A Mixed-Method Comparative Analysis of BIM Technology Adoption in China’s and Japan’s Construction Sectors

Abstract

In Japan and China, the construction industries make significant contributions to GDP (gross domestic product). Due to different socioeconomic backgrounds, the construction industries in both countries face different challenges. Recently, Japan’s and China’s construction industries have been focusing on the active development of BIM (building information modeling) technology. Recognized for its unique advantages, BIM technology is considered by both countries as an innovative tool that can be used to resolve industry bottlenecks. This paper presents a comparative study on the application of BIM technology in the construction industries of Japan and China, covering five dimensions: development status, policy framework, specific case applications, SWOT analysis, and awareness in higher education. The results indicate that BIM development in both countries is at a broadly similar stage. However, differences in their construction industries have led to distinct strengths and limitations in BIM application. China holds a comparative advantage in policy-driven promotion, while Japan excels in lifecycle management and operational sustainability. Nevertheless, BIM implementation in China tends to be formalistic, whereas Japan needs to enhance its efforts in BIM education. This study discusses improvement measures and complementary strategies based on these differences, aiming to address existing research gaps and underscore their significance in advancing BIM technologies as well as the construction industries of both countries.

1. Introduction

In China and Japan, the construction industries contribute significantly to GDP, with these countries ranking as the second-largest and fourth-largest economies globally, respectively, and being the largest economies in Asia. According to the latest data (published in 2024) from China’s National Bureau of Statistics and the Japan Federation of Construction Contractors, the construction industry accounts for 6.9% and 5.2% of the GDP in each country, respectively [1,2]. This underscores the construction sector as a critical pillar of both economies and its importance in the global construction market. China’s construction industry, after years of rapid growth, is at a crossroads, facing numerous challenges, such as low productivity, high consumption of resources and energy, and frequent safety incidents [3,4,5]. This necessitates urgent upgrades in the construction sector. In Japan, the primary issue is labor shortages due to aging, with the additional need to maintain infrastructure built during high-growth periods and respond swiftly to natural disasters [6,7].

BIM technology plays a crucial role in the sustainability of the construction industry [8], introducing new work methods aimed at improving efficiency and environmental goals [9]. With its technological superiority and global popularity, both Japan and China are actively researching BIM technology. Government agencies in both countries are also promoting the use of information technology in construction. They regard BIM as an effective means of solving problems and advancing the construction industry. However, there are concerns about the slow progression of BIM implementation in Japan, a lack of motivation among clients to adopt BIM, and a closed technology supply chain [10]. Challenges in China’s BIM development include a lack of understanding of BIM’s value by clients, insufficient government leadership, and high legal regulations, as well as application costs of BIM [11,12].

The construction industries of Japan and China significantly influence each other. For example, when Taisei Corporation participated in the Lubuge Hydropower Station project in China in 1984, it introduced international bidding and project management models to China, promoting the development of China’s construction industry and leading to the establishment of the project manager system and construction engineer qualification framework [13]. According to Japan’s MLIT (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism) 2022 survey, Chinese nationals working in construction management account for 45% of foreign employees in Japan, significantly higher than the figure for other nationalities [14], highlighting the substantial contribution of Chinese technical personnel to Japan’s construction industry. As Chinese construction firms grow, China and Japan have become “competitive partners” in overseas infrastructure investments [15,16].

The comparison of the construction industries between Japan and China has attracted significant attention, with numerous studies published to date. For example, Sasatani compared the environmental awareness of construction professionals in both countries regarding wood, concrete, and steel, examining their impact on the sustainability of building materials [17]. Huang compared the energy-saving policies of the construction industries in Japan and China, identifying barriers and proposing tailored recommendations for each country [18]. Su compared the development of smart cities in both countries, providing feasible measures for building smart cities in Asia through studies on Shanghai and Kitakyushu [19]. Majerska conducted multicriteria case studies on Japan and China, exploring and showcasing smart design elements in buildings [20]. These studies demonstrate that the comparison of the construction industries in Japan and China has practical significance and reference value.

Furthermore, many scholars from around the world have compared the development of BIM between countries or regions, conducting studies to better utilize BIM technology and promote the development of the construction industry. Kaneta compared the BIM implementation status in two advanced Asian countries, Japan and Singapore, discussing project management issues and presenting a new version of a BIM development strategy [21]. Chu compared BIM technology between the UK and China, analyzed the application prospects of BIM in terms of technology level, construction process applications, strategic corporate implementation, and operations, and made related recommendations [22]. Juszczyk compared BIM development between neighboring countries, Poland and the Czech Republic, providing insights based on similar development levels [23]. Inter-country (inter-regional) BIM comparative studies are summarized in

Table 1. Comparative studies of BIM.

Authors and Year	Country	Purpose
Prabhakaran et al. (2021) [24]	USA, Qatar	Confirming the effectiveness of macro-policies in promoting BIM adoption in the market
Edirisinghe et al. (2015) [25]	USA, UK	Identifying the impact of national governance and institutional frameworks on BIM adoption
Wong et al. (2011) [26]	Hong Kong, USA	Analyzing governmental involvement in BIM deployment across the construction lifecycle
Hong et al. (2020) [27]	Australia, China	Identifying the key factors that influence BIM adoption
Jin et al. (2019) [28]	Australia, China, and UK	Identifying the differences in students’ perceptions of BIM industry practices
Sari et al. (2020) [29]	USA, UK, and Turkey	Identifying the deficiencies and gaps in construction companies’ practices in BIM transformation
Morganti et al. (2023) [30]	USA, Europe	Developing a BIM educational curriculum to bridge the gap and mismatch between academia and industry
Jiang et al. (2022) [31]	Singapore, UK, and USA	Identifying the role of government in promoting BIM implementation
Ma et al. (2023) [32]	New Zealand, China	Analyzing barriers to BIM adoption and proposed corresponding countermeasures

.

At this stage, it has been found that there is still a research gap in comparative studies on the application of BIM technology in the construction industries of Japan and China. This gap presents both a challenge and an opportunity. In this context, advancing comparative research is crucial, and the differences in technology, policy, and culture between the two countries provide a multidimensional perspective for academic inquiry. Additionally, their complementary advantages suggest the potential of new digital construction models. This research not only aims to promote progress in the construction industries of both countries but also serves as a reference for the effective application and innovative development of BIM in smart construction across the Asian region. The potential findings could offer valuable insights into the choices of decision makers in different countries concerning the development of the construction industry. Thus, they could mutually learn and cooperate to enhance their capabilities to develop the construction industry by using BIM technology.

This paper begins with an introduction to the research methodology, followed by an analysis of the historical development and policy evolution of BIM in China and Japan. It then presents representative case applications and employs SWOT analysis to assess key features of the construction sectors in both countries. Furthermore, we access and analyze higher education institutions to survey the consciousness of higher education in both countries. Finally, based on survey results and previous findings, we propose suggestions to promote the advancement of BIM and the development of the construction industry in Japan and China.

2. Research Method and Object

Currently, in a global context, the United Kingdom and the United States are considered pioneers in BIM technology, with Japan and China positioned in the second group, actively catching up [33,34,35]. The primary objective of this study was to comprehensively compare the adoption, development, and impact of BIM technology in the construction industries of Japan and China. Using a comparative case study approach, this research integrated qualitative and quantitative methods to perform a multidimensional analysis of BIM technology in Japan and China. The framework of this analysis is illustrated in Figure 1. This paper is structured into three parts: introduction, analysis, and discussion.

This study employed a mixed-method comparative approach that integrates a bibliometric analysis, case studies, stakeholder surveys, and SWOT-AHP (analytic hierarchy process) analysis to comprehensively examine BIM technology adoption in China and Japan. As illustrated in Figure 1, the research process followed four structured stages. First, bibliometric and comparative analyses were conducted by retrieving high-quality academic publications, government policies, and industry reports from databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI, and J-STAGE. These sources were used to clarify the historical evolution, regulatory frameworks, and dissemination strategies of BIM in both countries. To enhance the credibility of the literature review, only high-quality sources were selected according to the following standards: (1) articles published in peer-reviewed journals indexed by reputable academic databases; (2) official policy documents and white papers issued by government bodies or nationally accredited professional organizations; (3) research reports from leading academic or industry institutions; and (4) materials featuring methodological transparency and substantial citation frequency. These selection standards ensured that the literature included was both academically rigorous and practically relevant. Second, case studies were conducted on two representative projects at similar stages of development—the Shanghai Chest Hospital Science and Education Complex and the Onomichi City Hall—to analyze technological implementation and corroborate macro-level findings. Third, a survey was administered to 365 industry professionals, and their responses were categorized into strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (a SWOT analysis), followed by quantification using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to facilitate a structured comparison of BIM implementation characteristics. Fourth, a higher education survey involving 8 faculty members and 115 students from BIM-related disciplines was carried out to assess levels of awareness, satisfaction, and perceived challenges in current BIM education.

This multi-layered and systematic framework enables a comprehensive comparison across industrial characteristics, policy environments, professional perceptions, and educational practices. Moreover, it provides a replicable methodological reference for future cross-national research on BIM adoption.

3. Japan’s and China’s BIM Development and Policies

Figure 2 presents the key milestones in the development of BIM technology in China and Japan. While both countries show certain similarities in the timing and phases of BIM adoption, they exhibit clear differences in the historical evolution of the construction industry, market structures, and societal needs. These fundamental differences significantly influence the acceptance processes and dissemination strategies of BIM technology, shaping each country’s unique adoption paths.

3.1. China

The development of BIM in China began in the early 21st century, but its widespread adoption and application accelerated post-2010. From 2011 onward, the Chinese government has released a multitude of policies and standard documents to promote the adoption of BIM technology in the construction sector [12]. The Ministry of MOHURD (Housing and Urban–Rural Development) positioned BIM as a crucial component in the promotion of industrial informatization, setting the acceleration of BIM application as a policy goal. Notably, a clear target was set in 2015: “By the end of 2020, BIM adoption in large and medium-sized government investment projects should reach over 90%” [36]. This policy objective demonstrated the government’s strong commitment to BIM promotion, providing clear direction to the industry. Subsequently, local governments successively introduced their own BIM promotion guidelines and mandatory measures. Under this policy support, China gradually established a well-organized BIM standard system.

In 2016, the “National Unified Standard for Building Information Modeling” was published at the national level, establishing guidelines for BIM implementation across the country. Following this, national standards corresponding to different stages of the process were formulated. In 2018, the “BIM Design Delivery Standards” were defined for design phase deliverables; in 2019, the “Application Standards for Manufacturing Design Information Models” expanded BIM application to the design sector of manufacturing; and in 2021, the “BIM Data Preservation Standards” set the standards for the storage and exchange formats of BIM data. Additionally, industry associations like the China Engineering Construction Standardization Association have issued practical BIM operation guides and collections for specific fields. In recent years, China has gradually strengthened the alignment between its national BIM standards and international frameworks, particularly ISO 19650 [37]. The core national standard, GB/T 51212-2016 (National Unified Standard for Building Information Modeling) [38], provides guidance for BIM practices in design, construction, and operation. Although it was developed independently and predates ISO 19650, recent updates and supplementary guidelines have begun to adopt similar concepts. This reflects a growing trend toward compatibility with international BIM standards while retaining local regulatory and industry-specific characteristics.

With robust policy support and standardization, BIM technology development in China has rapidly progressed. Major state-owned design institutes and construction companies took early initiative in response to the policy, establishing BIM teams, developing corporate-specific BIM standards and platforms, and accumulating experience in project applications. Post-2016, the BIM adoption rate in China’s AEC industry notably increased; surveys around 2018 reported that 36.5% of major construction companies had already adopted BIM [33]. During this period, BIM was widely implemented in domestic infrastructure and large-scale architectural projects, like high-speed railway stations, airports, and new urban complexes, significantly contributing to coordinated design and construction management of complex projects [39].

However, there are regional imbalances in BIM adoption within China. While advanced regions in the East and major state-owned enterprises show notable usage, the spread in small- and medium-sized enterprises and in Western regions has been comparatively slower [40]. Overall, China is recognized for achieving significant progress in a short period under strong policy-driven initiatives, transitioning from conceptual understanding to the practical implementation of BIM.

3.2. Japan

The introduction of BIM technology in Japan began relatively early, with 2009 widely recognized as the Inaugural Year of BIM. In 2010, the MLIT began trial implementations of BIM in public construction projects, focusing on government buildings to accumulate practical application experience. In 2014, the MLIT officially issued the “Guidelines for the Use of BIM in Government Building Projects”, marking the first official BIM guidelines by the Japanese government. These guidelines established fundamental principles for creating and utilizing BIM models in government construction projects, specified LOD (level of detail) requirements, and clarified representative cases, setting a foundational document for BIM implementation in Japan.

Continuing to promote BIM-related policies, in 2016, the MLIT announced the “i-Construction” strategy aimed at dramatically improving construction productivity using ICT technologies, including BIM/CIM (building/construction information modeling). From April 2016 onwards, the implementation of BIM/CIM was mandated as a principle for civil engineering projects exceeding about USD 300 million (approximately JPY 30 billion). In 2018, the “3D Model Deliverables Creation Guidelines” were published, providing a standard format for deliverables, which were revised in 2020. That year, the MLIT also released the “Guidelines on Standard BIM Workflows and Their Utilization in the Construction Sector”, emphasizing the creation of BIM work processes adapted to Japanese conditions while referencing the international standard ISO 19650.

Private organizations have also been actively involved in the dissemination of BIM. The JIA (Japan Institute of Architects) has issued BIM guides for the architectural design field, the AIJ (Architectural Institute of Japan) created workflow charts for BIM projects, and the JFCC (Japan Federation of Construction Contractors) established a BIM knowledge-sharing platform to facilitate the accumulation of practical knowledge among member companies.

However, to date, the mandatory adoption of BIM in the private construction sector has not been implemented in Japan, and the government primarily exerts its influence through pilot projects and guideline publications. Additionally, Japan’s unique business practices in the construction industry have resulted in a relatively slow acceptance of BIM. For instance, the strong tendency among major general contractors to recreate detailed drawings and adjust them during the construction phase, and the delayed decision making in the early design stages, are considered factors that hinder the full utilization of BIM’s efficiency [41].

In 2023, the MLIT mandated the principal implementation of BIM/CIM in public architecture and infrastructure projects directly managed by the government [42], signaling a move towards more unified BIM standards and promoting their adoption. Overall, Japan’s BIM technology development has transitioned from a phase of voluntary exploration to a government-led phase. In the initial stages, major general contractors and software vendors led internal adoption to enhance competitiveness, while the government facilitated the rollout in the public works sector through guidelines and the i-Construction policy. According to surveys conducted by the MLIT in 2022 and 2024, the adoption rate of BIM among Japanese construction companies increased from 48.4% to 58.7% [43,44].

In summary, while both the Japanese and Chinese governments recognize the importance of BIM, their approaches to promotion show significant differences. China aims for a phased deployment driven by planned, policy-induced, and central–local coordination, with a large market size and state-owned enterprises playing a major role, ensuring strong policy traction. On the other hand, Japan promotes industry alignment through model project demonstrations by the government and major corporations, and the government’s stance on BIM has shifted from observational and exploratory to active promotion.

Regarding BIM standards, China pursues the creation of a comprehensive, independently developed standard system, rapidly updated and expanded, while Japan bases its approach on international standards (ISO), with the government leading efforts towards unification. The alignment and systematic establishment of standards are essential as a foundation for inter-team collaboration and data interoperability, presenting a common critical issue for both countries in deepening the application of BIM in the future.

4. Success Cases

To better illustrate the practical outcomes and focal points of BIM utilization in both countries, this section selects and analyzes one representative real project each from both China and Japan (Figure 3). The selection criteria were based on the typicality and availability of information. For China, the “Shanghai Chest Hospital Science and Education Complex” project was chosen. This project is positioned as one of the initial model projects utilizing BIM technology in Shanghai [45,46]. In Japan, the “Onomichi City Hall New Main Building” project was selected, which was adopted as a BIM implementation model project by the MLIT [47,48]. Both projects belong to public architecture, allowing for comparability, and each represents an advanced example of full-lifecycle BIM implementation, showcasing the characteristics of practical applications in its respective country.

Table 2. Project overview and background.

Item	Shanghai Chest Hospital Science and Education Complex Project	Onomichi City Hall New Main Building Project
Location	Xuhui District, Shanghai, China	Onomichi, Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan
Size and volume	Gross floor area: approx. 24,208 m2 Above ground: 13 floors; below ground: 3 floors	Gross floor area: approx. 14,500 m2 Above ground: 5 floors; below ground: 1 floor
Implementation period	Design phase: 2015–2016 Construction phase: 2016–2019	Design phase: 2017–2018 Construction phase: 2018–2020
Functional characteristics	Complex facility with medical, research, education, and administrative functions	Facility with administrative functions and public services for citizens
Geographical conditions	Complex surroundings with limited construction space; foundation excavation (10.9 m from subway) requires strict control of structural and environmental risks near roads and subway facilities	Adjacent to the Onomichi Waterway, considering coastal city landscape and disaster prevention needs Logistics entry restricted, requiring precise construction planning
Policy background	Shanghai city BIM trial project	MLIT BIM model project
Construction objectives	BIM was applied to enhance construction quality, safety, and management while establishing implementation standards for public buildings in Shanghai	Lifecycle BIM enabled the integration of design, construction, and maintenance while promoting standard BIM models and digital application in public-sector operations
Key points of BIM application	BIM supported early-stage foundation planning, 4D simulation, and clash detection during construction, integrated piping and process management, and facilitated delivery as well as maintenance preparation	BIM was used to coordinate design and construction, establish a management platform, and support 60 years of building operation, enabling the quantitative evaluation of client efficiency and demonstrating BIM’s long-term value

organizes the basic information about both projects, including geographical conditions, size and functionality, key stakeholders, and policy background. This table provides a foundation for future comparative analysis of the BIM implementation process, outcomes, and implications in China and Japan.

4.1. “Shanghai Chest Hospital Science and Education Complex” Project

The Shanghai Chest Hospital Science and Education Complex project, located in Xuhui District, Shanghai, is a newly constructed research and educational facility attached to a major hospital, incorporating medical, educational, research, and administrative functions. It necessitates high requirements for the integration of mechanical as well as electrical facilities and spatial design. The north side of the site is adjacent to subway lines, with foundation excavation approaching as close as approximately 10.9 m, necessitating extremely stringent standards for foundation deformation control. Additionally, the site is surrounded by green spaces and municipal infrastructure, with limited construction space, making construction management highly challenging. In response, the client implemented BIM technology to achieve precise construction management, thereby reducing construction risks while ensuring safety, quality, and project timeline goals.

In this project, a full-lifecycle BIM application model led by the client was adopted. From the outset, the client emphasized BIM, engaging a professional BIM consultant to establish a collaborative framework with design, construction, and supervision firms. A clear BIM organizational structure was established, defining responsibilities from the management to operational levels.

During the design phase, specialist designers conducted proactive modeling, creating three-dimensional design models. For complex foundation works, both the “top-down” and “bottom-up” construction methods were visualized and simulated using BIM, enabling comprehensive comparisons in terms of cost, schedule, environmental impact, safety, and green construction. The optimal solution was then presented to the client. Additionally, for critical spaces, such as patient rooms and conference rooms, multiple interior design options were presented using BIM visualization, assisting the client and cost management personnel in making visual comparisons and decisions.

In the construction phase, the integration and interference detection of piping and ductwork were emphasized. A BIM-based construction management information platform was developed and implemented, integrating the BIM model with the construction management database. This system allowed for the centralized management and sharing of information on scheduling, quality and safety inspections, and cost aggregation. At the completion and handover stage, completed models were loaded onto tablets for on-site comparison with the actual construction, allowing for the immediate identification of minor discrepancies, thus contributing to the assurance of delivery quality.

As an early BIM pilot project in Shanghai, this project achieved significant results:

Project duration reduction: The optimization of project management through BIM allowed for completion and handover approximately 90 days earlier than planned.

Assurance of quality and safety: BIM-enabled quality and safety management ensured that structural works passed on the first attempt and were completed without any accidents, earning recognition as a “Shanghai Excellent Structural Project”.

Cost management: BIM technology enhanced cost-effectiveness at all stages, including scheduling, construction, design, and estimation. Even after accounting for the cost of implementing BIM, an economic effect equivalent to approximately 7.5% of the total investment was achieved.

4.2. “Onomichi City Hall New Main Building” Project

The Onomichi City Hall New Main Building project, located in Hiroshima Prefecture’s Onomichi City, was constructed with a design by the renowned Japanese architectural firm Nikken Sekkei and built by the Shimizu Corporation. Emphasizing harmony with the urban landscape and public accessibility, the project serves not only administrative functions but also as a new landmark and public space for the city. The project adopted advanced design and construction collaboration strategies integrated with BIM operations, achieving information management throughout its entire lifecycle.

In the design phase, Nikken Sekkei developed architectural, structural, and mechanical BIM models. The design team utilized these models as a basis for multi-stakeholder collaboration, frequently sharing the design models with the constructor to obtain feedback on constructability, marking an improvement over Japan’s typical separation of the design and construction phases. The Shimizu Corporation, the main contractor, also formed an internal BIM team and refined the construction planning and detailed design based on the design models. In particular, the models were enhanced for critical construction elements, such as mechanical and electrical systems and steel connections, which were used in on-site construction and prefabrication. Nikken Sekkei and the Shimizu Corporation held regular BIM coordination meetings to discuss construction strategies through model and information exchange, integrating design and construction BIM.

During construction, BIM was primarily used for schedule management, quality control, and progress tracking. Because the site’s location is adjacent to waterfront areas with restricted logistics routes, the constructor used BIM to simulate tower crane operations and material delivery paths, establishing an efficient construction setup. One of the most advanced aspects of this project is the use of BIM during facility operation and maintenance. As a lifecycle BIM model project, the project team developed an information system necessary for facility operation and management by the city hall, the client. The project team established a data delivery system based on BIM, extracting and structuring information required by the client, such as equipment inventory, maintenance plans, and energy consumption metrics, transforming model information into visual and practical operational materials.

The application of BIM in this project achieved the following outcomes:

Realization of design and construction collaboration: Under government support and a clear collaboration policy, designers and constructors established an information exchange system using BIM from the early stages of the project. Sharing models and feedback reduced design changes and redundant data entry, enhancing accuracy and efficiency. Even under traditional contracting arrangements, the use of BIM provided benefits similar to IPD (integrated project delivery).

Improvement in quality and construction efficiency: The pre-review of complex fittings and detailed planning during the construction phase helped prevent onsite issues, supporting smooth site operations and resulting in high-quality construction outcomes that met design specifications, with the project completed on schedule. It was estimated that the construction period was reduced by about 15%.

Enhanced operational efficiency for the client: Using BIM for operation management, staff could quickly access facility information and maintenance records through a digital platform, reducing the workload associated with traditional paper-based archives. A quantitative comparison of personnel and time investment in traditional management versus BIM usage showed that work hours for management tasks could be reduced by about 10.8%.

4.3. Project Comparison

Table 3. Summary of the comparative findings of the two projects.

Item	Shanghai Chest Hospital Science and Education Complex Project	Onomichi City Hall New Main Building Project
Construction period reduction	Approx. 10% reduction in construction time	Approx. 15% reduction in construction time
Quality and safety	Structural work passed on the first attempt; completed without accidents	High-quality construction meeting design specifications
Cost reduction	About 7.5% reduction in total investment, including BIM costs	No quantitative figure disclosed; approx. 10.8% reduction in administrative workload
Leadership in BIM implementation	Client-led with third-party BIM consultant	Collaboration between designer and contractor
Focus of BIM utilization	Integrated management and clash detection in the design and construction phases	Lifecycle management, including design, construction, and operation

summarizes the comparative findings of the two projects. Comparisons of the projects conducted simultaneously in both China and Japan revealed clear differences in collaborative structures and organizational management. In the Chinese example, a multi-stakeholder collaboration model consisting of “Client-led + Third-party BIM Consultant + Design and Construction” was implemented. This model, led by the client or an agency, facilitated efficient integration between design and construction and also promoted the formation of an independent BIM consulting industry. In contrast, Japan emphasized collaboration between design and construction, with major general contractors playing a significant role. This project represents an unconventional model positioned between the traditional DBB (design–bid–build) and EPC (engineering, procurement, and construction) models.

The ROI (return on investment) for BIM is commonly calculated by converting cost savings from avoided errors into reductions in rework costs. In terms of cost-effectiveness, while the Chinese project quantitatively assessed the value added by shortened construction periods and resolved conflicts, the Onomichi City Hall project in Japan did not disclose specific figures but quantitatively evaluated labor savings in the operational phase (approximately 10.8% over 60 years), translating the effects of BIM implementation into concrete numbers. Such cost-based analyses should become standard in evaluating BIM implementation, serving as a guideline to encourage companies to shift from “model creation for BIM use” to “leveraging BIM for efficiency and effectiveness”.

The lifecycle value of BIM was clearly demonstrated in both countries’ projects, though the focus differed. The Shanghai Chest Hospital project in China emphasized enhancing management performance during the design and construction phases, focusing on schedule reduction, cost management, and ensuring quality as well as safety. Meanwhile, the Onomichi City Hall project in Japan was built on the outcomes of collaborative design and construction to extend BIM use into the operation and maintenance stages, thereby improving management efficiency across the building’s entire lifecycle.

In both the Shanghai Chest Hospital and Onomichi City Hall projects, BIM was implemented at an advanced maturity level, with models developed up to LOD (level of development) 500 to support post-construction operations and facility management. This reflects a clear orientation toward the lifecycle application of BIM, extending beyond design and construction to include asset management and long-term maintenance. Both projects also demonstrated efforts in internal capacity building, including the establishment of dedicated BIM roles, such as BIM managers, model coordinators, and multidisciplinary engineering teams capable of managing and updating models throughout the project lifecycle. The emphasis on organizational integration and digital workflow adaptation enabled continuous information use from design to facility operation. In the Shanghai case, a third-party BIM consulting firm was engaged to provide technical support and coordination expertise. This external support model not only enhances project execution quality but also offers a practical reference for SMEs (small- and medium-sized enterprises) in Japan, which often face resource limitations when adopting BIM independently.

Furthermore, both projects demonstrated awareness of openBIM principles, with model exchange based on IFC standards to ensure interoperability across software platforms and to future-proof digital assets for long-term use. These practices highlight a shift from isolated BIM adoption toward integrated, scalable, and sustainable digital construction strategies in both countries.

5. BIM Industry SWOT Analysis

5.1. SWOT Survey

Government agencies as well as industry associations in China and Japan have conducted multiple surveys on the adoption of BIM [41,43,44], revealing the actual use, main strengths, and challenges faced by BIM technology in both countries. These findings are crucial for future comparative analyses and require ongoing verification.

Previous studies have demonstrated the advantages of BIM technology, such as visualization, automated calculations, and information integration [49,50,51,52,53,54], while also highlighting challenges, such as implementation costs, platform interoperability, and talent shortages [55,56,57,58].

SWOT analyses are an established framework for assessing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of organizations or industries, and they have matured over years of development [59,60]. The adoption of BIM in Japan and China also shows a certain hierarchical structure within each SWOT element, necessitating systematic analysis.

In particular, combining SWOT analyses with the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) allows for the quantification of the relative importance of each element (Figure 4). As part of preliminary research, a survey was conducted among construction industry stakeholders in Japan from April to June 2024 to verify the validity of this analytical method [61]. A similar survey was also conducted among Chinese construction industry stakeholders.

This survey aimed to compare the BIM application statuses in China and Japan, building a hierarchical structure for the BIM survey tailored to both countries based on literature reviews and preliminary surveys with experienced professionals, including BIM educators, construction consultants, major general contractors, and heads of architectural firms in both countries (

Table 4. Details of BIM-related influencing factors (Japan) (developed by the authors with reference to [61]).

First	Second	Third
S	S1 Informed Decision Making	S11 Project planning optimized via comprehensive digital integration
		S12 Enhanced decision accuracy through 3D model visualization
	S2 Optimized Design	S21 Cost estimation improved through automatic quantity take-off
		S22 Reduced errors and assured quality using clash detection
	S3 Advanced Construction Management	S31 Early assessment of buildability and maintainability
		S32 Embedding construction data into BIM models
		S33 Validating construction results via integrated measurement tools
	S4 Unified Information Management	S41 Precise grasp of construction cost and schedule status
		S42 Improved collaboration and data exchange among stakeholders
		S43 Seamless tracking of data for facility operation and maintenance
W	W1 Financial Burden	W11 Substantial software acquisition and maintenance costs
		W12 Elevated personnel expenses linked to BIM utilization
		W13 Cost-intensive training for BIM proficiency
	W2 Software Limitations	W21 Poor interoperability across different software platforms
		W22 Inadequate systems for 3D data sharing and utilization
	W3 Time Constraints	W31 BIM design phases often take longer than conventional approaches
		W32 Revision cycles in BIM are more time-consuming
	W4 Efficiency in Project Management	W41 BIM shows limited efficiency gains over 2D methods
		W42 Management roles need redefinition under BIM workflows
		W43 Long-term commitment needed for data updates and maintenance
O	O1 Government and MLIT Initiatives	O11 Policy initiatives promoting construction standardization and industrialization
		O12 Active governmental support for green building implementation
		O13 BIM adoption encouraged in the precast construction domain
	O2 Societal and Industry Growth	O21 National environment conducive to construction innovation
		O22 Local governments and private sectors support BIM center development
	O3 Global Advancement of BIM	O31 Accelerated global innovation in BIM technologies
		O32 Availability of international best-practice references
	O4 Strong Digital Transformation Ecosystem	O41 Improved hardware performance (e.g., computing devices)
		O42 Growing diversity of BIM-related software applications
		O43 Digitally fluent younger workforce in construction industry
T	T1 Limited Awareness in the Sector	T11 Lack of immediate financial returns from BIM usage
		T12 Disjointed collaboration among project stakeholders
		T13 Industry-wide resistance to technological change
	T2 Standardization Gaps	T21 Absence of specific legal frameworks supporting BIM
		T22 Lack of consistent and universal BIM construction standards
	T3 Industry Challenges	T31 Legacy CAD tools still fulfill current design requirements
		T32 High initial cost for BIM implementation
		T33 Frequent project revisions delay design finalization
	T4 Shortage of Skilled Workforce	T41 Limited formal BIM education in academic institutions
		T42 Time-intensive in-house training for BIM talent development

and

Table 5. Details of BIM-related influencing factors (China) (developed by the authors with reference to [61]).

First	Second	Third
S	S1 Informed Decision Making	S11 Streamlined project planning via full-process digitalization
		S12 Precise cost forecasting for client reference and budgeting
	S2 Optimized Design	S21 Automated compliance checking against regulatory standards
		S22 Improved design quality and error minimization through clash detection
	S3 Sophisticated Construction Management	S31 Standardized production process for precast elements
		S32 High-accuracy placement of precast components on site
		S33 Clear real-time monitoring of project cost and timeline progress
	S4 Comprehensive Information Management	S41 Quick model-based cost estimations
		S42 Strengthened inter-party communication and data exchange
		S43 Lifecycle tracking of data for facility operation and maintenance
W	W1 Financial Constraints	W11 Elevated expense of BIM software licenses
		W12 High labor costs in BIM-integrated workflows
		W13 Considerable investment required for workforce training
	W2 Software Limitations	W21 Deficiencies in BIM component libraries
		W22 Inadequate infrastructure for 3D data exchange and application
		W23 Limited interoperability across software vendors
	W3 Design Time Burden	W31 Revisions in BIM take longer than traditional methods
	W4 Project Coordination Challenges	W41 Need for reevaluation of stakeholder management roles
		W42 Urgent need for a revised BIM cost distribution framework
		W43 Ongoing data maintenance demands over the long term
O	O1 Government-Driven Initiatives	O11 Strong policy endorsement of construction digitalization and standardization
		O12 Nationwide atmosphere supportive of technological innovation
		O13 Proactive governmental promotion of green building practices
		O14 State-led efforts to expand BIM use in precast construction
		O15 Regional and private-sector establishment of BIM service hubs
	O2 Evolving Industry Landscape	O21 Fast-paced development of digital technologies in China
		O22 Abundant international case studies available for reference
		O23 Rising innovation potential in small- and medium-sized enterprises
		O24 Gradual move toward standardization and institutionalization of projects
		O25 New generation professionals proficient in digital tools and IT skills
T	T1 Low BIM Awareness Among Practitioners	T11 Weak understanding of data-sharing mechanisms within teams
		T12 Lack of coordination among owners, designers, and builders
		T13 Absence of direct economic returns from BIM implementation
		T14 Institutional inertia against adopting new technologies
	T2 Deficiencies in Regulatory Frameworks	T21 Absence of BIM-specific legal frameworks
		T22 No standardized national BIM implementation guidelines
		T23 Missing system for BIM-related cost attribution
	T3 Structural Challenges in the Construction Sector	T31 Conventional CAD tools still meet immediate design needs
		T32 Compressed timelines for design delivery
		T33 Frequent revisions slow down project finalization
		T34 Overemphasis on cost-cutting over long-term value
		T35 Widespread use of low-efficiency, extensive project management styles
		T36 Limited financial incentives or subsidies from the government
	T4 Shortage of Skilled BIM Workforce	T41 Scarcity of formal BIM education and training in academia
		T42 Corporate training requires long-term resource investment

). The results were used to conduct and compare the SWOT analyses of both countries.

This survey comprised two components: the corporate attributes of respondents and an assessment of their perceptions regarding BIM. The perception survey employed a five-point Likert scale to evaluate the secondary and tertiary indicators presented in Table 4 and Table 5, thereby measuring respondents’ awareness and attitudes toward BIM implementation. Responses were obtained from individuals with expertise in BIM and information technology and those affiliated with departments responsible for BIM/IT promotion. The survey link was distributed specifically to these individuals. The targeted companies included the top 700 construction-related firms by annual revenue, encompassing general contractors, construction consultants, architectural design offices, and other entities, such as property management and building material suppliers.

5.2. Comparison of SWOT Survey Results

The survey yielded 365 valid responses in total, including 152 from China and 213 from Japan. The corporate attributes of the respondents are presented in Figure 5a,b. The process of the SWOT-AHP analysis is outlined below.

Step 1. Referring to

Table 6. Indicator scale for assessing development strategy priorities.

Score	Interpretation
1 (No advantage)	Represents a baseline level of importance; the indicator is generally relevant within the strategic development context but lacks distinct significance.
3 (Slight advantage)	Reflects a modest level of importance; the indicator holds relatively more value compared to less impactful factors.
5 (Moderate advantage)	Denotes a clearly influential indicator that plays a meaningful role within the strategic framework.
7 (High advantage)	Suggests a strongly favorable indicator that is highly relevant and influential in development strategy formulation.
9 (Critical advantage)	Indicates a top-priority indicator with exceptional importance in guiding strategic decisions.
2, 4, 6, 8 (Intermediate values)	Used to express a nuanced level of importance that lies between two adjacent defined scores.

, the responses are grouped accordingly, and statistical analysis is conducted on both the frequency and percentage of selections for each item. In addition, the geometric mean is employed to compute the average score (X) for each indicator, as shown in Equation (1).

$$\mathrm{X}=\sqrt[\mathrm{n}]{{\mathrm{x}}_1·{\mathrm{x}}_2·\dots ·{\mathrm{x}}_{\mathrm{n}}}$$

(1)

Step 2. Based on Equations (2)–(4), judgment matrices (${\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{j}}$) are formulated for both secondary and tertiary indicators, from which the corresponding relative weights (${\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{i}}$) are subsequently derived. Subsequently, Equation (5) is applied to account for the influence of factors between the secondary and tertiary levels, enabling the calculation of the overall relative weights (${\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{sij}}$):

$${\mathrm{a}}_{\mathrm{ij}}={\displaystyle \frac{{\sum }_{\mathrm{i}=1}^{\mathrm{n}}\mathrm{Xi}}{{\sum }_{\mathrm{i}=1}^{\mathrm{n}}\mathrm{Xj}}}$$

(2)

$${\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{ij}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}{\mathrm{a}}_{11}& \dots & {\mathrm{a}}_{1\mathrm{j}}\\ ⋮& \ddots & ⋮\\ {\mathrm{a}}_{\mathrm{i}1}& \dots & {\mathrm{a}}_{\mathrm{ij}}\end{array}\right)\hspace{1em}\mathrm{i}=1,2,\dots \mathrm{n}\hspace{1em}\mathrm{j}=1,2,\dots \mathrm{n}$$

(3)

$${\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{i}}={\displaystyle \frac{{(\prod _{\mathrm{j}=1}^{\mathrm{n}}{\mathrm{a}}_{\mathrm{ij}})}^{\frac{1}{\mathrm{n}}}}{\sum _{\mathrm{i}=1}^{\mathrm{n}}{(\prod _{\mathrm{j}=1}^{\mathrm{n}}{\mathrm{a}}_{\mathrm{ij}})}^{\frac{1}{\mathrm{n}}}}}$$

(4)

$${\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{sij}}=\sum _{\mathrm{i}=1}^{10}{\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{si}}{\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{sij}}^{,}$$

(5)

Based on the average scores of the indicators, the relative weights (${\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{i}}$) for both secondary and tertiary levels are obtained from their corresponding judgment matrices. Subsequently, the comprehensive weights (${\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{sij}}$) for each component of the SWOT structure—namely, strengths (S), weaknesses (W), opportunities (O), and threats (T)—are computed. The detailed outcomes of this analysis are summarized in

Table 7. (a) Relative weights of strengths and overall relative weights (China), (b) relative weights of weaknesses and overall relative weights (China), (c) relative weights of opportunities and overall relative weights (China), and (d) relative weights of threats and overall relative weights (China).

(a)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{sij}}$	Ranking
S1	0.2427	S11	0.4931	0.1197	4
		S12	0.5103	0.1239	2
S2	0.2516	S21	0.4897	0.1232	3
		S22	0.5103	0.1284	1
S3	0.2555	S31	0.3346	0.0855	6
		S32	0.3344	0.0854	7
		S33	0.3309	0.0845	8
S4	0.2503	S41	0.3476	0.0870	5
		S42	0.3260	0.0816	10
		S43	0.3264	0.0817	9
(b)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{oij}}$	Ranking
W1	0.2791	O11	0.2033	0.1023	1
		O12	0.1984	0.0998	5
		O13	0.1987	0.0999	4
W2	0.2629	O14	0.2028	0.1020	2
		O15	0.1968	0.0990	9
		O21	0.1989	0.0989	10
W3	0.2311	O22	0.1999	0.0994	7
W4	0.2267	O23	0.1991	0.0990	8
		O24	0.2004	0.0996	6
		O25	0.2016	0.1002	3
(c)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{oij}}$	Ranking
O1	0.5021	O11	0.2033	0.1023	1
		O12	0.1984	0.0998	5
		O13	0.1987	0.0999	4
		O14	0.2028	0.1020	2
		O15	0.1968	0.0990	9
O2	0.4979	O21	0.1989	0.0989	10
		O22	0.1999	0.0994	7
		O23	0.1991	0.0990	8
		O24	0.2004	0.0996	6
		O25	0.2016	0.1002	3
(d)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{tij}}$	Ranking
T1	0.2533	T11	0.2592	0.0657	6
		T12	0.2593	0.0657	7
		T13	0.2437	0.0617	8
		T14	0.2378	0.0602	9
T2	0.2376	T21	0.3375	0.0802	3
		T22	0.3352	0.0796	4
		T23	0.3273	0.0777	5
T3	0.2534	T31	0.1577	0.0400	15
		T32	0.1688	0.0428	13
		T33	0.1701	0.0431	10
		T34	0.1695	0.0429	11
		T35	0.1694	0.0429	12
		T36	0.1646	0.0417	14
T4	0.2557	T41	0.4988	0.1276	2
		T42	0.5012	0.1282	1

a–d and

Table 8. (a) Relative weights of strengths and overall relative weights (Japan) (source: [61]), (b) relative weights of weaknesses and overall relative weights (Japan) (source: [61]), (c) relative weights of opportunities and overall relative weights (Japan) (source: [61]), and (d) relative weights of threats and overall relative weights (Japan) (source: [61]).

(a)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{sij}}$	Ranking
S1	0.2892	S11	0.4481	0.1296	2
		S12	0.5519	0.4596	1
S2	0.2203	S21	0.4512	0.0994	5
		S22	0.5488	0.1209	3
S3	0.2321	S31	0.3669	0.0851	6
		S32	0.2996	0.0695	10
		S33	0.3335	0.0774	7
S4	0.2584	S41	0.2916	0.0754	9
		S42	0.4100	0.1060	4
		S43	0.2984	0.0771	8
(b)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{wij}}$	Ranking
W1	0.2898	W11	0.3573	0.1035	5
		W12	0.3071	0.0890	7
		W13	0.3357	0.0973	6
W2	0.2387	W21	0.4951	0.1182	3
		W22	0.5049	0.1205	2
W3	0.2467	W31	0.5265	0.1299	1
		W32	0.4735	0.1168	4
W4	0.2248	W41	0.2996	0.0674	10
		W42	0.3452	0.0776	9
		W43	0.3552	0.0799	8
(c)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{oij}}$	Ranking
O1	0.2360	O11	0.3347	0.0790	9
		O12	0.3025	0.0714	10
		O13	0.3629	0.0856	6
O2	0.2543	O21	0.4870	0.1239	3
		O22	0.5131	0.1305	2
O3	0.2521	O31	0.5460	0.1376	1
		O32	0.4540	0.1144	4
O4	0.2576	O41	0.3613	0.0931	5
		O42	0.3070	0.0791	8
		O43	0.3317	0.0854	7
(d)
Second Item	Second ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	Third Item	Third ${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{i}}$	${\mathbf{w}}_{\mathbf{tij}}$	Ranking
T1	0.4512	T11	0.3152	0.1422	6
		T12	0.3995	0.1802	4
		T13	0.2854	0.1288	7
T2	0.5488	T21	0.4652	0.2553	2
		T22	0.5348	0.2935	1
T3	0.2350	T31	0.2644	0.0621	10
		T32	0.3855	0.0906	8
		T33	0.3500	0.0823	9
T4	0.3669	T41	0.4512	0.1655	5
		T42	0.5489	0.2014	3

a–d.

Step 3. To confirm the robustness of the AHP results, it is required that the consistency ratio (CR) for each pairwise comparison matrix remains below 0.1. This consistency check, partially addressed in Step 2, is further validated through the following procedure: the consistency index (CI) of each matrix is computed using Equations (6)–(8), and these values are then compared with the corresponding average random index (RI) values listed in

Table 9. Average random index (RI) (source: [61]).

n	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
RI	0	0	0.58	0.89	1.12	1.24	1.32	1.41

:

$$\mathrm{C}\mathrm{I}={\displaystyle \frac{{\lambda }_{\max }-\mathrm{n}}{\mathrm{n}-1}}$$

(6)

$${\lambda }_{\max }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{n}}}{\sum }_{\mathrm{i}=1}^{\mathrm{n}}{\displaystyle \frac{{(\mathrm{A}·\mathrm{w})}_{\mathrm{i}}}{{\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{i}}}}$$

(7)

$$\mathrm{C}\mathrm{R}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{I}}{\mathrm{R}\mathrm{I}}}$$

(8)

Although consistency may be confirmed at each hierarchical level, cumulative deviations can still introduce inconsistencies in the aggregated judgment matrix. To address this, a global consistency verification is performed on the matrix of total relative weights derived in Step 3, using Equation (9). This step is crucial for assessing the coherence of the entire matrix and reinforcing the dependability of the AHP-based decision process:

$$\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{s}}={\displaystyle \frac{{\sum }_{\mathrm{i}=1}^{10}{\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{sij}}·\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{I}}_{\mathrm{i}}}{{\sum }_{\mathrm{i}=1}^{10}{\mathrm{w}}_{\mathrm{sij}}·\mathrm{R}{\mathrm{I}}_{\mathrm{i}}}}$$

(9)

The computed consistency ratios (CRs) at all hierarchical levels, including the overall consistency ratio ($\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{s}}$), fall below the accepted threshold of 0.1. This outcome confirms that the assessments conducted in this study are internally consistent, thus supporting the analytical process’s validity and reliability.

Based on the collected data, the top two items scoring the highest in each SWOT category (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) were identified as key factors for comparative analysis.

Table 10. Comparison of SWOT survey results between China and Japan.

Item	China	Japan
Strengths	1. Improved design quality and error minimization through clash detection. 2. Streamlined project planning via full-process digitalization.	1. Enhanced decision accuracy through 3D model visualization. 2. Project planning optimized via comprehensive digital integration.
Weaknesses	1. Revisions in BIM take longer than traditional methods. 2. High labor costs in BIM-integrated workflows.	1. BIM design phases often take longer than conventional approaches. 2. Inadequate systems for 3D data sharing and utilization.
Opportunities	1. Strong policy endorsement of construction digitalization and standardization. 2. State-led efforts to expand BIM use in precast construction.	1. Accelerated global innovation in BIM technologies. 2. Local governments and private sectors support BIM center development.
Threats	1. Corporate training requires long-term resource investment. 2. Scarcity of formal BIM education and training in academia.	1. Lack of consistent and universal BIM construction standards. 2. Absence of specific legal frameworks supporting BIM.

provides an overview of the comparison of SWOT survey results between China and Japan.

The results reveal that there are both commonalities and differences in the perception of BIM technology in the construction industry across the two countries.

Commonalities: In both countries, “decrease in design efficiency due to BIM implementation” is recognized as a common challenge. This suggests that during the initial stages of BIM adoption, design teams require significant time to adapt and master the technology.

Differences: In China, direct practical effects such as “reduction in construction errors” and “accurate cost estimation” are highly valued. The emphasis on industrialization and prefabrication in the industry, coupled with government-led policies, serves as a major driving force for BIM promotion. In contrast, in Japan, the value of BIM is placed more on “integrated management of the entire project” and an “enhancement in decision making” at the management level.

Additionally, while the shortage of BIM professionals is seen as a major issue in China, in Japan, the lack of standardized practices and unclear legal frameworks are perceived as the greatest challenges. This reflects differences in the institutional background and technical maturity of BIM implementation between the two countries.

6. Survey on Awareness of BIM Education in Higher Education

BIM is widely adopted in the construction industry, yet its integration into university education lags behind the pace of implementation in the industry, as pointed out in [62]. University students are the core talent that will lead the future AEC (architecture, engineering, and construction) industries, and educational efforts reflect broader industry trends. The extent to which BIM is incorporated into university curricula differs internationally, reflecting variations in the maturity of construction industries and the structure of national educational systems [63].

Although BIM education is a relatively new field, it has recently been positioned as a central educational element within the AEC areas [64], with its adoption progressing rapidly. The non-profit organization NATSPEC has been continuously updating the status of BIM adoption and education globally. As of December 2023, 104 universities in mainland China have established majors related to “smart construction”, implementing practical education that includes BIM. Furthermore, academic interest in China’s BIM education is growing, with several studies addressing its reality [65,66].

In contrast, systematic reviews of BIM education in Japanese universities are extremely limited, and the reality of education within academic institutions is generally underrecognized. Awareness and acceptance of BIM are shaped by an understanding of technological innovation, and differences in awareness among members of educational institutions significantly affect the adoption and effectiveness of the technology [67].

Against this backdrop, this survey aimed to compare the awareness of BIM education between higher education institutions in China and Japan. From May to July 2024, a survey was conducted targeting faculty and students from four universities each for both countries that have implemented BIM education. All eight universities surveyed are considered mid-to-top-tier nationally, ensuring the reliability of the responses. The survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics to understand the overall trends and characteristics of awareness structures.

6.1. University Faculty Awareness

In this survey, questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were used to collect insights and perspectives from university faculty members involved in BIM education in China and Japan.

Table 11. Respondent characteristics in the BIM education survey.

Country	Position	Years of Teaching Experience	BIM Teaching Experience Years
Japan	Professor	40 years	26 years
	Professor	24 years	5 years
	Professor	21 years	6 years
	Associate Professor	10 years	Unknown
China	Professor	18 years	8 years
	Professor	16 years	10 years
	Associate Professor	8 years	8 years
	Associate Professor	5 years	5 years

presents the demographic data of the respondents, and

Table 12. Survey results on BIM education.

Item	Selected Content	Japan	China
BIM-related course content	Design and 3D modeling	4	4
	Structural analysis		1
	Construction management related	1	4
	Cost estimation		3
	Sustainable design	1	1
	Others	1
The importance of BIM education in university education	Very important	4	1
	Important		3
The university provides sufficient resources and support for BIM education	Think so		2
	Ordinary		2
	Do not think so	2
	Do not think so at all	2
How will the role of BIM education in university education change over the next five years	Unchanged from the current situation	1
	A slight change has no overall impact	3	1
	Changes have an overall impact		3

shows the results of the awareness survey.

The survey revealed that universities in both China and Japan commonly implement basic courses in design education and 3D modeling related to BIM. However, Chinese universities emphasize the application of BIM in construction management based on real construction projects, highlighting the practical use of BIM within their curricula. This approach not only shares commonalities with Japanese educational content but also exhibits a more application-oriented perspective.

Furthermore, the faculty members in both countries highly value the importance of BIM education, yet there are differences in their views on the educational environment and support systems. The Japanese faculty members often cited a lack of institutional support for BIM education as a challenge, and they expressed a pessimistic outlook on the development of educational environments over the next five years. In contrast, in China, strong government-led policy support and active efforts to expand educational resources as well as organize curricula have led many educators to have a positive view of the future improvement in educational standards.

These results suggest that institutional support and educational infrastructure significantly influence faculty attitudes and the effectiveness of education.

Sacks et al. [68] conducted a survey on the state of BIM education curricula at the undergraduate level in universities worldwide, revealing that universities generally adopt one of three educational strategies. The first strategy involves not setting up BIM-centric courses but gradually teaching necessary BIM skills within individual subjects across various specialties. The second strategy entails offering one or two introductory or modeling-related BIM courses. The third strategy is a more comprehensive approach, reorganizing existing curricula to be centrally focused on BIM.

In China, with the backdrop of governmental policy support and the construction industry’s demand for skilled professionals, some architecture universities have implemented an interdisciplinary integration of the fields of engineering and information science, aiming to enhance BIM education. Many universities adopt the third strategy, placing BIM at the core of their educational curricula, while some transitioning universities also employ the second strategy.

Conversely, in Japan, while discussions on BIM education are advancing, there are several constraints on its implementation. For instance, certification requirements by the Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education (JABEE), the upper limit on compulsory subjects, and high dependency on faculty are significant factors. As a result, BIM education in Japanese universities primarily continues to follow the second strategy at the current stage.

6.2. University Student Awareness

This study also surveyed students’ perceptions of BIM technology in China and Japan. The participants included 62 students from China (38 undergraduates and 24 postgraduates) and 53 students from Japan (22 undergraduates and 31 postgraduates). The survey covered several topics: the importance of BIM technology in the construction field, the frequency of using BIM in learning and research, the adequacy of current BIM education, the demand for BIM in the job market, the placement of BIM education in construction-related education, and the most effective learning methods. The results are displayed in Figure 6a–f.

The analysis revealed that approximately 90% of the students in both countries recognized the importance of BIM technology. Notably, the Chinese students tended to use BIM technology more frequently than their Japanese counterparts. Additionally, 55% of the Chinese students believed that current BIM education is sufficient, significantly higher than the 23% among the Japanese students.

Regarding the demand for BIM in the job market, about half of the students in both countries perceived it as “high”, though a slightly larger percentage of the Japanese students rated it as “very high”. The students from both countries acknowledged the importance of BIM education, and there was a consensus on its essential role in future educational curricula.

Lastly, when it comes to the most effective learning methods, students from both countries favored “practical operational training” and “exercises through simulated projects”, suggesting that practicality and application are crucial elements in the design of future BIM curricula.

In this study, based on the classifications shown in

Table 13. Classification and statistical organization of survey items.

Item	Classification	China (n = 62)	Japan (n = 53)	χ2	p	Cramer’s V	Conclusion
The importance of BIM technology	High	56 (90.3%)	51 (96.2%)	1.557	0.212	0.12	Not significant
	Low	6 (9.7%)	2 (3.8%)
Frequency of using BIM technology	Has experience	54 (87.1%)	26 (49.1%)	19.40	<0.001 ***	0.41	Significant
	No experience	8 (12.9%)	27 (50.9%)
Adequacy of BIM education	Rich	33 (53.2%)	13 (24.5%)	18.93	<0.001 ***	0.40	Significant
	Neutral	21 (33.9%)	14 (26.4%)
	Deficient	8 (12.9%)	26 (49.1%)
Market demand for BIM	High	39 (62.9%)	47 (88.7%)	10.57	0.001 **	0.30	Significant
	Low	23 (37.1%)	6 (11.3%)
Status of BIM education	Core/important	51 (82.3%)	45 (84.9%)	0.760	0.684	0.08	Not significant
	Non-major	11 (17.7%)	8 (15.1%)

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01.

, the students’ data regarding BIM awareness were grouped and subjected to significance testing using SPSS. The results were visualized in a radar chart comparing BIM awareness between students in Chinese and Japanese universities (Figure 7).

The significance tests revealed no statistical differences between the Chinese and Japanese students in terms of the “Importance of BIM Technology” and “BIM’s Position in Construction Education”. Both groups demonstrated a high level of awareness, confirming a common recognition of BIM’s importance in the construction sector. However, significant differences were found in terms of “Satisfaction with BIM Education” and “Practical Experience Using BIM”, with the Japanese students showing markedly lower satisfaction and frequency of use compared to their Chinese counterparts. Additionally, concerning “Perceived Demand for BIM in the Job Market”, a significantly higher proportion of the Japanese students perceived a very high demand.

These findings suggest that while Japanese students recognize the importance and necessity of BIM in the job market, they also feel a significant lack of educational opportunities at their universities. This underscores the urgent need for the systematization and expansion of practical opportunities in BIM education within Japanese higher education institutions.

7. Discussion

In this comprehensive analysis, this study yielded the following findings and proposals for the future:

The adoption paths of BIM technology in China and Japan reflect the characteristics of their institutional environments and the structural features of the construction industry. In China, strong top-down policy measures, driven by the government and tied to bidding qualifications, have rapidly increased the penetration rate of BIM, particularly in large-scale public projects. In contrast, Japan has been gradually promoting BIM through the accumulation of demonstration projects and strategic guidelines under the i-Construction strategy, with efforts such as the “BIM Deliverables Guidelines” clarifying technical standards. However, the forceful policy guidance in China has led to instances where BIM implementation remains merely formalistic, limited to design optimization. This contrasts with Japanese private construction companies, which directly link BIM to profit and efficiency enhancements. On the other hand, Japan faces challenges, such as the incompatibility of BIM with lump-sum contracting and a lack of risk aversion among clients, where the enforcement power seen in China’s policies could offer a solution.

Our comparative analysis of project examples shows that China tends to concentrate BIM use in the design and construction phases to enhance efficiency, while Japan advances its application in maintenance and management, taking a leading position in addressing sustainability. Going forward, China should incorporate Japan’s extensive maintenance know-how and information systems for construction waste processing to strengthen lifecycle management using BIM. Meanwhile, Japan could consider adopting China’s approach of involving third-party BIM consultants during the design and construction phases to improve collaboration and close supply chain gaps under a segregated contracting system.

The SWOT comparative analysis also revealed that while professionals in both countries recognize the advantages of BIM in visualization, they share the common challenge of “low design efficiency” (noted as “frequent revisions” in China and “lengthy model creation times” in Japan). This can be addressed by developing open-platform BIM and standardized component libraries, integrating China’s big data processing capabilities with Japan’s precision in construction management into a multi-stage, multi-stakeholder collaborative BIM tool. While China positions BIM as a driving force in industrialized and prefabricated construction, Japan aims for more advanced process integration and knowledge management within its already-mature industrial structure. Collaborative technological efforts leveraging the complementary strengths of both countries are desirable.

In the field of higher education, the faculty and students in both countries hold high expectations for BIM education, with common challenges in enhancing practical education and establishing industry–academic collaboration labs. However, in Japan, educational content and resources are limited, resulting in significantly lower student satisfaction compared to China, where the policy-driven integration of educational resources is advancing timely construction education. Japan urgently needs to expand institutional support for BIM education, possibly taking cues from China’s experience in constructing “smart construction” specialized courses. China could further incorporate Japan’s educational insights into maintenance and achieving carbon neutrality in the construction industry to enhance its educational system by integrating BIM, thereby strengthening the training of next-generation industrial talents.

Overall, Japan and China each possess unique strengths in terms of technology development, standardization, educational models, and practical experience in the architectural industry. Deepening academic and industry cooperation between the two countries can avoid redundancy in technological development and accelerate the rapid as well as advanced penetration of BIM. This would enable strategic responses to challenges in the construction industry and position Asia as a leader in the digital transformation of the architectural field, potentially offering a model for meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that originates from East Asia.

8. Conclusions

BIM technology, due to its advantages, is being actively adopted and promoted around the world, and in China and Japan, its implementation has been accelerated with the aim of advancing and transforming the construction industry. Both countries influence each other while being at different stages of development, establishing a certain complementary relationship. Numerous studies have previously considered various aspects of China’s construction industry for comparison.

Against this background, this study utilized a multidimensional and mixed-method approach to systematically compare the application of BIM technology in China and Japan. Specifically, it examined the use of BIM technology, policies and systems, practical examples, SWOT analyses, and the state of higher education awareness to elucidate the development status, areas of focus, opportunities, and challenges faced by BIM in both countries.

This study reveals that although both China and Japan have made substantial progress in BIM implementation, significant challenges remain. In China, while top-down policies have accelerated adoption, the process often lacks depth in terms of standardization and long-term sustainability, resulting in formalistic practices and limited integration across project phases. In contrast, Japan exhibits strong lifecycle-oriented BIM practices but faces issues such as fragmented promotion, weak policy incentives, and inadequate educational support. To address these shortcomings, China should prioritize an enhancement in interoperability standards, long-term policy coherence, and cross-disciplinary collaboration. Japan, meanwhile, should invest in the development of BIM-specific training programs, improve inter-organizational coordination, and establish a national-level framework with which to promote BIM adoption. These targeted strategies can facilitate a transition in both countries toward more mature, efficient, and integrated BIM ecosystems.

This analysis reveals that both countries view BIM as key to the sophisticated and sustainable growth of the construction industry. However, significant differences exist in their paths of adoption, policy-driven promotion mechanisms, and stakeholders’ perceptions, which clearly reflect the socioeconomic backgrounds and industrial structures of each country. Nevertheless, these differences also indicate potential for complementarity in technology, policy, and education, providing a crucial opportunity for collaborative development in the future.

This study systematically compares the BIM technology in the construction industries of China and Japan for the first time, demonstrates the potential for mutual complementation in technology, policy, and education, and provides specific improvement measures. It fills a gap in the existing research and proposes that future efforts should continuously monitor the BIM development trends in both countries, aiming to further deepen mutual complementation and co-creation in the digitalization of the construction industry through the implementation of specific collaborative models.