for the further investigation and exploration of this important topic. It provides a thorough and insightful examination of the current state of research on GBT, highlighting gaps in knowledge, methodological approaches, and theoretical frameworks and presenting a knowledge map to guide future studies. By identifying key themes and topics within the field, the review offers a valuable resource for scholars and practitioners looking to navigate the complexity of GBT.