Exploring Barriers to the Adoption of Digital Technologies for Circular Economy Practices in the Construction Industry in Developing Countries: A Case of Ghana
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Circular Economy (An Overview)
2.2. Digital Transformation in CE
2.3. Barriers to Digital Technologies Adoption for CE Implementation in the Construction Industry
3. Methodology
3.1. Survey Design
3.2. Questionnaire Design
3.3. Sampling Method
3.4. Data Collection
3.5. Data Analyses
4. Results
4.1. Demographic Information of Respondents
4.2. Mean Score Ranking Analysis
4.3. Results of EFA
- Factor 1: Institutional and Knowledge Barriers (59.097% variance explained)
- Factor 2: Financial and Adoption Constraints (6.842% variance explained)
- Factor 3: Technological and Market Limitations (6.509% variance explained
- Factor 4: Regulatory and Organizational Challenges (5.398% variance explained)
4.4. Results of FSE
5. Discussion of Results
6. Framework for Overcoming Barriers to Digital Technologies Adoption for CE Implementation
7. Implications of Findings
8. Study Limitations
9. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Rodrigo, N.; Omrany, H.; Chang, R.; Zuo, J. Leveraging digital technologies for circular economy in construction industry: A way forward. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2024, 13, 85–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Energy Agency (IEA). Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction 2019; IEA: Paris, France, 2019. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-status-report-for-buildings-and-construction-2019 (accessed on 21 January 2025).
- United Nations. Peace, Dignity and Equality on a Healthy Planet. 2022. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/population (accessed on 21 January 2025).
- Antunes, M.; Santos, R.L.; Pereira, J.; Rocha, P.; Horta, R.B.; Colaço, R. Alternative Clinker Technologies for Reducing Carbon Emissions in Cement Industry: A Critical Review. Materials 2022, 15, 209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Economic Forum. The Global Risks Report 2024; 19th Edition. Insight Report. 2024. Available online: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2024.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2025).
- Benachio, G.L.F.; Freitas, M.D.C.D.; Tavares, S.F. Circular economy in the construction industry: A systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 260, 121046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pomponi, F.; Moncaster, A. Circular economy for the built environment: A research framework. J. Cleaner Prod. 2017, 143, 710–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bao, Z. Developing circularity of construction waste for a sustainable built environment in emerging economies: New insights from China. Dev. Built Environ. 2023, 13, 100107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thirumal, S.; Udawatta, N.; Karunasena, G.; Al-Ameri, R. Barriers to adopting digital technologies to implement circular economy practices in the construction industry: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2024, 16, 3185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Govindan, K.; Hasanagic, M. A systematic review on drivers, barriers, and practices towards circular economy: A supply chain perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018, 56, 278–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agyekum, K.; Amudjie, J.; Pittri, H.; Dompey, A.M.A.; Botchway, E.A. Prioritizing the principles of circular economy among built environment professionals. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag. 2024, 14, 734–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bello, A.O. Towards achieving circular economy in the Nigerian construction industry: Policymakers perspectives and conceptual framework development. In Smart and Sustainable Built Environment; Emerald Insight: Leeds, UK, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bao, Z.; Li, S.; Chen, Y.; Xie, H.; Long, W.; Chen, W.Q. Applications of geospatial technologies for construction and demolition waste management: A systematic literature review. J. Ind. Ecol. 2025, 29, 279–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mhlanga, J.; Haupt, T.C.; Loggia, C. Shaping circular economy in the built environment in Africa. A bibliometric analysis. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2024, 22, 613–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Çetin, S.; Gruis, V.; Straub, A. Digitalization for a circular economy in the building industry: Multiple-case study of Dutch social housing organizations. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. Adv. 2022, 15, 200110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Y.; Yazan, D.M.; Junjan, V.; Iacon, M. Circular economy in the construction industry: A review of decision support tools based on Information and Communication Technologies. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 349, 131335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, W.; Ng, S.T.; Lu, W.; Mora, L.; Bao, Z. Deciphering how digital functions enable circular economy practices in construction: A critical review of recent progress and future outlook. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2025, 113, 107889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flores Lara, J.C.; El Fadel, M.; Khalfan, M.M.A. Integrating Industry 4.0 and circular economy in the UAE construction sector: A policy-aligned framework. In Built Environment Project and Asset Management; Emerald Insight: Leeds, UK, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jayarathna, H.S.N.M.; Perera, B.A.K.S.; Atapattu, A.M.D.S.; Rodrigo, M.N.N. Synergy between blockchain and circular economy in improving construction waste management: A literature review. In Proceedings of the 11th World Construction Symposium, Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, 21–22 July 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Takyi-Annan, G.E.; Zhang, H. Assessing the impact of overcoming BIM implementation barriers on BIM usage frequency and circular economy in the project lifecycle using Partial least Squares structural Equation modelling (PLS-SEM) analysis. Energy Build. 2023, 295, 113329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osei-Tutu, S.; Ayarkwa, J.; Osei-Asibey, D.; Nani, G.; Afful, A.E. Barriers impeding circular economy (CE) uptake in the construction industry. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2022, 12, 892–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atta, N. Remanufacturing towards circularity in the construction sector: The role of digital technologies. In Technological Imagination in the Green and Digital Transition; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 493–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, Z.; Liu, Z.; Wang, F.; Osmani, M. Driving circular economy through digital technologies: Current research status and future directions. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bao, Z.; Lu, W. Developing efficient circularity for construction and demolition waste management in fast emerging economies: Lessons learned from Shenzhen, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 724, 138264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Harichandran, A.; Wandahl, S.; Anderson, L.V. State of the Art Technologies that Facilitate Transition of Built Environment into Circular Economy. In Proceedings of the 40th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction; ISARC: Mumbai, India, 2023. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/conference-papers-proceedings/state-art-technologies-that-facilitate-transition/docview/2841145455/se-2?accountid=16064 (accessed on 10 February 2025).
- Okotie, G.O. How can blockchain (BC) and smart contract (SC) technologies facilitate the circular economy (CE) in construction. Int. J. Nat. Sci. Adv. Res. 2025, 7, 202–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banihashemi, S.; Meskin, S.; Sheikhkhoshkar, M.; Mohandes, S.R.; Hajirasouli, A.; LeNguyen, K. Circular economy in construction: The digital transformation perspective. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2024, 18, 100715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oluleye, B.I.; Chan, D.W.; Antwi-Afari, P. Adopting Artificial Intelligence for enhancing the implementation of systemic circularity in the construction industry: A critical review. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2023, 35, 509–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jemal, K.M.; Kabzhassarova, M.; Shaimkhanow, R.; Dikhanbayeva, D.; Turkyilmaz, A.; Durdyev, S.; Karaca, F. Facilitating Circular Economy Strategies Using Digital Construction Tools: Framework Development. Sustainability 2023, 15, 877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryman, A. Social Research Methods, 5th ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Amudjie, J.; Agyekum, K.; Adinyira, E.; Amos-Abanyie, S.; Kumah, V.M.A. Awareness and practice of the principles of circular economy among built environment professionals. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag. 2023, 13, 140–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kissi, E.; Aigbavboa, C.; Kuoribo, E. Emerging technologies in the construction industry: Challenges and strategies in Ghana. Constr. Innov. 2023, 23, 383–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oyewobi, L.O.; Windapo, A.O.; Rotimi, J.O.B. Measuring strategic performance in construction companies: A proposed integrated model. J. Facil. Manag. 2015, 13, 109–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Field, A. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, 2nd ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Osei-Kyei, R.; Chan, A.P.C.; Ameyaw, E.E. A fuzzy synthetic evaluation analysis of operational management critical success factors for public-private partnership infrastructure projects. Benchmarking Int. J. 2017, 24, 2092–2112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ameyaw, E.E.; Chan, A.P. Evaluation and ranking of risk factors in public–private partnership water supply projects in developing countries using fuzzy synthetic evaluation approach. Expert Syst. Appl. 2015, 42, 5102–5116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; Chan, A.P.; Yeung, J.F. Developing a fuzzy risk allocation model for PPP projects in China. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2010, 136, 894–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lingard, H.; Rowlinson, S. Letter to the editor. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2006, 24, 1107–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahadzie, D.K.; Proverbs, D.G.; Olomolaiye, P.O. Critical success criteria for mass house building projects in developing countries. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2008, 26, 675–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, B.; Akintoye, A.; Edwards, P.J.; Hardcastle, C. Critical success factors for PPP/PFI projects in the UK construction industry. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2005, 23, 459–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdi, H. Factor Rotations in Factor Analyses. In Encyclopedia for Research Methods for the Social Sciences; Lewis-Beck, M., Bryman, A., Futing, T., Eds.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2003; pp. 792–795. Available online: https://personal.utdallas.edu/~herve/Abdi-rotations-pretty.pdf (accessed on 15 December 2024).
- Liu, J.; Li, Q.; Wang, Y. Risk analysis in ultra-deep scientific drilling project—A fuzzy synthetic evaluation approach. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2013, 31, 449–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agyekum, K.; Amudjie, J. Challenges to implementing circular economy: Empirical evidence among built environment firms in Ghana. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2024, 24, 281–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwasafo, O.K.; Adinyira, E.; Agyekum, K. Impact of green construction procurement practices on the success of circular economy in Ghana. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag. 2024, 14, 765–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asiedu, E.; Blay Jnr AV, K.; Denutsui, S.K. Exploring practitioners’ knowledge of circular economy in the Ghanaian construction industry. Int. Res. J. Sci. Technol. Educ. Manag. (IRJSTEM) 2024, 4, 9–19. [Google Scholar]
- Gyimah, S.; Owusu-Manu, D.G.; Edwards, D.J.; Buertey, J.I.T.; Danso, A.K. Exploring the contributions of circular business models towards the transition of green economy in the Ghanaian construction industry. In Smart and Sustainable Built Environment; Emerald Insight: Leeds, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO 27001; Information Security, Cybersecurity and Privacy Protection-Information Security Management Systems-Requirements. 2022. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/27001 (accessed on 23 March 2025).
- Pittri, H.; Agyekum, K.; Botchway, E.A.; Alencastro, J.; Oladinrin, O.T.; Dompey, A.M.A. Drivers for design for deconstruction (DfD) implementation among design professionals. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2024, 13, 1134–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pittri, H.; Agyekum, K.; Ayebeng Botchway, E.; Opoku, A.; Bimpli, I. Design for deconstruction (DfD) implementation among design professionals: Empirical evidence from Ghana. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2024, 24, 1387–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kottmeyer, B. Digitisation and sustainable development: The opportunities and risks of using digital technologies for the implementation of a circular economy. J. Entrep. Innov. Emerg. Econ. 2021, 7, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramesohl, S.; Berg, H.; Wirtz, J. The Circular Economy and Digitalisation: Strategies for a Digital-Ecological Industry Transformation; Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy: Wuppertal, Germany, 2022; Available online: https://epub.wupperinst.org/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/7900/file/7900_Circular_Economy.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2023).
SN | Digital Technology | Function in CE Implementation | Source(s) |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Building Information Modeling (BIM) | Enables material tracking, lifecycle assessment, and optimized design for sustainability | [1,9,15,18,19,20,23,25,27] |
2 | Blockchain Technology | Blockchain fosters supply chain transparency by offering real-time data visibility across manufacturers, suppliers, and recyclers. This enables efficient reverse logistics for returned, reused, or remanufactured products | [1,9,18,19,25,26,27] |
3 | Internet of Things (IoT) | Facilitates real-time data collection and remote monitoring of construction materials and processes | [1,9,18,23,25,27] |
4 | Artificial Intelligence (AI) | Supports predictive analytics for waste minimization and optimized resource utilization | [1,9,18,23,25,28] |
5 | Digital Twins | Provides virtual simulations for predictive maintenance and extended building lifecycle | [9,18,22,23,25,27] |
6 | Big Data Analytics | Big Data Analytics helps track and analyze materials and products throughout their lifecycle, enabling better recovery, reuse, and recycling | [9,25] |
7 | Cloud Computing | Supports efficient data storage, access, and collaboration among stakeholders | [9,25] |
8 | 3D Printing | Reduces material waste by enabling precise, on-demand production of components | [9,25] |
9 | Geographic Information Systems (GIS) | Assists in site selection, resource mapping, and impact assessment for circular construction | [9,25] |
10 | Robotics and Automation | Enhances efficiency in deconstruction, material recovery, and resource optimization | [9] |
11 | Material passport | Store detailed material properties, such as composition, toxicity, recyclability, and embodied carbon footprint. This information allows stakeholders to track materials throughout their lifecycle, from procurement to reuse, ensuring a closed-loop system | [9,15,18,20,25,26,27] |
S/N | Barrier | Source(s) | Explanation |
---|---|---|---|
B1 | Lack of technical expertise | [9,25,29] | Insufficient knowledge and skills to adopt digital tools like BIM, AI, or IoT hinder their effective application in CE practices. |
B2 | High implementation costs | [9,22,23] | High initial investment in digital tools such as digital twins, blockchain, and RFID discourages stakeholders from adopting them for CE implementation. |
B3 | Fragmented construction industry | [9,22,25] | The construction industry is highly fragmented, with poor coordination between stakeholders, making the integration of digital tools for CE challenging. |
B4 | Lack of interoperability of digital tools | [9,23,29] | Many digital technologies (e.g., BIM and material passports) are not fully interoperable across platforms, hindering data exchange and collaboration. |
B5 | Limited access to quality data | [9,22,23] | The absence of accurate and reliable data on materials, components, and buildings makes it difficult to implement CE strategies effectively. |
B6 | Resistance to change | [9,25,29] | Cultural resistance within organizations and reluctance among stakeholders to adopt new digital processes slow down CE implementation. |
B7 | Regulatory and policy gaps | [9,23,25] | Lack of supportive regulations and standards for circular practices and digital technology integration hinders the transition. |
B8 | Data security and privacy concerns | [9,29] | Concerns about the security and privacy of data collected through digital tools such as blockchain or IoT discourage stakeholders from using these technologies. |
B9 | High energy consumption of technologies | [9,23] | Digital tools and processes like AI and blockchain often require significant energy resources, contradicting CE’s sustainability goals. |
B10 | Limited scalability | [9,25,29] | Many digital solutions are developed for specific projects and are not easily scalable across the construction industry. |
B11 | Lack of stakeholder collaboration | [9,23,29] | Poor communication and collaboration between stakeholders across the value chain limit the adoption of digital tools for CE. |
B12 | Economic unpredictability | [9,23] | Uncertainty in economic returns from CE initiatives, combined with the high costs of digital technologies, discourages investment. |
B13 | Limited availability of recycled materials | [9,25,29] | The insufficient supply and demand for recycled materials restrict the development of circular processes, which depend on digital tracking and lifecycle data. |
B14 | Cybersecurity risks | [9,23] | Increased reliance on interconnected digital systems exposes organizations to potential cybersecurity threats, making stakeholders hesitant to adopt these technologies. |
B15 | Complexity of digital tools | [9,29] | Many tools are overly complex for practical use, leading to resistance among end-users and a lack of perceived value. |
B16 | Lack of standardization | [9,23,25] | Absence of unified standards for tools like BIM and material passports leads to inefficiencies in adopting circular construction practices. |
B17 | Inadequate CE knowledge management | [9,23] | Lack of efficient systems for managing and disseminating CE knowledge limits the ability to implement digital tools effectively. |
B18 | Lack of trained workforce | [9,23,29] | Insufficient training and expertise in handling advanced digital tools limit their adoption in CE practices. |
B19 | Lack of CE-specific indicators | [9,23,29] | The absence of clear metrics and indicators for assessing the integration of CE practices using digital tools hinders decision-making. |
B20 | Poor infrastructure for circular systems | [23,29] | Inadequate infrastructure for recycling, waste separation, and material recovery hampers the effectiveness of digital tools in enabling CE. |
B21 | Short lifecycle of enabling technologies (RFID) | [9,23] | Technologies like RFID tags often have a shorter lifespan than construction projects, limiting their usefulness in CE practices. |
B22 | Need for new organizational role and training | [1,25] | The transition to CE and digital transformation requires specialized roles, such as CE strategists and digital technology experts, necessitating extensive training programs. |
B23 | Lack of financial resources | [19,23] | High costs of acquiring, implementing, and maintaining digital technologies deter adoption, particularly among small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the construction industry. |
B24 | Slow uptake of new technologies in the construction industry | [1,11] | The construction industry is traditionally slow to adopt innovation due to entrenched practices, risk aversion, and a lack of regulatory incentives. |
B25 | Environmental concerns of new technologies | [9,22] | The production, use, and disposal of digital technologies, such as sensors and IoT devices, raise concerns about electronic waste and resource-intensive manufacturing. |
B26 | Lack of awareness of CE and/or DTs | [23,25] | Many industry stakeholders lack knowledge about CE principles and digital tools, limiting widespread adoption and engagement. |
B27 | Lack of commitment from stakeholders | [1,11] | The absence of clear incentives, coupled with competing priorities, results in weak commitment from policymakers, investors, and construction firms toward CE adoption. |
B28 | Lack of built-environment-related data | [19,22] | A lack of standardized and accessible data on building materials, construction processes, and waste streams inhibits informed decision-making and lifecycle analysis. |
B29 | Unavailability of web-based database for secondary products | [9,25] | The lack of digital platforms to catalog and facilitate the exchange of reused and recycled materials limits circular construction practices and material traceability. |
Demographic Information | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|
Profession | ||
Quantity Surveyor | 42 | 32.3 |
Architect | 11 | 8.5 |
Engineer | 18 | 13.8 |
Project Manager | 15 | 11.5 |
Site/Construction Manager | 32 | 24.6 |
Researcher/Academic | 12 | 9.3 |
Total | 130 | 100 |
Number of years spent in current profession | ||
1–5 years | 30 | 23.1 |
6–10 years | 35 | 26.9 |
11–15 years | 12 | 9.2 |
16–20 years | 14 | 10.8 |
More than 20 years | 39 | 30.0 |
Total | 130 | 100 |
Level of Education | ||
BSc | 50 | 38.5 |
MBA/MSc./MPhil | 34 | 26.2 |
PhD | 46 | 35.3 |
Total | 130 | 100 |
Category of firm | ||
D1K1 | 36 | 27.7 |
D2K2 | 36 | 27.7 |
D3K3 | 23 | 17.7 |
D4K4 | 17 | 13.1 |
None | 18 | 13.8 |
TOTAL | 130 | 100 |
Code | Barriers (Indicator (I)) | Mean | SD | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|
B1 | Complexity of digital tools | 4.677 | 0.587 | 1st |
B2 | Lack of technical expertise | 4.669 | 0.640 | 2nd |
B3 | Lack of commitment from stakeholders | 4.654 | 0.567 | 3rd |
B4 | Lack of financial resources | 4.639 | 0.693 | 4th |
B5 | Lack of CE-specific indicators | 4.615 | 0.801 | 5th |
B6 | Limited scalability | 4.615 | 0.698 | 6th |
B7 | Lack of standardization | 4.615 | 0.857 | 7th |
B8 | Economic unpredictability | 4.608 | 0.629 | 8th |
B9 | High implementation costs | 4.585 | 0.581 | 9th |
B10 | Short lifecycle of enabling technologies (RFID) | 4.585 | 0.843 | 10th |
B11 | Unavailability of web-based database for secondary products | 4.577 | 0.746 | 11th |
B12 | Lack of trained workforce | 4.569 | 0.704 | 12th |
B13 | Limited availability of recycled materials | 4.561 | 0.826 | 13th |
B14 | Limited access to quality data | 4.561 | 0.826 | 14th |
B15 | Poor infrastructure for circular systems | 4.554 | 0.727 | 15th |
B16 | Slow uptake of new technologies in the construction industry | 4.554 | 0.636 | 16th |
B17 | Lack of awareness of CE and/or DTs | 4.554 | 0.636 | 17th |
B18 | Lack of built-environment-related data | 4.547 | 0.769 | 18th |
B19 | Need for new organizational role and training | 4.546 | 0.808 | 19th |
B20 | Fragmented construction industry | 4.546 | 0.683 | 20th |
B21 | Inadequate CE knowledge management | 4.546 | 0.727 | 21st |
B22 | Regulatory and policy gaps | 4.539 | 0.881 | 22nd |
B23 | Lack of interoperability of digital tools | 4.523 | 0.637 | 23rd |
B24 | Environmental concerns of new technologies | 4.515 | 0.770 | 24th |
B25 | Data security and privacy concerns | 4.485 | 0.790 | 25th |
B26 | Cybersecurity risks | 4.477 | 0.684 | 26th |
B27 | Resistance to change | 4.477 | 0.900 | 27th |
Indicator Codes | Factor Groupings | Factor Loading | Eigenvalue | % of Variance Explained | Cumulative % Variance Explained |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Criteria 1 | Institutional and Knowledge Barriers | 15.956 | 59.097 | 59.097 | |
B7 | Lack of standardization | 0.830 | |||
B5 | Lack of CE-specific indicators | 0.770 | |||
B15 | Poor infrastructure for circular systems | 0.714 | |||
B21 | Inadequate CE knowledge management | 0.713 | |||
B18 | Lack of built-environment-related data | 0.712 | |||
B11 | Unavailability of web-based database for secondary products | 0.670 | |||
B10 | Short lifecycle of enabling technologies (RFID) | 0.666 | |||
B12 | Lack of trained workforce | 0.657 | |||
B19 | Need for new organizational role and training | 0.545 | |||
Criteria | Financial and Adoption Constraints | 1.847 | 6.842 | 65.938 | |
B9 | High implementation costs | 0.815 | |||
B17 | Lack of awareness of CE and/or DTs | 0.803 | |||
B16 | Slow uptake of new technologies in the construction industry | 0.774 | |||
B4 | Lack of financial resources | 0.729 | |||
B26 | Cybersecurity risks | 0.608 | |||
B3 | Lack of commitment from stakeholders | 0.590 | |||
B23 | Lack of interoperability of digital tools | 0.547 | |||
B1 | Complexity of digital tools | 0.525 | |||
Criteria | Technological and Market Limitations | 1.757 | 6.509 | 72.447 | |
B24 | Environmental concerns of new technologies | 0.819 | |||
B25 | Data security and privacy concerns | 0.816 | |||
B13 | Limited availability of recycled materials | 0.724 | |||
B8 | Economic unpredictability | 0.713 | |||
B6 | Limited scalability | 0.707 | |||
Criteria | Regulatory and Organizational Challenges | 1.458 | 5.398 | 77.846 | |
B2 | Lack of technical expertise | 0.851 | |||
B27 | 0.707 | ||||
B14 | Resistance to change | 0.695 | |||
B20 | Fragmented construction industry | 0.569 | |||
B22 | Regulatory and policy gaps | 0.517 |
Criteria 1: Institutional and Knowledge Barriers | Mean | Weightings of Each Indicator (Wi) | Weightings of Each Grouping (Wc) |
---|---|---|---|
B7 | 4.615 | 0.112 | |
B5 | 4.615 | 0.112 | |
B15 | 4.554 | 0.111 | |
B21 | 4.546 | 0.110 | |
B18 | 4.546 | 0.110 | |
B11 | 4.577 | 0.111 | |
B10 | 4.585 | 0.111 | |
B12 | 4.569 | 0.111 | |
B19 | 4.546 | 0.110 | |
41.154 | 1.000 | 0.334 | |
Criteria 2: Financial and Adoption Constraints | |||
B9 | 4.585 | 0.125 | |
B17 | 4.554 | 0.124 | |
B16 | 4.554 | 0.124 | |
B4 | 4.638 | 0.127 | |
B26 | 4.477 | 0.122 | |
B3 | 4.654 | 0.127 | |
B23 | 4.523 | 0.123 | |
B1 | 4.677 | 0.128 | |
36.662 | 1.000 | 0.297 | |
Criteria 3: Technological and Market Limitations | |||
B24 | 4.515 | 0.198 | |
B25 | 4.485 | 0.197 | |
B13 | 4.562 | 0.200 | |
B8 | 4.608 | 0.202 | |
B6 | 4.615 | 0.203 | |
22.785 | 1.000 | 0.185 | |
Criteria 4: Regulatory and Organizational Challenges | |||
B2 | 4.669 | 0.205 | |
B27 | 4.477 | 0.196 | |
B14 | 4.562 | 0.200 | |
B20 | 4.546 | 0.199 | |
B22 | 4.538 | 0.199 | |
22.792 | 1.000 | 0.185 | |
1 |
Fuzzy Matrix | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Criteria 1: Institutional and Knowledge Barriers | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Neutral | Agree | Strongly Agree | Membership Function Level 2 | Membership Function Level 1 | Index |
B7 | 0.031 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.185 | 0.754 | (0.031, 0.015, 0.015, 0.185, 0.754) | 0.010, 0.027, 0.034, 0.235, 0.693 | 4.573 |
B5 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.062 | 0.154 | 0.754 | (0.015, 0.015, 0.062, 0.154, 0.754) | ||
B15 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.000 | 0.338 | 0.631 | (0.015, 0.015, 0.000, 0.338, 0.631) | ||
B21 | 0.000 | 0.031 | 0.046 | 0.269 | 0.654 | (0.000, 0.031, 0.046, 0.269, 0.654) | ||
B18 | 0.000 | 0.046 | 0.031 | 0.254 | 0.669 | (0.000, 0.046, 0.031, 0.254, 0.669) | ||
B11 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.285 | 0.669 | (0.015, 0.015, 0.015, 0.285, 0.669) | ||
B10 | 0.015 | 0.031 | 0.046 | 0.169 | 0.738 | (0.015, 0.031, 0.046, 0.169, 0.738) | ||
B12 | 0.000 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 0.277 | 0.662 | (0.000, 0.031, 0.031, 0.277, 0.662) | ||
B19 | 0.000 | 0.046 | 0.062 | 0.192 | 0.700 | (0.000, 0.046, 0.062, 0.192, 0.700) | ||
Criteria 2: Financial and Adoption Constraints | ||||||||
B9 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.046 | 0.323 | 0.631 | (0.000, 0.000, 0.046, 0.323, 0.631) | 0.000, 0.010, 0.048, 0.292, 0.651 | 4.584 |
B17 | 0.000 | 0.015 | 0.031 | 0.338 | 0.615 | (0.000, 0.015, 0.031, 0.338, 0.615) | ||
B16 | 0.000 | 0.015 | 0.031 | 0.338 | 0.615 | (0.000, 0.015, 0.031, 0.338, 0.615) | ||
B4 | 0.000 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 0.208 | 0.731 | (0.000, 0.031, 0.031, 0.208, 0.731) | ||
B26 | 0.000 | 0.015 | 0.062 | 0.354 | 0.569 | (0.000, 0.015, 0.062, 0.354, 0.569) | ||
B3 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.046 | 0.254 | 0.700 | (0.000, 0.000, 0.046, 0.254, 0.700) | ||
B23 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.077 | 0.323 | 0.6 | (0.000, 0.000, 0.077, 0.323, 0.600) | ||
B1 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.062 | 0.200 | 0.738 | (0.000, 0.000, 0.062, 0.200, 0.738) | ||
Criteria 3: Technological and Market Limitations | ||||||||
B24 | 0.000 | 0.046 | 0.031 | 0.285 | 0.638 | (0.000, 0.046, 0.031, 0.285, 0.638) | 0.006, 0.025, 0.043, 0.258, 0.668 | 4.557 |
B25 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.046 | 0.315 | 0.608 | (0.015, 0.015, 0.046, 0.315, 0.608) | ||
B13 | 0.015 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 0.223 | 0.700 | (0.015, 0.031, 0.031, 0.223, 0.700) | ||
B8 | 0.000 | 0.015 | 0.031 | 0.285 | 0.669 | (0.000, 0.015, 0.031, 0.285, 0.669) | ||
B6 | 0.000 | 0.015 | 0.077 | 0.185 | 0.723 | (0.000, 0.015, 0.077, 0.185, 0.723) | ||
Criteria 4: Regulatory and Organizational Challenges | ||||||||
B2 | 0.015 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.269 | 0.715 | (0.015, 0.000, 0.000, 0.269, 0.715) | 0.0122, 0.025, 0.043, 0.232, 0.688 | 4.559 |
B27 | 0.031 | 0.015 | 0.046 | 0.262 | 0.646 | (0.030, 0.015, 0.046, 0.262, 0.646) | ||
B14 | 0.015 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 0.223 | 0.700 | (0.015, 0.031, 0.031, 0.223, 0.700) | ||
B20 | 0.000 | 0.015 | 0.062 | 0.285 | 0.638 | (0.000, 0.015, 0.062, 0.285, 0.638) | ||
B22 | 0.000 | 0.062 | 0.077 | 0.123 | 0.738 | (0.000, 0.062, 0.077, 0.123, 0.738) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pittri, H.; Godawatte, G.A.G.R.; Esangbedo, O.P.; Antwi-Afari, P.; Bao, Z. Exploring Barriers to the Adoption of Digital Technologies for Circular Economy Practices in the Construction Industry in Developing Countries: A Case of Ghana. Buildings 2025, 15, 1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15071090
Pittri H, Godawatte GAGR, Esangbedo OP, Antwi-Afari P, Bao Z. Exploring Barriers to the Adoption of Digital Technologies for Circular Economy Practices in the Construction Industry in Developing Countries: A Case of Ghana. Buildings. 2025; 15(7):1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15071090
Chicago/Turabian StylePittri, Hayford, Godawatte Arachchige Gimhan Rathnagee Godawatte, Osabhie Paul Esangbedo, Prince Antwi-Afari, and Zhikang Bao. 2025. "Exploring Barriers to the Adoption of Digital Technologies for Circular Economy Practices in the Construction Industry in Developing Countries: A Case of Ghana" Buildings 15, no. 7: 1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15071090
APA StylePittri, H., Godawatte, G. A. G. R., Esangbedo, O. P., Antwi-Afari, P., & Bao, Z. (2025). Exploring Barriers to the Adoption of Digital Technologies for Circular Economy Practices in the Construction Industry in Developing Countries: A Case of Ghana. Buildings, 15(7), 1090. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15071090