Analysis of Problems and Solutions in Stakeholder Management in Digital Technology-Based Sustainable Construction Projects
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32492/nucleus.v5i1.5112Keywords:
Stakeholder management, Sustainable construction projects, Digital technology, Collaborative governance, BIM-LCAAbstract
Stakeholder management in modern sustainable construction projects faces significant complexity due to the diversity of priorities and barriers to the adoption of digital technology. A review of the literature indicates that there remains a significant gap regarding disagreements in decision-making, poor coordination between parties, and the sub-optimal use of technology at the project governance level. To address these issues, this research aims to formulate a comprehensive framework based on PMBOK 10 that integrates Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) with cutting-edge technologies (such as AI, blockchain, and fuzzy logic). This framework is designed to facilitate collaborative governance and enhance the effectiveness of aligning various interests throughout the project lifecycle. The research method uses a descriptive analysis approach to three main problem categories including stakeholder disagreements, digital technology evaluation, and stakeholder relationships. The research results identified nine specific problems with solutions based on Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), digital technology (AI, big data, blockchain), collaborative governance, and interactive stakeholder mapping systems. The discussion shows the importance of technology integration, human resource capacity building, communication transparency, and structured coordination mechanisms. The research conclusion confirms that effective stakeholder management requires a holistic approach that combines digital technology, participatory collaboration, and adaptive monitoring systems to improve the sustainability performance of infrastructure projects.
References
I. Wolf, J. Kratzer, and C. Reimer, “Stakeholder Perspectives on Policy, Social, and Organizational Challenges of Sustainable Residential, Multi-Storey Building Retrofitting in Germany,” Buildings, vol. 15, no. 19, p. 3566, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.3390/buildings15193566.
S. Parece, R. Resende, and V. Rato, “A BIM-based tool for embodied carbon assessment using a Construction Classification System,” Dev. Built Environ., vol. 19, p. 100467, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.dibe.2024.100467.
R. J. Tumpa and L. Naeni, “Improving decision-making and stakeholder engagement at project governance using digital technology for sustainable infrastructure projects,” Smart Sustain. Built Environ., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1292–1329, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.1108/SASBE-10-2024-0451.
X. Xiahou, X. Ding, P. Chen, Y. Qian, and H. Jin, “Digital Technologies in Urban Regeneration: A Systematic Literature Review from the Perspectives of Stakeholders, Scales, and Stages,” Buildings, vol. 15, no. 14, p. 2455, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.3390/buildings15142455.
L. Zhang, Y. Cai, S. Song, and L. Sun, “A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for building assessment, selection, and retrofit. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management,” Buildings, vol. 14, no. 9, p. 2962, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.3390/buildings14092962.
S. Parece, R. Resende, and V. Rato, “Stakeholder Perspectives on BIM-LCA Integration in Building Design: Adoption, Challenges, and Future Directions,” Build. Environ., vol. 284, p. 113434, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2025.113434.
Q. Zhu, J. Xi, X. Hu, H.-Y. Chong, Y. Zhou, and S. Lyu, “Stakeholder Mapping and Analysis of Off-Site Construction Projects: Utilizing a Power–Interest Matrix and the Fuzzy Logic Theory,” Buildings, vol. 14, no. 9, p. 2865, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.3390/buildings14092865.
P. Villalba, A. J. Sánchez-Garrido, and V. Yepes, “A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for building assessment, selection, and retrofit. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management,” J. Civ. Eng. Manag., vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 465–480, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.3846/jcem.2024.21621.
F. Martins, P. Ribeiro, and F. J. Duarte, “Classifying and Managing a Complex Project using the European Union public tendering rules, focusing on Stakeholder Management,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 256, pp. 1836–1844, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2025.02.324.
S. A. Huq and B. Puthuvayi, “Stakeholders’ satisfaction assessment in heritage conservation: Case study of a project performance model for Thiruvananthapuram Fort Area, Kerala, India,” Front. Archit. Res., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 285–304, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.foar.2023.12.012.
Z. Liao and M. Liu, “Critical barriers and countermeasures to urban regeneration from the stakeholder perspective: a literature review,” Front. Sustain. Cities, vol. 5, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.3389/frsc.2023.1115648.
G. Mejía, O. Sánchez, K. Castañeda, and E. Pellicer, “Stakeholders’ issues as a source of project delays: a meta-analysis between building and road projects,” Rev. la construcción, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 51–73, 2023, doi: 10.7764/RDLC.22.1.51.
Y. Yang, Z. Wei, and Z. Zhang, “Stakeholder Relationship in Construction Projects: A Mixed Methods Review,” Buildings, vol. 13, no. 12, p. 3122, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.3390/buildings13123122.
B. Hwabamungu and P. Shepherd, “The Influence of Stakeholder Involvement in the Adoption of Digital Technologies in the UK Construction Industry,” Informatics, vol. 11, no. 4, p. 97, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.3390/informatics11040097.
M. de O. Gondak, G. F. do Prado, C. Hluszko, J. T. de Souza, and A. C. de Francisco, “Interactive Map of Stakeholders’ Journey in Construction: Focus on Waste Management and Circular Economy,” Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 11, p. 5195, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.3390/su17115195.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nucleus Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
