Journals / Turkish Journal of Civil Engineering / 2023 / Cilt: 34 Sayı: 5

Operational Barriers against the Use of Smart Contracts in Construction Projects

Pages
81–106
Publication Date
2023-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results show that financial and technical aspects establish the most significant categories hindering the adoption of smart contracts, while expensive and clunky drafting and registration process, and cost of upskilling are the most significant barriers.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:As an emerging but embryonic way of contract administration, smart contracts can play a prominent role in managing construction projects in an effective manner.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Finally, a framework is proposed for the adoption of smart contracts effectively in construction projects. 20 operational barriers were attained based on four main barrier categories: technical, financial, security/technological, and time.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results show that financial and technical aspects establish the most significant categories hindering the adoption of smart contracts, while expensive and clunky drafting and registration process, and cost of upskilling are the most significant barriers.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Blockchain · operational risks · contract administration

Abstract

As an emerging but embryonic way of contract administration, smart contracts can play a prominent role in managing construction projects in an effective manner. However, there are still some barriers preventing the implementation of them in the life cycles of construction projects. This study investigates operational barriers against the adoption of smart contracts in construction projects and explores the challenges in this process. Operational barriers against smart contract implementation are identified through a comprehensive literature review and a focus group discussion is performed to refine the identified barriers. These barriers are evaluated through fuzzy analytical hierarchy process analysis. Finally, a framework is proposed for the adoption of smart contracts effectively in construction projects. 20 operational barriers were attained based on four main barrier categories: technical, financial, security/technological, and time. The results show that financial and technical aspects establish the most significant categories hindering the adoption of smart contracts, while expensive and clunky drafting and registration process, and cost of upskilling are the most significant barriers. Overall, the proposed framework might be useful for practitioners and project managers, who decide to use smart contracts in managing construction projects. The motive behind understanding critical operational barriers is to assist construction practitioners in automating contract execution processes. This study provides a basis for recommending the necessary strategies for the use of smart contracts in the industry to researchers in the construction management field.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÜNKCÜ, H., KOC, K., GURGUN, A. P., DAGOU, H. H. (2023). Operational Barriers against the Use of Smart Contracts in Construction Projects. Turkish Journal of Civil Engineering, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 5, 81–106. https://ajindex.com/articles/960952

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Zhang, Y., Wang, T., and Yuen, K. V., Construction Site Information Decentralized Management Using Blockchain and Smart Contracts, Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering 37, 1450–1467 2022.
  2. Ahn, S., Shokri, S., Lee, S., Haas, C. T., and Haas, R. C. G., Exploratory Study on the Effectiveness of Interface-Management Practices in Dealing with Project Complexity in Large-Scale Engineering and Construction Projects, Journal of Management in Engineering 33, 1–12 2017.
  3. Arcadis, Global Construction Disputes Report 2022, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.arcadis.com/en/knowledge-hub/perspectives/global/global-construction-disputes-report.
  4. Demirkesen, S. and Ozorhon, B., Measuring Project Management Performance: Case of Construction Industry, EMJ - Engineering Management Journal 29, 258–277 2017.
  5. Liu, L., Comparative Analysis of the Mechanism of Engineering Project Management Standardization, in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020, 526, 012218. Wu, Q., Sheng, W., Wei, F., Liu, H., and Wen, H., Identification of Smart Construction Features and Impacts on Engineering Project Performance, in Conference Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Project Management, 2022, 837–842.
  6. Tang, L., Xiahou, X., Li, K., Li, Q., and Hu, X., Research on the Relationship Between Flexible Contract Term Setting Method and Setting Effect of Environmental Protection PPP Project, EMJ - Engineering Management Journal 00, 1–13 2022.
  7. Meier, O. and Sannajust, A., The Smart Contract Revolution: A Solution for the Holdup Problem?, Small Business Economics 57, 1073–1088 2021.
  8. Mahmudnia, D., Arashpour, M., and Yang, R., Blockchain in Construction Management: Applications, Advantages and Limitations, Automation in Construction 140, 104379 2022.
  9. Mutikanga, H. E., Abdul Nabi, M., Ali, G. G., El-adaway, I. H., and Caldwell, A., Postaward Construction and Contract Management of Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Hydropower Projects: Two Case Studies from Uganda, Journal of Management in Engineering 38, 05022012 2022.
  10. Mckinsey Global Insititute, Reinventing Construction: A Route to Higher Productivity, 2017.
  11. Sinha, A. K. and Jha, K. N., Critical Analysis of Contract Clauses in Road Sector: Case Study, Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 12, 05020005 2020.
  12. Winanri, R. P., Susanti, B., and Juliantina, I., Comparison Analysis Between Traditional and Long Segment Contracts on National Road Preservation Ac