Article

Examining Green Building Practices: The Influence on Building

Information Modeling Function Diffusion
Claudette Ibrahim El Hajj 1, * and Germán Martínez Montes 2

1 Department of Civil Engineering, Notre Dame University Louaize, Zouk Mikael P.O. Box 72, Lebanon
2 Department of Construction and Engineering Projects, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain;
gmmontes@ugr.es
* Correspondence: chajj@ndu.edu.lb

Abstract: The construction sector plays a pivotal role in sustainability efforts, driving the
need for innovative solutions like Building Information Modeling (BIM) to optimize green
building design and performance. This study examines the diffusion of BIM functionalities
that support sustainability, particularly in energy efficiency, water management, mate-
rial selection, indoor environmental quality, and green building certification. Using the
innovation diffusion theory, the research employs three mathematical models—internal, ex-
ternal, and mixed—to analyze the adoption patterns of BIM for green building applications.
Empirical findings reveal that external factors, such as government regulations, financial
incentives, and industry trends, significantly influence the diffusion of BIM functions re-
lated to environmental performance. The mixed diffusion model demonstrates the highest
explanatory power, indicating that both external and internal drivers play a role, partic-
ularly in material selection and lifecycle assessment. This study highlights the growing
integration of BIM in sustainable construction, reinforcing the need for regulatory support
to accelerate adoption. These findings offer valuable insights for researchers, policymakers,
and industry professionals, demonstrating how BIM can drive greener practices in the built
environment. Policymakers should focus on developing policies and offering incentives
such as feed-in tariffs, investment tax credits, and integrating Green BIM requirements into
building codes to encourage sustainable construction practices. Also, curricula should be
updated to include real-world projects and experiential learning to improve the adoption
Academic Editors: Ahmad Jrade,
Jieying Jane Zhang, Farzad Jalaei and
and efficiency of Green BIM practices. Future research should explore enhanced digital
Aliakbar Kamari frameworks to further improve BIM’s impact on sustainability and lifecycle optimization.
Received: 25 February 2025
Revised: 5 April 2025
Keywords: BIM; RES; sustainability; diffusion; theory; innovation
Accepted: 15 April 2025
Published: 24 April 2025

Citation: El Hajj, C.I.; Martínez

Montes, G. Examining Green Building 1. Introduction
Practices: The Influence on Building The increasing demand for sustainable development has pushed the construction sec-
Information Modeling Function
tor towards inventive approaches that relieve natural effects while progressing proficiency.
Diffusion. Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843.
The architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry essentially contributes to
https://doi.org/10.3390/su17093843
worldwide energy utilization and carbon emissions. According to the United Nations Envi-
Copyright: © 2025 by the authors.
ronment Program [1], in 2021, the AEC segment accounted for around 37% of worldwide
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
energy-related CO2 emissions, with energy utilization coming to 132 exajoules, which is
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
more than a third of the worldwide demand [2], and the World Green Building Coun-
conditions of the Creative Commons cil [3] emphasized that buildings are responsible for 39% of energy-related carbon outflows
Attribution (CC BY) license around the world, with 28% emerging from operational emissions, namely energy utilized
(https://creativecommons.org/ for heating, cooling, and fueling buildings, and the remaining 11% from materials and
licenses/by/4.0/).

Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 https://doi.org/10.3390/su17093843

Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 2 of 29

development forms. For this reason, the shift towards green buildings has risen as a key ob-
jective for stakeholders in the AEC industry [4]. Among different innovative tools, Building
Information Modeling (BIM) has developed as a key technology that enhances construction
efficiency processes through the optimization of energy usage, material selection, and
lifecycle assessments [5].
In any case, the application of BIM remains shy, especially in green building activities,
due to challenges such as high adoption costs, a lack of skills, and issues related to interop-
erability [6]. Previous studies have explored the role of BIM in sustainable development,
emphasizing its capabilities for energy simulations, the automation of green certification
processes, and waste reduction procedures [7,8]. Researchers have acknowledged that
BIM is a critical enabler for green building certification by integrating environmental
performance analysis in the early stages of the design [9].
Later improvements in BIM’s functionalities advance and open its potential for sus-
tainability, highlighting functions that encourage multi-objective optimization for accom-
plishing net-zero carbon targets [5]. Also, BIM’s association with material lifecycle assess-
ments and digital twin integration provides a data-driven system for informed sustainable
decision-making all through the extended lifecycle [10]. Despite these benefits, BIM dif-
fusion for functions related to sustainability is hindered by financial and technological
barriers [11].
Investigation shows that the complexities encompassing BIM adoption manifest in
developing regions, where the lack of standardized policies, low awareness, and insuffi-
cient skilled labor impede broader utilization [12]. In addition, interoperability challenges
between different BIM software and green certification systems remain a significant imped-
iment that discourages its integration into sustainable construction practices [13,14].
Other studies examined small-scale green building projects and demonstrated that BIM
applications could effectively promote sustainability [15]. The research addressed specific
obstacles and opportunities encountered in these projects, highlighting that while BIM has
been extensively examined in large-scale developments, its application in smaller projects
also offers significant sustainability benefits. Similarly, Ref. [16] emphasized that while
BIM offers valuable tools for certain assessments, it is essential to recognize its limitations
in providing a comprehensive overview. Establishing a process is inherently dependent
on prior knowledge, which is often lacking without a comprehensive understanding of
the subject matter in KSA. In this context, Ref. [15] investigated BIM-based projects with a
view to enhancing the widespread adoption of BIM for construction projects in Nigeria by
the government and construction firms. The findings indicated that BIM has the potential
to significantly improve design coordination and construction execution, suggesting that
its integration can lead to more sustainable building practices. Despite the contribution
of previous researchers in the field of BIM and green buildings, the existing literature
often lacks empirical evidence on specific barriers and enablers influencing Green BIM
diffusion, particularly in the Gulf region, where construction practices and policies differ
from Western contexts. In addition, they have not sufficiently explored the role of external,
internal, and mixed factors in the adoption of Green BIM, limiting the understanding
of how different forces drive or hinder its implementation. This study is driven by the
unique challenges and opportunities facing the Gulf region. These complexities have not
been adequately addressed in the existing literature. These include the region’s rapid
urban development, its reliance on conventional building techniques, and the emerging
demand for sustainable practices amid regulatory and technological gaps. Despite the
growing recognition of the benefits of BIM for sustainability purposes, there is a lack of
comprehensive research into the patterns of Green BIM diffusion and the specific factors
influencing the adoption of sustainability-related functions. These factors may include
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 3 of 29

regulatory barriers, technological fragmentation, and limited stakeholder awareness or

capacity in the construction sector.
Furthermore, traditional diffusion models often fail to capture the complexity of BIM
adoption in the context of sustainable construction. This study employs innovative diffu-
sion models, specifically internal, external, and mixed models, to provide a more nuanced
understanding of how external regulations, market demands, and organizational readiness
interact in shaping the adoption of Green BIM functions. The absence of empirical data
on the factors influencing Green BIM diffusion in this region not only leaves a signifi-
cant knowledge gap but also inhibits the development of tailored strategies to promote
sustainability in construction practices.
Current research concentrates on technological problems [17] and sustainable prac-
tices in construction, emphasizing energy efficiency [18], waste reduction [15] and lifecycle
assessments [19]. Also, scholars highlighted the associated benefits like cost savings, im-
proved resource management, and reduced environmental impact through digital modeling
and simulations [18,20,21]. Moreover, earlier studies concentrated on modeling capabilities
and recent advancements that emphasize enhanced data integration and sustainability
outcome analysis. Despite the importance of the above, there is still a lack of knowledge
about the patterns of diffusion and whether external factors, including regulations, policies,
and media, or internal factors, such as imitative behavior and bandwagon pressure, affect
the diffusion of Green BIM functionalities in the Gulf area. The Gulf region has been
rarely researched for Green BIM diffusion patterns, limiting insights into adoption trends
and challenges.
The integration of BIM in complex construction projects, particularly high-risk environ-
ments like tunnel construction, has been explored in previous studies. Ref. [22] developed
a BIM-based risk management system that enhances safety, efficiency, and decision-making
in mountain tunnel construction. Their findings demonstrate how predictive modeling
and real-time analytics can improve hazard assessments. These insights can be applied
to Green BIM adoption in the Gulf region, where extreme climate conditions and rapid
urbanization require advanced digital solutions for sustainability.
Similarly, Ref. [23] used finite element modeling (FEM) and numerical simulation mod-
els to predict tunnel stability, assess geological risks, and optimize construction sequencing
in BIM-based tunnel engineering management. Song’s findings suggest that automated
analysis, lifecycle assessment tools, and sustainability-driven workflows can support Green
BIM adoption, enhancing decision-making in eco-friendly building practices.
Despite these advancements, research on Green BIM functionalities in the Gulf remains
limited. Ref. [22] provides valuable insights into BIM adoption barriers and facilitators,
particularly in risk-based digital modeling, predictive analytics, and sustainability assess-
ments. This study addresses this gap by extending BIM risk management approaches to
Green BIM adoption, offering a region-specific analysis of how digital tools can enhance
sustainable construction in the Gulf region.
In addition, observational data are needed on how innovative diffusion models can
illustrate the changing rates of decision-making to adopt specific Green BIM functions,
especially in the Gulf area [24]. Addressing these gaps is imperative to develop strategies
that encourage the widespread use of BIM for sustainability-enhancing applications.
This study is especially important for policymakers, construction companies, and
analysts interested in the progress of the use of BIM in green building frameworks. By
examining the variables that affect specific Green BIM function utilization, this research
seeks to provide insights that will help industry experts overcome the adoption challenges.
Moreover, this study contributes to the academic debate by analyzing the patterns of
technological advancement diffusion, such as BIM, within the construction sector, giving
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 4 of 29

visibility to a new viewpoint on how technological advances can drive economic change in
the built environment.
The main objective of this research is to study the patterns affecting the diffusion
of BIM in the Gulf region. Exploring this geographical area is vital because of its rapid
urbanization, huge construction projects, and government-driven sustainability goals such
as the (KSA) Vision 2030. Identifying the adoption patterns of BIM functions, especially
tailored to green building applications, can improve efficiency, decrease the environmental
impact (EI), and support policy development in the region.
Through a thorough research investigation of the green adoption rate and the barriers
and enablers of adoption, this study seeks to fill the research gap encompassing BIM’s
role in sustainability, ultimately supporting its ability to provide significant benefits to the
AEC sector.

2. Literature Review
2.1. Building Information Modeling (BIM)
BIM is a digital process for creating, managing, and sharing construction project data
throughout its lifecycle. Successful BIM adoption depends on the expertise of its users,
particularly in integrating sustainability strategies such as lifecycle assessments (LCAs)
and energy-efficient designs. Without trained professionals as implementation guides, the
full potential of green construction remains unrealized.
BIM has arisen as a focal technological tool in the scope of green building design
and construction, assisting in the incorporation of sustainability principles throughout the
building lifecycle. BIM has several functions that can be used in sustainability and green
building initiatives. The latest functions have rapidly progressed in the last decade all over
the world [25].
Another critical aspect of BIM’s sustainability potential is its ability to facilitate eco-
conscious procurement and material selection, ensuring that sustainable resources are
incorporated while monitoring supply chain integrity [9]. As the demand for environ-
mentally responsible buildings continues to rise, firms leveraging BIM gain a competitive
advantage by delivering high-performance, sustainable solutions. This not only enhances
their reputation but also increases their market share by aligning with industry-wide
sustainability expectations [11]. Furthermore, BIM fosters improved collaboration by estab-
lishing a shared digital platform that streamlines coordination among multidisciplinary
teams, a fundamental requirement for integrating sustainability principles throughout the
project lifecycle [26,27].
Recent studies emphasize the pivotal role of Building Information Modeling (BIM)
in evaluating environmental impacts and resource consumption through advanced data
analytics [18].
As the literature increased, scholars started to discover the integration of BIM with
building rating tools, such as LEED and BREEAM, which provided a structured approach
to estimating sustainability metrics [4]. This scored a considerable step in lining up BIM
functionalities with green building goals, as it enabled a systematic assessment of energy
efficiency and resource utilization during the design phase [7]. With time, the use of BIM
progressed to become a useful tool for performing complex energy modeling, lifecycle as-
sessments, and real-time data analytics. For example, the employment of BIM with energy
simulation tools, such as Green Building Studio and Ecotect, has permitted performing
complete energy performance calculations and optimization strategies [28]. Furthermore,
recent evidence suggests that BIM adoption significantly contributes to performance anal-
ysis, optimization strategies, and the development of structured frameworks for green
building designs [4].
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 5 of 29

Adding to the above, the review of the literature revealed the role of BIM in providing
informed material selection by offering detailed information on the EI, durability, and
cost-effectiveness of materials, backing sustainable results [10]. Apart from the above, BIM
has been recently deployed to design efficient water management systems and simulate
water flow. This optimizes water usage and backs conservation strategies [7]. In the recent
literature, many scholars emphasized the integration of BIM with digital twins which
enables the real-time monitoring and management of building performance throughout
its lifecycle. This allows for the tracking and optimization of resource allocation and
utilization, resulting in sustainable and efficient building operations. Summarizing the
literature review, the authors identified 11 key Green BIM functionalities that will be
examined in this study, as presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Green functionalities. Authors.

Green BIM Functionalities

1 Energy Efficiency and Performance [7,18,28–31]
2 Water Efficiency and Management [32–37]
3 Material Selection and LCA [5,10,16,19,26,27,32,38]
4 Sustainable Site Design [39–43]
5 Indoor Environmental Quality [7,11,24,44,45]
6 Waste Reduction and Construction Optimization [7,8,13–15,46,47]
7 Green Building Certification Assistance [4,11,33,44,48–50]
8 Carbon Footprint and Emissions Analysis [5,22,49,51,52]
9 Renewable Energy Integration [53–56]
10 Data Management and Digital Twins [10,20,21,23,57]
11 Facility Management Tools for Sustainability [9,13,14,16,58]

2.2. Barriers to BIM Adoption

Despite its numerous benefits, the widespread implementation of BIM in green build-
ing projects is hindered by several constraints. The initial costs associated with acquiring
software, training personnel, and integrating BIM into existing workflows present sig-
nificant financial challenges, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises [12,59].
Moreover, the scarcity of skilled BIM professionals limits its effective utilization, as the
demand for trained experts surpasses the current supply [6,48]. Another major obsta-
cle is interoperability, as inconsistencies in data exchange protocols among various BIM
tools and platforms create difficulties in collaboration, particularly in multi-stakeholder
projects [13,14]. Additionally, resistance to change remains a persistent challenge, as many
firms remain reluctant to transition from traditional construction methodologies, perceiving
BIM as a complex and costly shift [60,61]. The financial burden of acquiring BIM-compatible
hardware and software further exacerbates adoption hesitancy, particularly for organi-
zations operating with limited technological infrastructure [62]. Furthermore, a lack of
commitment from clients and upper management often undermines BIM implementation,
as project decision-makers prioritize short-term financial returns over the long-term sustain-
ability benefits that BIM offers [63]. BIM adoption challenges are universal but vary based
on regional construction practices, regulatory frameworks, and technological maturity.
Developed markets like the UK and US benefit from strong digital infrastructure and regu-
lations, whereas emerging markets face hurdles such as high costs and limited expertise.
Effective BIM implementation also depends on a strong understanding of architectural
principles, including materials, design, and management [14]. Without this knowledge,
BIM tools may be underutilized, reducing their potential benefits. Interdisciplinary collabo-
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 6 of 29

ration among architects, engineers, and project managers is essential for maximizing BIM’s
impact across different contexts. Table 2 summarizes all the barriers.

Table 2. BIM diffusion barriers.

Barrier References
High Initial Costs [6,39,62]
Lack of Skilled Workforce [64,65]
Resistance to Change [6,48,65]
Technological Complexity [39,66,67]
Lack of Awareness and Knowledge [62,68]
Interoperability Issues [14,63]
Uncertain Return on Investment [63,69]
Data Privacy and Security Concerns [39,67]
Cultural and Organizational Barriers [63,64,70]

2.3. Innovative Diffusion Models

To better understand these barriers and drivers of Green BIM function adoption,
innovation diffusion models (IDMs) can be used.
Innovation diffusion theory (IDT) presents a structured framework for understand-
ing how new technologies, including BIM, are adopted within industries [58,71]. Prior
research suggests that BIM adoption follows distinct diffusion patterns, with early adopters
demonstrating its benefits before widespread industry acceptance occurs [72,73].
Innovative diffusion models aid in understanding the factors affecting Green BIM
adoption like the patterns of adoption, peer influence, and market conditions. Scholars
successfully used these models to assess the enablers of BIM adoption in green building
projects, finding that organizational factors and technological readiness significantly impact
its diffusion [72,74]. The authors used models to examine how various levels of awareness
and knowledge across construction firms affect the implementation of sustainable practices.
These models present a systematic approach to expecting and examining the factors that
encourage or deter BIM’s use of sustainability features.
Mathematically, the internal diffusion model is represented as

dN(t)
= aN(t)[m − N(t)] (1)
dt
where
• N(t) is the cumulative number of adopters at time t;
• m represents the total number of potential adopters in the social system;
• a is the probability that each adopter will independently influence a non-user;
• dN(t)/dt represents the rate of diffusion at time t.
This equation suggests that as the number of adopters increases, the influence of social
networks accelerates the diffusion process. In the case of BIM, this internal mechanism is
evident in the construction industry’s gradual shift towards digital transformation, where
early adopters promote technology diffusion through industry conferences, professional
networks, and collaborative projects.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 7 of 29

In contrast, the external diffusion model argues that technology adoption is influenced
primarily by external sources of information, rather than social interactions within an
industry. According to this model, firms adopt new technologies based on external forces
such as government regulations, media influence, and client demands [75]. Unlike the
internal model, this approach assumes that direct communication between early adopters
and potential adopters is minimal.
The external diffusion model is expressed as

dN(t)
= b[m − N(t)] (2)
dt
where
• b is the coefficient of an external influence per period (b ≥ 0).
This model indicates that as the number of adopters increases, the implication on
social frameworks enlivens the spread. In the case of BIM, this internal component is
clear as the advancement industry’s nonstop move towards progress alters, where early
adopters progress advancements through industry conferences, capable frameworks, and
collaborative wanders.
On the other hand, the exterior model contends that development allotment is affected
fundamentally by exterior sources of information, rather than social interactions interior an
industry. Concurrent to this show, firms grasp unused propels based on exterior powers
such as government headings, media effects, and client demands [75]. Not at all like
the inside show, this approach expects that coordinating communication between early
adopters and potential adopters is negligible.
This show is especially pertinent for BIM selection in green buildings, where govern-
ment commands approach motivating forces, and administrative conditions play a key
part in quickening selection rates [68]. In this case, in districts where BIM compliance
is legitimately required for open foundation ventures, selection rates tend to be essen-
tially higher [48]. In addition, supportability certification frameworks such as LEED and
BREEAM frequently empower BIM utilization to upgrade vitality proficiency and carbon
following, fortifying the outside dissemination component.
Mixed dispersal appears for the planning of both inward social effects and exterior
control weights, recognizing that the advancement choice is influenced by both peer pan-
tomime and exterior drivers [75]. This is real and particularly profitable when analyzing
BIM determination components, as firms routinely grasp advancements due to both com-
petitive weights and regulatory prerequisites.
The mixed diffusion model integrates both internal social influence and external
institutional pressures, recognizing that technology adoption is influenced by both peer
imitation and external drivers. This model is particularly useful in analyzing BIM adoption
dynamics, as firms often adopt the technology due to both competitive pressures and
regulatory requirements.
The mixed influence model is defined as

dN (t)
= [b + aN(t)][m − N(t)] (3)
dt
This equation suggests that BIM adoption is accelerated by a combination of industry-
wide best practices, regulatory frameworks, and social learning dynamics. For instance,
firms operating in competitive markets may feel compelled to adopt BIM both to comply
with government regulations and to maintain a competitive edge within the industry [76].
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 8 of 29

The integration of BIM in complex construction projects, particularly high-risk envi-

ronments like tunnel construction, has been explored in previous studies. Liu Naifei et al.
(2022) [22] developed a BIM-based risk management system that enhances safety, efficiency,
and decision-making in mountain tunnel construction. Their findings demonstrate how
predictive modeling and real-time analytics can improve hazard assessments. These in-
sights can be applied to Green BIM adoption in the Gulf region, where extreme climate
conditions and rapid urbanization require advanced digital solutions for sustainability.
Similarly, Song Zhanping et al. (2021) [22] used finite element modeling (FEM) and nu-
merical simulation models to predict tunnel stability, assess geological risks, and optimize
construction sequencing in BIM-based tunnel engineering management. Song’s findings
suggest that automated analysis, lifecycle assessment tools, and sustainability-driven
workflows can support Green BIM adoption, enhancing decision-making in eco-friendly
building practices.
Despite these advancements, research on Green BIM functionalities in the Gulf region
remains limited. Liu and Song’s methodologies provide valuable insights into BIM adoption
barriers and facilitators, particularly in risk-based digital modeling, predictive analytics,
and sustainability assessments. This study addresses this gap by extending BIM risk
management approaches to Green BIM adoption, offering a region-specific analysis of how
digital tools can enhance sustainable construction in the Gulf region.
Although extensive research has been conducted on BIM adoption in the construction
industry, a critical gap remains in understanding how innovation diffusion models can
enhance BIM integration in green building projects. While previous studies have identified
general adoption drivers and barriers, they often lack a systematic approach to aligning
BIM functionalities with sustainability objectives such as energy efficiency, water manage-
ment, material selection, indoor environmental quality, and green building certifications.
Current research predominantly examines the technical capabilities of BIM without suf-
ficiently addressing the social and organizational factors influencing its diffusion within
sustainable construction.
One key limitation in existing studies is the insufficient focus on practical frameworks
that facilitate the seamless integration of BIM into established green certification systems
such as LEED, BREEAM, and Green Star. Additionally, the absence of standardized
methodologies for employing BIM in lifecycle sustainability assessments, particularly
regarding energy modeling, resource conservation strategies, and the optimization of
environmentally friendly materials, hinders its full potential. While BIM is recognized
for enhancing collaboration, there is limited research on its effectiveness in fostering
interdisciplinary teamwork aimed at achieving sustainability goals.
To bridge this gap, future research should develop comprehensive methodologies
that integrate BIM with sustainability performance indicators and ensure that construction
projects effectively align with green certification requirements. In addition, exploring
the role of innovation diffusion models in shaping BIM adoption patterns for sustainable
construction can offer deeper insights into overcoming existing barriers. Investigating
digital workflows that optimize BIM’s role in lifecycle assessments, carbon footprint re-
duction, and sustainable material sourcing will further enhance its contribution to green
building practices. Addressing these research gaps will not only advance BIM’s role in
promoting sustainability but also support its widespread adoption as a fundamental tool for
achieving global environmental objectives through technology-driven innovation. Table 3
summarizes the main factors of the three diffusion models.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 9 of 29

Table 3. Key factors.

Model Type Key Factors Impact on Diffusion

-Bandwagon pressure
-Management commitment and leadership Internal factors focus on the internal
-Availability of skilled professionals environment and resources necessary for
successful adoption. Management
Internal Factors -Word of mouth commitment, leadership, organizational
-Organizational culture (openness to culture, and the ability to manage change are
innovation) key factors as well.
-Organizational readiness for change
-Regulatory frameworks (government
mandates for BIM adoption)
External factors include legal requirements,
-Economic incentives (tax breaks and governmental support, and market demand
External Factors subsidies for green buildings) for sustainable building practices that drive
-Societal demand for sustainable construction adoption. These factors create external
pressures for organizations to adopt new
-Industry standards and norms innovations
-Environmental and sustainability policies
-Interaction between internal readiness and
external regulatory pressures
-Collaboration between industry players Mixed factors consider the interplay between
Mixed Factors
internal and external influences.
-Knowledge transfer from industry leaders
and pioneers

3. Methodology
Data-Collection Instrument and Process
The in-depth literature review discussed in the “Background” section revealed 11 main
BIM functionalities for green building practices that were shortlisted according to the expert
opinions of the researchers whose works were reviewed. A case study was integrated into
this research. The Dubai Frame project is an 8000 m2 project where BIM (Revit 19.2) was
extensively used for material tracking. The project focused on minimizing construction
waste and tracking materials from procurement to installation. Similarly, building energy
modeling tools were integrated with BIM (Revit 2019.2) to conduct the energy analysis
and modeling for the project aiming for an energy efficient project. The authors conducted
report analysis and interviews with a project manager and a BIM specialist. The interview
questions focused on their experiences with BIM adoption, the main enablers, and the
barriers they encountered in integrating material tracking and energy simulation tools.
These formed the basis of the comprehensive questionnaire the authors used to collect
data and seek answers to the research questions. A questionnaire with 18 questions was
developed based on the literature review results, as this quantitative data collection method
generates data that can be utilized for rigorous quantitative analysis and for high-quality
research outcomes [77]. Questions included the size of the company, position, years of
experience, and the type of system used.
Diffusion models predict adoption patterns and rates in the market, rather than specific
factors that drive individual firms’ decisions. These models assume that once a firm is
exposed to an innovation (via marketing or peer influence), adoption is based on general
parameters like imitation and innovation. Economic variables such as ROI, cost–benefit
analysis, and project size are more relevant to the firm’s decision-making process, which lies
outside the scope of these models. The mixed model emphasizes social influence (internal)
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 10 of 29

and external marketing efforts (external) but does not account for a company’s economic
value or project scale when deciding to invest in BIM.
Before sending the questionnaire, and to avoid information distortion, the instrument
was revised by two groups of specialists, including three academic faculty members and
two industry professionals for the content validity process and to improve the solidity and
practicability of the questionnaire.
There are different BIM functions being used for green buildings, and the companies
that have been implementing BIM in the Gulf area have different technical skills, experi-
ence, and understanding of the functions; therefore, it was important to collect data from
many organizations. To guarantee that the answers are collected from the correct sample
population, the survey was sent only to firms listed either on the Institute of Architecture
and Engineering register of the Gulf region’s countries or in the business directory under
the Chamber of Commerce of Civil and Construction work, which resulted in a total of
1833 firms. As suggested in [78], three experts responded first to the questionnaire as
part of a pilot study, and the questionnaire was reviewed according to their opinions and
suggestions. Over 721 surveys were filled and submitted, indicating that the results portray
the population accurately, with a confidence interval of 5% and a confidence level of 95%.
Participants consisted of contractors, designers, construction engineers, construction man-
agers, general managers, and owners working in the Gulf region, regardless of whether
they were using BIM for specific green practices or not.
The questionnaire was headed by a brief description of the goals of the survey and
the research paper, with an additional attestation from the authors to the respondents that
total anonymity of their identity will be kept and that their response will be confidential
and used solely for the paper’s objectives. Then, the responders were requested to answer
questions presented in three sections. The first part was an obligatory part that focused
on collecting data about the characteristics of the respondents and the company they
worked with, including the company size, the respondent’s role, years of experience in the
industry, expertise, mode of work, and educational level. The data collected are crucial to
warrant that survey takers can procure data realistically [77] and to establish the credibility
of the results [79,80]. The last question of this section is about whether they are using
BIM functionalities in the projects or not. This final question was used as a directory
for the subsequent part. The second section tackles only respondents who use BIM for
green building practices. It starts with introducing only the 11 BIM functions related
to sustainable and green building practices and thereafter asks participants if they are
adopting any of them and the first year they have started adopting this function in their
organization. The six-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (low) to 6 (High) was used, as
per the recommendation by [81], to assess how frequently the BIM functions are used,
the difficulty of adopting the functions, and the significance of its adoption. On the other
hand, a third section of the questionnaire is developed especially for participants who
answered that they are using BIM but not using any of the above functions, for example,
if they use BIM for visualization, clash detection, cost estimation, and scheduling. This
section is important to understand the barriers behind not using BIM features such as
energy analysis, water conservation modeling, and lifecycle assessments for green building
practices; specifically, for those people, the software and the skills are already there as they
are using the BIM for other functions. The data collection process started in June 2024 and
ended in January 2025.
To test whether the results are reliable or not, IBM SPSS Statistics version 30.00 was
used to conduct a Cronbach alpha test. A reliability coefficient value of 0.802 was found,
which is above the 0.7 threshold for reliable data, according to [82], which means that the
results are reliable.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 11 of 29

Data Analysis Using Diffusion Models

The time-series data retrieved from Section 2 of the questionnaire were examined
using the three influence models presented above (internal, external, and mixed) to identify
the decision-making patterns that affect the utilization of BIM features related to sustainable
and green building practices in the specific context of the Gulf region. This step involves
the estimation of the three parameters (a, b, and m) of the 10 BIM functionalities related to
green building practices. To achieve this, the research employs the Levenberg–Marquardt
algorithm within the Nonlinear Least Squares (NLS) framework for parameter estima-
tion using SPSS. This method has proved its ability to correctly predict the diffusion of
technological innovations in the built environment and presents reliable and more con-
servative results [79]. The three resulting influence models were then compared based on
their goodness of fit to decide on the most powerful model in understanding why and
how professionals adopt specific BIM functionalities that support sustainable and11green
Sustainability 2025, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW of 29
building practices. To fulfill this objective, this study used the coefficient of determination,
R2, and AIC. These methods basically measure and compare the amount of error in each
model, which is defined as the sum of squares of the differences between the actual and
model, which is defined as the sum of squares of the differences between the actual and
predicted values for each observation. Complete descriptions of methods used to compare
predicted values for each observation. Complete descriptions of methods used to compare
the models’ goodness of fit are provided in the Supplementary Materials. Figure 1 outlines
the models’ goodness of fit are provided in the Appendix. Figure 1 outlines the research
the research methodology.
methodology.

Literature Review

BIM functionalities for Green

Innovative Diffusion Models Green Buildings
building Practices

Case Study + Questionnaire

BIM Users for green building practices BIM Users for other design practices
(Time series of BIM sustainability related functions (Adoption barriers of BIM functionalities related to
+ ease of use) sustainability and green buildings )

Results

Diffusion Rate of BIM Functionalities in Green Ranking the Barriers to BIM Adoption in Green
Building Practices Building Practices

Discussion

Interpreting the most and Interpret the preferred Identify the model with Analyze the factors
least used Green BIM Model based on R2 and the highest explanatory affecting the diffusion
functionalities AIC value power patterns

Figure 1. Methodology results.

3.1. Case Study Analysis

The interviews and project report analysis of the case study highlighted critical in-
sights concerning the encounters and opportunities in Green BIM adoption. For the Dubai
Frame project, the use of BIM to monitor materials throughout the construction lifecycle
allowed PMs to determine the excess materials ordered. According to the report, BIM en-
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 12 of 29

3.1. Case Study Analysis

The interviews and project report analysis of the case study highlighted critical insights
concerning the encounters and opportunities in Green BIM adoption. For the Dubai
Frame project, the use of BIM to monitor materials throughout the construction lifecycle
allowed PMs to determine the excess materials ordered. According to the report, BIM
enabled the accurate purchase of material quantities and reduced material wastage by
15% (Azhar et al., 2015) [39], resulting in lower carbon footprints. Notwithstanding the
benefits of BIM, several challenges, specifically interoperability problems, were encountered
during the integration of BIM (Revit) with energy simulation tools. Interviewees reported
occasional issues with data synchronization and focused on how difficult it is to sustain
accurate material specifications and energy performance data across different software
platforms, which led to additional manual interventions to ensure compatibility. Data
exchange between BIM and the IES-VE software was complex, leading to delays in energy
performance analysis, specifically during the final phases of the project. Sometimes, energy
simulation results were incompatible with the actual BIM model statistics.
Another insight from the interviews is that the company purchased BIM in 2010, but
they were using it mainly for clash detection and scheduling rather than sustainability
analysis. The year 2017 was the first year in which BIM was used for sustainability purposes,
as most staff in the company were not aware of these capabilities earlier. The PM initiated
five targeted training sessions per year with assessments, which led to a 30% increase
in BIM-based energy efficiency assessments within a year. The PM established a system
where whenever a new problem arises and is resolved, a meeting is held with the team
to explain the issue and its solution, ensuring everyone knows how to handle it in the
future. He indicated that the lack of skills and training is a barrier to adopting Green
BIM functionalities.
When examining the effect of regulations on the adoption of BIM for sustainability
practices, the PM highlighted the importance of recent green building regulations in Dubai
(Al Sa’fat) and how they were both a push and an incentive to use BIM for energy and
green certification. From their perspective, these policies provide a clear roadmap and act
as a framework to integrate sustainability features. Similarly, the economic incentives for
sustainable construction were key factors that influenced BIM adoption. The government
provided tax exemptions and financial benefits to encourage investment in renewable
energy technologies and sustainable practices in construction. The interviews imply that
these incentives provided an added push for the integration.

3.2. Participants’ and Companies’ Characteristics

A total of 721 survey responses were collected from architecture, engineering, and
construction (AEC) companies in the Gulf region, of which 709 were complete and were
used in the analysis. Among the respondents, 374 were BIM users and 335 were non-BIM
users. For the 374 BIM users’ respondents, the questionnaire assessed whether they are
employing BIM for green and sustainable related practices (109 respondents) or structural
design and other practices (265 respondents). Overall, the results show that 48% of the
respondents are non-BIM users, and 52% of the respondents are BIM users of which
71% are using BIM functions for non-green/sustainability applications and 29% adopt
specific BIM functionalities that support sustainable and green building practices. The
distribution of participants fits the objective of the study as BIM users for non-green
building/sustainability applications were asked to assess the significance of the barriers
hindering the adoption of specific sustainability practices, while BIM users for green
building applications were asked to determine the used functionalities and the year of
adoption of each Green BIM function.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 13 of 29

The answers show that construction professionals from different targeted divisions
contributed to the survey. Among BIM users for green building practices, 52% have more
than 10 years of experience and are using Green BIM functions for big projects; for BIM
users for functions other than those related to green buildings, the results show that 72%
have more than 5 years of experience and are also mainly using BIM for medium-sized
and large projects. Table 4 displays the major characteristics of the respondents and their
companies, while Figure 2 illustrates that respondents represented 6 different countries
across the Gulf region, ensuring a geographically diverse sample.

Table 4. Participants and company characteristics.

Respondents Percentage
BIM Users for Green BIM Users for Other
Features Subcategories
Building Practices (Non-Green) Functions
Sustainability 2025, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 29
Technology
29% 71%
adoption status
Less than 3 years 2% 5%
Average
Average work
work expe- 3–5 years 7% 23%
3–5 years 7% 23%
experience
rience 6–10
6–10 years
years 39%
39% 37%
37%
Experience
Experience More
More than
than 10
10 years
years 52%
52% 35%
35%
Architect
Architect 25%
25% 23%
23%
MEP
MEP Engineers
Engineers 22%
22% 16%
16%
Civil
Civiland
and Structural
Structural Engineers
Engineers 16%
16% 21%
21%
Role Sustainability
Sustainability Consultants
Consultants 4%
4% 1%
1%
Role
Contractors
Contractors and Construction
and Construction Manag- 20%
20% 21%
21%
Managers
ers
Project Managers
Project Managers 12%
12% 15%
15%
Other 1% 3%
Other 1% 3%
Small
Small 6%
6% 12%
12%
Project Size Medium 29% 36%
Project Size Medium 29% 36%
Big 65% 52%
Big 65% 52%

11%
9% 27%

8%

20% 25%

UAE KSA Qatar Bahrein Oman Kuwait

Figure2.2.Respondents’
Figure Respondents’country
countryof
ofoperation.
operation.

3.3. Non-Green BIM Users’ Perception of Adoption Barriers

3.3. Non-Green BIM Users’ Perception of Adoption Barriers
As mentioned earlier, 71% of the participants stated that they use BIM for standard
As mentioned earlier, 71% of the participants stated that they use BIM for standard
applications such as visualization, clash detection, structural design, cost estimation, and
applications such as visualization, clash detection, structural design, cost estimation, and
scheduling but do not leverage its sustainability-related functionalities. The authors inves-
scheduling but do not leverage its sustainability-related functionalities. The authors in-
tigate the reasons why BIM users do not utilize BIM for green or sustainability applications,
vestigate the reasons why BIM users do not utilize BIM for green or sustainability appli-
despite already possessing the necessary hardware, software, and skills.
cations, despite already possessing the necessary hardware, software, and skills.
BIM users for non-green functions rated the impact of various possible reasons for
not adopting BIM for sustainability practices. Figure 3 illustrates the percentage of partic-
ipants who rated each barrier as “Significant” or “Very Significant” on a 6-point Likert
scale. The findings indicate the key challenges preventing BIM users from adopting sus-
 Following these barriers, the absence of regulatory or client demand for green build-
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 ing practices is found. This shows that the utilization of BIM for green building practices 14 of 29
is often not prioritized unless specifically required by a client or regulatory framework.
This means that if the client does not ask for sustainability features, it makes it less urgent
for theBIM users
users to for non-green
deploy functions
these BIM rated the impact
functionalities. of various
The third possible reasons
most significant barrierfor is not
the
adopting BIM for sustainability practices. Figure 3 illustrates the percentage
complexity and integration of challenges, which were perceived as a significant barrier by of participants
who
54% of rated
the each barrier asthis
respondents; “Significant” or “Very Significant”
might be explained by the resultsonofa 6-point Likert
[83], where thescale.
toolsThe
for
findings indicate the key challenges preventing BIM users from adopting
energy modeling, renewable energy integration, and carbon footprint analysis frequently sustainability-
related functionalities,
necessitate despite having
particular software the necessary
programs, advanced software,
data inputs,hardware, and skills. The
and cross-disciplinary
results reveal that although many adopters who are skilled in
collaboration, which many gulf AEC companies might not be prepared to handle BIM and work in compa-
[83]. In
nies sense,
this that have alreadyintegration
workflow made considerable financial investments
and interoperability might arise in because,
BIM, theyfor continue
example, to
overlook its capability for green building applications. According
combining energy simulation tools with BIM platforms like Revit or ArchiCAD forcesto the graph, the lack
of awarenessdata
harmonious and exchange
knowledge about numerous
among how BIM can support
software green building
packages. initiativesprob-
Interoperability tops
the list, with 77% of the participants perceiving it as a significant barrier.
lems can restrain organizations from embracing BIM for green practices, as they would This implies that
although
have practitioners
to provide are well versed
supplementary in utilizing
tools or BIM functions
workarounds to ensureincompatibility
their role, they are
which
using it for conventional tasks such as visualization and clash detection but
might also be costly [26]. Therefore, AEC companies in the Gulf area may not be convinced are unaware of
the innovative capabilities BIM offers for energy efficiency, water management, material
to invest more in BIM (30% of the respondents), especially since the return on investment
selection, and lifecycle analysis, among others. Without a solid understanding of these
for water saving and carbon footprint analysis is not apparent in the short term, especially
benefits, BIM remains underutilized in sustainable building practices [11].
when the project’s scope does not entail these features [7].

Resistance to Change & Organizational Culture 26%

Perceived Cost vs. Benefit 30%

Interoperability & Workflow Issues 46%

Complexity & Integration Challenges 54%

No Regulatory or Client Demand 59%

Lack of Awareness & Knowledge on Sustainability 77%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Figure
Figure 3.
3. Percentage
Percentage of
of respondents identifying barriers
respondents identifying barriers as
as significant
significant or
or very
very significant.
significant.

3.4. Perception
Followingofthese
BIM barriers,
Users forthe
Green Building
absence Practices or client demand for green building
of regulatory
practices
Tableis5found.
presentsThis
theshows
adoptionthatrates
the of
utilization
different ofBIMBIM for green building
functionalities for greenpractices
building is
oftensustainability
and not prioritized unless specifically
practices. According required by a client
to the results, the most or regulatory
frequently framework.
used Green BIM This
functionality in the Gulf region is energy efficiency and performance, which was used for
means that if the client does not ask for sustainability features, it makes it less urgent by
the users
71% to deploy
of Green theseThis
BIM users. BIMtool
functionalities.
is widely deployedThe third most
in the Gulf significant
region to barrier
examineisandthe
complexity
improve and integration
building of challenges,
energy performance forwhich were perceived
energy-saving purposes. as a The
significant
secondbarrier
most uti-by
54% of the respondents; this might be explained by the results of [83],
lized Green BIM function in the Gulf area is waste reduction and construction optimiza- where the tools for
energy
tion, modeling,
which renewableby
was employed energy
67% of integration, and carbon
the practitioners footprintmaterial
to minimize analysis waste
frequently
and
necessitate particular software programs, advanced data inputs,
plan/execute projects with reduced waste generation. Another commonly used feature and cross-disciplinary
collaboration,
was whichcertification
green building many gulf AEC companies
assistance, which might
was not be prepared
deployed by 61%toofhandle [83]. In
the respond-
this sense, workflow integration and interoperability might arise because,
ents to automate and streamline the certification process for sustainable building stand- for example,
combining
ards. On theenergy simulation
other hand, toolsfunctions
other BIM with BIM platforms
such like Revit
as renewable energyor integration,
ArchiCAD which forces
harmonious data exchange among numerous software packages. Interoperability
includes the simulation of photovoltaic (PV) panels and geothermal modeling, have been problems
can restrain
rarely organizations
embraced in the Gulffrom embracing
area, possiblyBIM dueforto green practices, as
project-specific they would and
requirements havetheto
provide supplementary tools or workarounds to ensure compatibility
need for specialized analysis tools to achieve accurate simulations. In addition, BIM em- which might also
be costly [26].
ployment Therefore,
for data AEC companies
management and digital in twins
the Gulf
wasarea
used mayby not
lessbe convinced
than 5% of the topartic-
invest
more
ipants.in BIM (30% of the respondents), especially since the return on investment for water
saving and carbon footprint analysis is not apparent in the short term, especially when the
project’s scope does not entail these features [7].
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 15 of 29

3.4. Perception of BIM Users for Green Building Practices

Table 5 presents the adoption rates of different BIM functionalities for green building
and sustainability practices. According to the results, the most frequently used Green BIM
functionality in the Gulf region is energy efficiency and performance, which was used
by 71% of Green BIM users. This tool is widely deployed in the Gulf region to examine
and improve building energy performance for energy-saving purposes. The second most
utilized Green BIM function in the Gulf area is waste reduction and construction optimiza-
tion, which was employed by 67% of the practitioners to minimize material waste and
plan/execute projects with reduced waste generation. Another commonly used feature
was green building certification assistance, which was deployed by 61% of the respondents
to automate and streamline the certification process for sustainable building standards. On
the other hand, other BIM functions such as renewable energy integration, which includes
the simulation of photovoltaic (PV) panels and geothermal modeling, have been rarely
embraced in the Gulf area, possibly due to project-specific requirements and the need for
specialized analysis tools to achieve accurate simulations. In addition, BIM employment
for data management and digital twins was used by less than 5% of the participants.

Table 5. Percent adoption of Green BIM functions.

Nb Green BIM Functions N % of BIM Users

F1 Green Building Certification Assistance 77 71%
F2 Waste Reduction and Construction Optimization 73 67%
F3 Energy Efficiency and Performance 66 61%
F4 Facility Management Tools for Sustainability 59 54%
F5 Material Selection and Lifecycle Analysis (LCA) 45 41%
F6 Water Efficiency and Management 31 28%
F7 Indoor Environmental Quality 32 29%
F8 Sustainable Site Design 25 23%
F9 Carbon Footprint and Emissions Analysis 18 17%
F10 Renewable Energy Integration 7 6%
F11 Data Management and Digital Twins 5 5%

3.5. Diffusion Models and Green BIM Functionality Diffusion

Participants were additionally inquired to indicate the year they started adopting
Green BIM functions. As shown in Figure 4, the first recorded adoption of Green BIM
functionalities among Gulf participants dates to 2013. Over time, Green BIM adoption has
evolved significantly. This study allowed us to examine their chronological evolution in
the Gulf area as follows:
Early adopted functions (2012–2016)
The first Green BIM functions adopted by respondents between 2012 and 2014 primar-
ily focused on improving energy efficiency and performance, including energy modeling, and
lighting analysis, indicating that in the early stage of BIM utilization for green building
applications, the software was firstly used for energy efficiency assessments and basic
sustainability evaluations. Similarly, the initial applications of Green BIM in the gulf area
were in lifecycle assessments (LCAs) to evaluate sustainability and environmental perfor-
mance. In the same sense, early BIM applications were tied to supporting green building
certification systems like LEED and BREEAM, which were employed first in 2015. The
graph shows the above three functions that were first used in the Gulf area.
 its infant level, there is a recent trend in the Gulf area to use BIM in renewable energy
integration, such as photovoltaic (PV) panels to optimize energy generation and consump-
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 tion in buildings. This was observed in 2023 for the first time. The result of the analysis is
16 of 29
shown in Figure 4.

Cumulativetrends
Figure4.4.Cumulative
Figure trendsin
inthe
thenumber
numberof
offirms
firmsthat
that adopted
adopted each
each Green
Green BIM
BIM function.
function.

Developed
The in the
subsequent Mid-Stage
analysis will functions
rely on the(2016–2020)
above results to compare the significance of
From
the three 2016 to 2021,
diffusion modelsweinstarted to seethe
explaining a gradual increaseofinthe
dissemination the11number
Green of BIMpractitioners
functions
who employ BIM tools
and their goodness of fit. for water usage analysis. This might be in line with the increasing
focusThe water models
on three conservation
werein building for
examined designs,
fitness.yet none
The of the
results participants
show had used
that the internal BIM
influ-
for stormwater management.
ence model exhibited the worst fit, having a low coefficient of determination (R ) and the 2

highestIn the same period,

Akaike’s a rapidcriterion
information increase(AIC)
in the value
number of Gulf
across allpractitioners
Green BIM who were using
functionalities.
BIM for waste reduction was observed. This includes modular designs
This means that the internal model fails to accurately approximate the m parameter (the and prefabrication
practices.
total numberHowever, sloweradopters
of potential growth over time
in the until
social 2020 was
system), detected
leading to in
anusing BIM to assess
overestimation of
indoor environmental quality, such as thermal comfort and indoor air
adopters compared to the actual questionnaire results. Therefore, this model was ex- quality. In this period,
BIM functionalities
cluded were alsoanalysis.
from the subsequent deployedAfor low site-specific
R2 and high analysis
AIC fortools,
the like environmental
internal diffusion
impact simulations for site design.
model imply that it poorly explains the adoption trends of Green BIM in the Gulf region.
Recently Emerging
This indicates that socialand Trending
influence (2021–2025)
alone (word of mouth and peer adoption) is not the
The most recent and trending functionalities
leading driver. Instead, other factors, such as external adopted in the
factors, Gulf
such asarea are carbon
regulations, foot-
finan-
print and emissions analysis, data management and digital twins, and facility
cial incentives, and project requirements, might play a key. To verify this, the mixed and management
tools formodels
external sustainability, with renewable
were examined energy
for their integration
fitness. As opposedalsotogaining importance.
the internal model In 2021
alone,
and 2022, we began to witness a sudden and unprecedented adoption of BIM for carbon
reduction. This indicates that in recent years, BIM has integrated new tools to analyze
both embodied and operational carbon emissions, which are essential for meeting modern
sustainability targets. Similarly, the embrace of digital twin technologies has increased
in the last two years, indicating that they represent a more recent development in BIM.
This technology can be used to manage real-time data and improve sustainable building
management. It is also worth mentioning that practitioners increasingly employ BIM as a
facility management tool to manage long-term performance and resource optimization.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 17 of 29

The examination of the results also shows that some BIM features were not used
in the Gulf area until the last couple of years. The results show that although BIM is
still at its infant level, there is a recent trend in the Gulf area to use BIM in renewable
energy integration, such as photovoltaic (PV) panels to optimize energy generation and
consumption in buildings. This was observed in 2023 for the first time. The result of the
analysis is shown in Figure 4.
The subsequent analysis will rely on the above results to compare the significance of
the three diffusion models in explaining the dissemination of the 11 Green BIM functions
and their goodness of fit.
The three models were examined for fitness. The results show that the internal
influence model exhibited the worst fit, having a low coefficient of determination (R2 ) and
the highest Akaike’s information criterion (AIC) value across all Green BIM functionalities.
This means that the internal model fails to accurately approximate the m parameter (the
total number of potential adopters in the social system), leading to an overestimation of
adopters compared to the actual questionnaire results. Therefore, this model was excluded
from the subsequent analysis. A low R2 and high AIC for the internal diffusion model imply
that it poorly explains the adoption trends of Green BIM in the Gulf region. This indicates
that social influence alone (word of mouth and peer adoption) is not the leading driver.
Instead, other factors, such as external factors, such as regulations, financial incentives, and
project requirements, might play a key. To verify this, the mixed and external models were
examined for their fitness. As opposed to the internal model alone, the external and mixed
models accurately explained the observed adoption patterns in the real-world data with
high R2 and low AIC values. A high R2 means that the model accurately explained much
of the variation in the actual number of BIM adopters over time. Similarly, a low AIC value
indicates that the model is an efficient or accurate representation of the adoption trend. The
two models accurately estimated the key parameters (a, b, and m).
The external influence model effectively estimated parameters for 9 Green-BIM func-
tions, and the mixed model realized accurate estimates for 9 functionalities. Nonetheless,
both models were incapable of forecasting parameters for both the renewable energy inte-
gration and data management and digital twin functions, likely due to the limited number
of practitioners using this feature.
The findings are presented in Table 6, which confirms that the external model has
superior performance and better goodness for fit for 4 functions including (1) water ef-
ficiency, (2) site design, and (3) certification assistance, which are largely influenced by
external factors like policies, regulations, and incentives. The results show that among
these Green BIM functionalities, the most significant external influences are water efficiency
and management (b = 0.629), green building certification assistance (b = 0.602), and waste
reduction and construction optimization (b = 0.519).
While the mixed models outperform the remaining models for 5 Green BIM functions,
namely (1) energy efficiency, (2) material selection, (3) air quality, (4) waste optimization,
(5) carbon analysis, and (6) facility management, they are influenced by both external
regulations and internal organizational priorities and indicate that balanced drivers, both
external and internal, affect their adoption in the gulf region. This implies that both the
internal dynamics of an organization and the external pressures from the market, govern-
ment, and industry are critical for the successful integration of BIM with sustainability
objectives. Therefore, organizations need to consider both sets of factors for effective BIM
adoption in the green building industry. This suggests that the successful adoption of green
building applications is not just about having the right tools or leadership in place but also
understanding and responding to external pressures (like sustainability policies, industry
collaborations, and global trends in green buildings).
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 18 of 29

Looking at the mixed model alone and examining the a and b values, the findings
reveal that for most Green BIM functions, the influences of the external factors exceed those
of the internal factors.

Table 6. Parameters of Green BIM function diffusion in the Gulf region.

R2 Adjusted
Nb Green-BIM Functions Model N m a b
Adjusted AIC
Green Building External 75 N.A. 0.602 0.987 77.23
F1 77
Certification Assistance Mixed 69 0.131 0.421 0.902 135.45
Waste Reduction and External 74 N.A. 0.519 0.978 84.65
F2 Construction Optimization 73
Mixed 66 0.009 0.312 0.894 236.9
Energy Efficiency and External 59 N.A. 0.312 0.922 110.78
F3 66
Performance Mixed 68 0.205 0.317 0.984 82.78
Facility Management Tools External 67 N.A. 0.216 0.977 85.89
F4 for Sustainability 59
Mixed 59 0.303 0.323 0.994 37.33
Material Selection and External 40 N.A. 0.107 0.972 89.32
F5 45
LCA Mixed 46 0.114 0.219 0.981 332.5
Water Efficiency and External 30 N.A. 0.629 0.997 277.2
F6 Management 32
Mixed 43 0.006 0.276 0.973 256.8
Indoor Environmental External 38 N.A. 0.233 0.99 212.17
F7 Quality 31
Mixed 29 0.134 0.452 0.996 179.54
External 27 N.A. 0.413 0.982 179.31
F8 Sustainable Site Design 25
Mixed 19 0.067 0.211 0.963 168.04
Carbon Footprint and External 15 N.A. 0.204 0.966 37.88
F9 Emissions Analysis 18
Mixed 17 0.122 0.232 0.982 67.83

4. Discussion
Unlike previous studies that examined BIM adoption in general construction practices,
this study isolates and quantifies the adoption of 11 key BIM functionalities directly linked
to sustainability (e.g., energy analysis, water conservation modeling, lifecycle assessments).
By distinguishing between firms using BIM for traditional functions (e.g., visualization and
cost estimation) and those applying it to sustainability-driven practices, this study offers
deeper insights into why Green BIM adoption lags despite the availability of BIM expertise
and software. Adding to the above, this study introduces a novel quantitative approach by
applying three influence models (internal, external, and mixed) to analyze decision-making
patterns in Green BIM adoption. The estimation of adoption parameters (a, b, and m) using
the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm within the Nonlinear Least Squares (NLS) framework
is an innovative application in construction research, providing a rigorous and predictive
method for analyzing technology diffusion.
Another novelty of this study is that it is one of the first large-scale empirical studies
on Green BIM in the Gulf region, surveying 721 industry professionals from 1833 firms
registered in architecture and engineering institutes or business directories. This extensive
dataset strengthens the statistical reliability of the findings and provides a high-confidence
basis (95% confidence level and 5% confidence interval) for assessing Green BIM adoption
patterns. The research uniquely segments respondents into two groups: (1) those using
BIM for green building functionalities and (2) those using BIM for other purposes but not
for sustainability applications. This distinction enables a deeper exploration of why firms
with BIM capabilities still hesitate to implement sustainability-focused features, offering
actionable insights for overcoming adoption barriers.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 19 of 29

4.1. The Perspective of Non-Green BIM Users

The outcome of the survey emphasized the main barriers hindering BIM users in the
Gulf region from leveraging their capability for sustainably related functions. It is evident
from the perspectives of non-Green BIM users that lack awareness, and knowledge is a
key barrier. This highlights the gap in both professional training and academic curricula in
the higher education institutions of the Gulf region where sustainability is considered a
secondary subject rather than an integrated aspect of BIM practices [84]. Previous studies
focused on the importance of integrating sustainability topics in the curricula of civil engi-
neering in the Arab world [6,52]. Although some countries in the Gulf such as KSA took
initiatives to align BIM with sustainability concerns [44], this might still be insufficient. The
finding aligns with technology acceptance model (TAM) theories, where perceived ease of
use and perceived usefulness dictate adoption. In the Gulf context, BIM adoption has been
driven by visualization and coordination efficiencies [67] rather than sustainability require-
ments, reflecting a wider regional trend where construction priorities have traditionally
accentuated cost, schedule, and architecture over environmental performance.
The lack of regulatory mandates and client demand further exacerbates the issue,
reinforcing the notion that sustainability remains a secondary priority in Gulf construction
markets. Unlike regions such as the EU, where stringent regulations drive BIM-based
energy modeling and lifecycle assessments, the Gulf’s regulatory landscape is still evolving.
While green building codes like ESTIDAMA in the UAE and SASO in KSA exist, they often
focus on material compliance rather than enforcing digital sustainability workflows. This
aligns with institutional theory, which posits that market behavior is shaped by regulatory
pressures, normative influences, and mimetic behaviors. In the Gulf region, there are several
regional initiatives like KSA’s Vision 2030 and the UAE’s net-zero targets; in addition to
making BIM mandatory for construction projects in Dubai, all these incentives increase the
potential that the AEC industry takes initiatives toward sustainability, yet the regulations,
which are the main driver of the Gulf AEC industry transformation, are not yet mandating
BIM-based sustainable integration.
Despite regulatory efforts mandating BIM adoption in various regions, its widespread
implementation remains inconsistent. This suggests that beyond legal requirements, factors
such as cost, training, and industry readiness play crucial roles in determining the success
of BIM integration in sustainable construction. High software costs remain a significant
barrier to BIM adoption, particularly in regions with limited financial resources. However,
affordability is only one of many challenges, and other factors such as training accessibility,
regulatory enforcement, and industry readiness also influence adoption rates. For instance,
a study on BIM adoption in the UK following the 2016 government mandate found that
while compliance rates increased, many firms struggled with the financial and technical
demands of full-scale implementation (Eadie et al., 2015) [66]. Similarly, in Saudi Arabia,
despite Vision 2030 initiatives promoting digital transformation in construction, BIM
adoption remains inconsistent, with projects facing difficulties in integrating BIM into
existing workflows [85]. These findings highlight the need for continuous training, financial
support, and clear implementation guidelines to bridge the gap between regulation and
practical adoption.
Moreover, the results of the survey indicated that workflow complexity and inefficient
challenges were key drivers. It is worth mentioning that some Green BIM functions, like
carbon footprint analysis and renewable energy integration, necessitate integration with
specific software like IES-VE or Open Studio, which augments complications to their
current fragmented workflows. As is well known, the AEC industry in the Gulf region is
characterized by a speedy execution schedule and numerous subcontractors, which means
that it faces extra interoperability challenges due to the coexistence of various BIM standards
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 20 of 29

(e.g., IFC vs. proprietary formats), which also discourages more function integrations
and training and encourages reliance on traditional energy simulations separate from
BIM workflows.

4.2. The Perspective of Green BIM Users

Regarding the perception of BIM sustainability functions users, this study involved the
perception of 109 Green BIM users, and only two functions (F1: green building certification
assistance, F2: waste reduction and construction optimization, and F3: energy efficiency
and performance) were found to be used by more than 65% of the participants. In this
case, the Pareto principle indicates that 65% of BIM users are using only 18% (2/11) of the
functionalities. This might be explained using Rogers’s assumptions that any technology
is composed of hardware, usually more visible to users, and software that need to be
effective and accessible for users (Rogers, 1983) [58]. Yet, despite the presence of manuals
that can help in conveying significant knowledge about Green BIM utilization, ease of use
and user interaction/knowledge transfer are the most effective ways to understand the
convenience and usefulness of any technology. To comprehend the relationship between
the adoption rate of Green BIM functions and their ease of use, the authors will back
on the results of [49] that integrating sustainability aspects, such as the carbon footprint
and embodied renewable energy integration, into BIM workflows necessitates the use of
particular software and tools such as IES-VE and requires specific knowledge and mature
skilled practitioners to perform the analysis, thereby making these functions hard to use by
new BIM adopters, as the above reasons add complications to the workflow. Adding to the
above [53], in their study, the lack of seamless integration between BIM tools and specialized
renewable energy integration and data management software led to more difficulties.
These conclusions might help in explaining the rationale behind having a low adoption
rate for these functionalities (F9 with 17%, F10 with 6%, and F11 with 5%).
The results of Figure 4 demonstrate that users have passed through the use of most
BIM sustainability-related functions before adopting the data management and digital
twin function, which was the latest and the least function to be adopted; i.e., the data
management and digital twin function was adopted for the first time in 2022 by only one
participant, while in 2022, all the other functions were already adopted by a higher number
of practitioners. This indicates that only mature users who are familiar and professional
with the usage of a variety of Green BIM functions can start operating BIM for digital twin
and data management.
Internal versus external factors
The results of the study highlight that the diffusion of all BIM sustainability-related
functions in the AEC sector of the Gulf region is principally driven by mixed factors and
more powerfully by the external components (the b parameter in Table 6) such as gov-
ernment regulations and policies, market conditions, and media rather than the imitative
behaviors and the bandwagon pressure (internal factors).
The results reveal that the mixed model best describes the diffusion for five Green
BIM functions (F3, F4, F5, F7, and F9), indicating that there is a combination or interaction
between internal and external factors that affect the adoption of these five Green BIM
functions. Examining the a, b, and m parameters for the functions where the mixed model
outperforms the external model shows that for all functions, b > a indicates that the external
factors have the biggest effect. In the practical world, this means that external marketing
and regulatory incentives might play a vital role in proving Green BIM’s utility in realizing
water efficiency, waste reduction, and compliance with green building certifications like
LEED or BREEAM but also the internal skills of construction experts, comprising their
awareness of sustainability paybacks and earlier exposure to Green BIM tools, which impact
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 21 of 29

adoption but less significantly. For the remaining functions in the model (F1, F2, F6, and
F8), the external model best describes their diffusion (R2 is higher and AIC is lower for
the external model than the mixed model), indicating that the presence of industry-wide
standards and the requirement for BIM in government projects push adoption forward.
Also, considering the external financial factors, the results imply that external factors, such
as government incentives, subsidies for sustainable construction, and the decreasing cost of
BIM software, encourage the wider diffusion of Green BIM. For the four functions that were
best described by the external model, the results imply that legal frameworks, incentives,
and restrictions are very important but are not alone affecting the diffusion. According to
the theory of the external diffusion model, other factors such as (1) the existence of market
competitors and economic trends which also profile the diffusion rate and (2) the media and
mass communication which increase awareness and desirability also affect diffusion [24,86].
Also, adding to the above, the authors of [49] confirmed that the availability and expansion
of complementary technologies stimulated diffusion.
These findings were not expected yet homogenous. The findings do not conform
with the study of [24], who studied the diffusion of BIM in the MENA region and found
that the mixed model, but mainly the internal factors (such as social influence and peer
networks), play a more significant role than external factors (like government policies and
market conditions) in driving BIM adoption in the MENA architectural, engineering, and
construction (AEC) industry. These results are the same when compared to many studies
in the same region [38,87].
Additionally, this study indicates that, according to non-Green BIM users, the main
barriers were related to a (1) lack of BIM knowledge, which stems from within the organiza-
tion, as professionals may lack the expertise, training, or awareness of BIM functionalities;
(2) the complexity of BIM–Internal relations due to skill gaps, learning curves, or resistance
to change; (3) workflow issues and organizational integration challenges; and (4) client
demand. All the above, apart from client demand, are internal factors. Only one barrier,
client demand, is perceived by non-users and is an impediment to the adoption of green
practices on BIM. Internal organizational workflow adjustments must align with external
software requirements and industry best practices.
The above two insights might lead to the conclusion that the adoption of BIM func-
tionalities, in general, is led by mixed models but mainly internal factors, yet those specific
functions related to green building and suitability practices are mainly driven by the mixed
model but mostly by external factors.
In other words, an internal push is needed to induce non-users to adopt Green BIM
functions; i.e., internal factors are mainly needed in the pre-adoption stage of Green BIM.
Yet when the adoption occurs, the external factors are those affecting the utilization or the
favoring of one functionality over the others.
Concerning F1 (green building certification assistance), the results for both external fac-
tors outperform the internal factors, indicating that although there is an internal preference
for the prestige associated with certifications (internal factors), the demand for certified
sustainable buildings in global markets and the stakeholder expectations and marketing
potential for green labels dominate adoption patterns.
In the last decade, countries in the Gulf area including Bahrein, Qatar, KSA, and the
UAE have been encouraged by global trends and are trying to obtain green certificates
(LEED, WELL, and BREEAM) for most of their big project such as Expo Dubai 2020, which
revealed a market demand for sustainability [33,44]. In this sense, the GCC Green Building
Market study outlined how certifications, stainability accreditations, and environmental
endorsements can enhance brand positioning and investor confidence [49]. BIM proved
to be a tool that aids in obtaining a green certification, as it not only facilitates energy and
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 22 of 29

water simulations but also helps in achieving and documenting the data that align with
LEED and BREEAM, among other certification requirements.
Apart from this, the authors also examined the diffusion of waste reduction and
construction optimization (F2). Table 6 shows that the external model best describes the
diffusion, indicating that legislation on construction waste management (e.g., EU directives,
Saudi Vision 2030 targets, and the media’s focus on sustainability in construction and
the circular economy) is mainly affecting the use of this green function. Legislation on
construction waste management in KSA, such as the Waste Management Law issued by
Royal Decree No. M/3 in 2021, mandates strict regulations on waste handling and disposal.
This forces the AEC sector to implement helpful waste reduction strategies such as BIM, as
it enables precise material estimation and aligns project practices with legal requirements.
The study of [16] underlines that adopting BIM helps in improving project efficiency and
compliance with environmental regulations.
For F3, energy efficiency and performance, the mixed model best estimates the pa-
rameters, indicating that government policies on energy codes and efficiency standards
and media highlighting energy crises and solutions (external), as well as organizational
priority for energy savings (internal), affect the adoption of this function. Government
incentives, such as renewable energy subsidies for solar and wind projects, play a cru-
cial role in driving the early adoption of energy-efficient technologies [29]. Moreover,
bandwagon effects, where establishments adopt sustainable innovations due to market
trends and competitive pressure, further accelerate adoption [58]. In other words, as both
the a and b parameters are significant for these functions, the incentives for renewable
energy integration (e.g., subsidies for solar/wind) and the bandwagon pressure to adopt
energy-saving technologies increase the chance of people adopting this specific function.
Subsidies and tax benefits in the Gulf, such as the Shams Dubai Initiative (UAE) and KSA’s
PPAs, decrease costs and incentivize renewable energy adoption. BIM optimizes project
design, enhances financial planning, and ensures compliance with regulations to maximize
incentives. By integrating subsidies into cost analysis, BIM drives efficient and profitable
renewable energy installations.
Similarly, the diffusion of F4, facility management tools for sustainability, is also
affected by both internal factors, including organizational readiness, such as staff skills and
existing technology infrastructure, and external factors, including government regulations
on sustainability and client demand for green buildings. These pressures can either push
early adoption through external incentives (in this study, the first adoption was in 2017) or
sustain it through internal operational needs [58], improving resource management and
energy efficiency (as it continues to be used at an increasing rate till 2025).
Concerning material selection and LCA (F5), the mixed model also best fits the data,
with both a and b parameters being significant. This indicates that embracing this function
is related to both external certification demands and internal environmental goals. Recently,
there has been a global push for sustainable construction materials and reporting (e.g.,
embodied carbon limits), and this seems to also affect the Gulf region [16], yet the results
show that internal or in-house expertise for LCA integration needs to be available, especially
as the green certificate also demands LCA compliance.
Internally, the lack of awareness about embodied carbon in materials in many coun-
tries might be a considerable challenge as it impends the smooth and successful integration
of LCA into BIM workflows [88], because stakeholders may not totally grab the significance
of evaluating the environmental impact of materials throughout their lifecycle. Apart from
the internal pushes, governments in KSA, the UAE, Kuwait, and Qatar have introduced
new material sustainability laws in the last decade [32]. In one way or another, these laws
are pushing the AEC sector to perform more environmental assessments, such as LCA,
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 23 of 29

for which BIM can be a convenient tool [59]. The results of Figure 4 show that more and
more practitioners are utilizing BIM to assist in material analysis and LCA, as it delivers
a complete platform for evaluating data throughout the lifespan of a building structure.
This trend underlines the significance of tackling both internal and external factors to
fully leverage BIM for LCA and to meet the evolving regulatory and environmental de-
mands. Yet internal limitations such as the lack of knowledge and skills about embodied
carbon and other sustainability metrics can hinder them from complying with the new
requirements [51].
For F6, water efficiency and management, the external factors best describe their diffu-
sion. This might be explained by the presence of regulatory frameworks and government
policies such as sustainability mandates and water conservation laws, which are driving the
adoption of BIM for water management in the Gulf area. Digging more into the mandates
for water efficiency in the Gulf area, the review of the literature pointed out that mandates
such as the ESTIDAMA Pearl Rating System in the UAE require water conservation for
many projects which might be the reason why BIM adoption for this specific function
has increased in the Gulf/UAE. Recently, Kuwait also has shown interest in reducing and
managing water utilization in buildings to abide by the recent Kuwait Environment Public
Authority (KEPA) 2024 environmental policies [32]. Likewise, Bahrain’s National Energy
Efficiency Action Plan underscores water conservation as part of its sustainability goals,
promoting BIM as a tool to achieve these objectives [33].
For F7, indoor environmental quality and BIM functionality, the results show that both
the internal and external factors are important, though the external ones have more power.
It is worth mentioning that health-focused policies and regulations in the Gulf region
might be a key driver for adoption. For instance, Qatar’s Global Sustainability Assessment
System (GSAS) and KSA’s Vision 2030 sustainability goals emphasize improving indoor
environmental quality (IEQ) to improve occupant health and well-being; these policies
in turn incentivize practitioners to implement BIM for a healthier design and monitor air
quality. Similarly, Bahrain’s National Energy Efficiency Action Plan includes provisions
for healthier indoor spaces, further encouraging the use of BIM. Concerning the internal
factors, the mounting demand for high-performance structures with higher IEQ withstands
the diffusion of BIM. The results in Figure 4 highlight that construction companies in
the Gulf area are more and more spotting the worth of BIM in improving air quality,
thermal comfort, and lighting, which supports both regulatory requirements and market
expectations. In this sense, [39] examined the role of BIM in providing sustainable designs.
Their case study, which focused on Gulf Organization for Research and Development
(GORD), revealed the importance of BIM in accounting for health and environmental
considerations in construction.
When examining the drivers of the sustainable site design functions, the results in
Table 6 outline the external factors as the key drivers. According to the authors of [31],
urban planning policies including zoning laws and sustainability mandates directly in-
crease the rate of adopting various software to design sustainable sites. The authors of [31]
examined the impact of urban mobility planning policies in Qatar and found that new laws
include firm requirements related to sustainable site development. This results in a better
diffusion of these specific BIM functionalities as BIM allows and facilitates meeting the
requirements and aligning with the policies. Similarly, KSA’s Vision 2030 and Bahrain’s
National Energy Efficiency Action Plan accentuate sustainable urban development. Fur-
thermore, stakeholder pressure from clients, investors, and regulatory bodies to minimize
environmental impacts is a critical factor. The authors of [39] underlined how BIM permits
shareholders to picture and enhance site layouts, reduce environmental footprints, and
comply with sustainability goals.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 24 of 29

The results reveal that the mixed model is accurately estimating the parameters for F9,
carbon footprint and emissions analysis, in the Gulf area. It is worth mentioning here that
the external pressure from international agreements, such as the Paris Accord, has pushed
Gulf countries to implement severe carbon reduction measures, thereby supporting the
embracing of BIM for accurate emissions tracking and analysis. Internally, corporations are
motivated by the necessity to improve their image and meet corporate commitments to
carbon neutrality, which supports global sustainability trends. Moreover, client expectations
for net-zero buildings are growing in the Gulf area [16], mostly in high-profile projects,
further incentivizing the adoption of BIM to bring sustainable outcomes. GORD reports
feature how BIM is a critical tool for achieving environmental targets in the Gulf area.

5. Conclusions
The diffusion of BIM sustainability-related functions in the Gulf area is continuing to
rise in accordance with an increasing trend. BIM users’ awareness and understanding of
non-environmentally friendly building-related functions in the Gulf region are limiting
the realization of BIM’s full sustainability potential, primarily due to a combination of
knowledge deficiencies, a lack of client demand, and technological fragmentation.
Concerning Green BIM users, this study showed that the Gulf area is missing BIM ca-
pability as a transformative tool for sustainable construction (a low percentage of adopters).
A deeper examination suggests that while some BIM functions like energy modeling and
waste reduction are frequently adopted, other functionalities like carbon footprint analysis
and renewable energy simulations are barely used potentially due to their complexity
or the need for specialized tools. Three diffusion models (internal, external, and mixed)
were employed. The results show that the mixed model best fits the results and estimates
perfectly the needed parameters for F3, F4, F5, F7, and F9, and the external model best
fits F1, F2, F6, and F8. Yet the results of the mixed model outline that the external factors
outperform the internal factors. This highlights the significance of rules, regulations, and
the media in green buildings. The low number of people adopting green BIM functions
highlighted the key role of both regulatory frameworks and awareness in determining the
future of sustainable construction practices.
This study has significant research and practical implications, primarily by bridging
the knowledge gap on the factors influencing the adoption patterns of Green BIM functions,
providing a comprehensive understanding of the key drivers within the Gulf region’s
construction industry, an area that has historically been under-explored and is currently
at an early stage in adopting BIM. The author is aware that research is the initial study to
investigate the influence of diffusion modes on the adoption of BIM sustainability-related
functionalities. These results assist managers and professionals in enhancing their execution
and provide guidance to policymakers regarding their involvement in encouraging the
development of green buildings.
This study significantly contributed to the Gulf area by identifying the most used
BIM functionalities that address sustainability issues such as green certification assistance,
waste reduction, and energy efficiency. While BIM has been widely researched, there is
a lack of region-specific studies focusing on its role in sustainable construction practices.
This research addresses that gap and provides new information on the barriers, drivers,
and patterns affecting the adoption of Green BIM functionalities in the Gulf region. Thus,
it offers practical insights into how sustainability-focused BIM tools can be integrated
into local construction practices, benefiting industry professionals in the region. Also, the
findings are relevant for policymakers and regulators in the Gulf area, as they provide data
that can inform the development of policies, incentives, and regulations to encourage the
broader use of Green BIM tools. This is crucial for promoting sustainable construction
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 25 of 29

practices in line with Saudi Vision 2030, which emphasizes the importance of sustainability
and environmental conservation in the region’s development. The research also aids in
aligning the construction industry with global best practices for sustainable building. By
promoting the use of Green BIM tools, this study supports the nation’s transition to more
sustainable construction practices, thereby helping to achieve the long-term sustainability
objectives outlined in Vision 2030, particularly in the areas of environmental conservation
and energy efficiency.
The results highlight the need for industry professionals to align their practices with
both external regulations and internal efficiency measures. Contractors, engineers, and
architects should invest in BIM training and collaborate with policymakers to ensure
compliance with sustainability standards. But at the same time, managers should guarantee
the availability of skills and resources needed, as well as infrastructure for the efficient
adoption of green functions.
The research further shows that theoretical education in Gulf universities lays the
essential groundwork; however, practical implementation proves crucial for mastering BIM
and sustainability principles. To close this disparity, educational programs should include
practical training sessions, partnerships with industries, and actual real-world projects.
Integrating BIM into construction workflows through experiential learning is demonstrated
to enhance both adoption and efficiency according to the results.
A limitation of this research is that it did not examine the reasoning behind the
differences in the number of users adopting various features. Subsequent research can
investigate this further. Presently, the models employed assume that the contributing
factors remain unchanged over time; however, to enhance the models’ accuracy, future
research could potentially evaluate the dynamic factors that influence the subjects, rather
than the static factors, with the aim of refining the model.
The mathematical model offers a structured framework for evaluating the spread of
Green BIM functions, but its limitations must be acknowledged. BIM adoption is signifi-
cantly impacted by user expertise, an organization’s preparedness, and regulatory guide-
lines, which may be overlooked by quantitative analysis on its own. Integrating qualitative
insights into mathematical modeling improves the comprehensiveness of assessments.

Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://
www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su17093843/s1, List of Acronyms; Tools to compare the power of
the models.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, C.I.E.H. and G.M.M.; methodology, C.I.E.H. and G.M.M.
formal analysis, C.I.E.H. and G.M.M.; investigation, C.I.E.H. and G.M.M.; writing—original draft
preparation, C.I.E.H.; writing—review, G.M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: This study is waived for ethical review as it states on the
Ethical Code (approved February 2022) does not provide prior authorization for the development of
research that does not have bioethical implications.

Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement: Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments: We thank the Jean Monnet Chair PM2 of the University of Granada for the
received support along the process.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 26 of 29

References
1. UNEP. Not Yet Built for Purpose: Global Building Sector Emissions Still High and Rising. UN Environment Programme
Website. Available online: https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/not-yet-built-purpose-global-building-
sector-emissions-still-high (accessed on 21 March 2025).
2. Chapa, J. Bringing Embodied Carbon Upfront. Built Envoronment Economist. Available online: https://search.informit.org/doi/
abs/10.3316/informit.985354490427057 (accessed on 21 March 2025).
3. World Green Building Council. Embodied Carbon-World Green Building Council. World Green Building Council Website.
Available online: https://worldgbc.org/climate-action/embodied-carbon/ (accessed on 21 March 2025).
4. Kavanancheeri, L. Impact of Building Information Modelling in achieving Sustainable Efficiency. J. Account. Bus. Manag. (JABM)
2024, 32, 323–334. [CrossRef]
5. Fauzi, M.A.; Anuar, K.F.; Zainudin, N.M.; Ahmad, M.H.; Wider, W. Building information modeling (BIM) in green buildings:
A state-of-the-art bibliometric review. Int. J. Build. Pathol. Adapt. 2023. ahead of printing. [CrossRef]
6. Shehata, A.O.; Megahed, N.A.; Hassan, A.M.; Shahda, M.M. Holistic SWOT based matrix of BIM adoption in heritage green
retrofitting processes. Arch. Eng. Des. Manag. 2024, 20, 694–718. [CrossRef]
7. Chai, Y. Analysis and prospect of green building engineering based on BIM technology. Appl. Comput. Eng. 2023, 25, 74–82.
[CrossRef]
8. Olaiya, B.C.; Fadugba, O.G.; Lawan, M.M.; Olaiya, B.C.; Fadugba, O.G.; Lawan, M.M. Building Information Modeling (BIM)
Implementation and Practices in Construction Industry: A Review. In Advances in Civil Engineering. Sustainable Materials and
Resilient Structures; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2024. [CrossRef]
9. Adekunle, P.; Aigbavboa, C.; Otasowie, K.; Akinradewo, O. Matching-up modularity methodology application within the built
environment: A bibliometric review. J. Asian Arch. Build. Eng. 2024. [CrossRef]
10. Yao, H.; Miao, J.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, G.; Chu, J. Undirected graph representing strategy for general room layout estimation. J. Vis.
Commun. Image Represent. 2023, 97, 103963. [CrossRef]
11. Ariono, B.; Wasesa, M.; Dhewanto, W. The Drivers, Barriers, and Enablers of Building Information Modeling (BIM) Innovation in
Developing Countries: Insights from Systematic Literature Review and Comparative Analysis. Buildings 2022, 12, 1912. [CrossRef]
12. Roseli, F.A.; Abas, N.H.; Ibrahim, N.Q.; Ta’at, N.H.M. Barriers Of Building Information Modelling (Bim) Implementation: Current
Perspectives of Construction Stakeholders in Johor, Malaysia. J. Civ. Eng. Sci. Technol. 2024, 15, 179–187. [CrossRef]
13. Alverinaldo, M.A.; Nugroho, A.S.B. Analysis of Factors Inhibiting the Implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM)
in Construction Projects. Bentang J. Teor. dan Ter. Bid. Rekayasa Sipil 2024, 12, 220–230. [CrossRef]
14. Shehzad, H.F.; Ibrahim, R.B.; Fadhil, A.; Khaidzir, K.; Husain, O.; Abdalla, S. Building Information Modelling Adoption:
Systematic Literature Review. In Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies; Springer: Cham, Switzerland,
2021; Volume 72, pp. 920–932. [CrossRef]
15. Tunji-Olayeni, P.; David, S. Barriers Hindering Green Building Materials Adoption in the Nigerian Construction Industry. J. Solid
Waste Technol. Manag. 2024, 50, 577–591. [CrossRef]
16. Alghamdi, M.S.; Beach, T.H.; Rezgui, Y. Reviewing the effects of deploying building information modelling (BIM) on the adoption
of sustainable design in Gulf countries: A case study in Saudi Arabia. City Territ. Arch. 2022, 9, 18. [CrossRef]
17. Carvalho, J.P.; Almeida, M.; Bragança, L.; Mateus, R. BIM-Based Energy Analysis and Sustainability Assessment—Application to
Portuguese Buildings. Buildings 2021, 11, 246. [CrossRef]
18. Huang, B.; Lei, J.; Ren, F.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, Q.; Li, S.; Lin, Y. Contribution and obstacle analysis of applying BIM in promoting green
buildings. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 278, 123946. [CrossRef]
19. Sudarsan, J.S.; Gavali, H. Application of BIM in conjunction with circular economy principles for sustainable construction.
Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023, 26, 7455–7468. [CrossRef]
20. Saieg, P.; Sotelino, E.D.; Nascimento, D.; Caiado, R.G.G. Interactions of Building Information Modeling, Lean and Sustainability
on the Architectural, Engineering and Construction industry: A systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 174, 788–806. [CrossRef]
21. Salgın, B.; Akgün, A.; Coşgun, N.; Agyekum, K. Construction Waste Reduction Through BIM-Based Site Management Approach.
Int. J. Eng. Technol. IJET 2017, 3, 135–142. [CrossRef]
22. Liu, N.; Guo, D.; Song, Z.; Zhong, S.; Hu, R. BIM-based digital platform and risk management system for mountain tunnel
construction. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 7585. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Wang, W.; Xu, K.; Song, S.; Bao, Y.; Xiang, C. From BIM to digital twin in BIPV: A review of current knowledge. Sustain. Energy
Technol. Assess. 2024, 67, 103855. [CrossRef]
24. El Hajj, C.; Montes, G.M.; Jawad, D. Analysis of BIM functionalities diffusion in the construction industry: The case of the MENA
region. Eng. Constr. Arch. Manag. 2021, 30, 415–435. [CrossRef]
25. Alotaibi, B.S.; Waqar, A.; Radu, D.; Khan, A.M.; Dodo, Y.; Althoey, F.; Almujibah, H. Building information modeling (BIM)
adoption for enhanced legal and contractual management in construction projects. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2024, 15, 102822. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 27 of 29

26. Durdyev, S.; Mbachu, J.; Thurnell, D.; Zhao, L.; Hosseini, M.R. BIM Adoption in the Cambodian Construction Industry: Key
Drivers and Barriers. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 215. [CrossRef]
27. Ohueri, C.C.; Liew, S.C.; Bamgbade, J.A.; Enegbuma, W.I. Critical components for successful BIM-based sustainable building
design collaboration: Structural equation model analysis. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2023. ahead of printing. Emerald Publishing Limited.
UK. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-06-2023-0235 (accessed on 21 March 2025).
28. Cheng, Q.; Tayeh, B.A.; Abu Aisheh, Y.I.; Alaloul, W.S.; Aldahdooh, Z.A. Leveraging BIM for Sustainable Construction: Benefits,
Barriers, and Best Practices. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7654. [CrossRef]
29. IRENA. Renewable Energy and Jobs: Annual Review; IRENA: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2023. Available online: https:
//www.irena.org/Publications/2023/Sep/Renewable-energy-and-jobs-Annual-review-2023 (accessed on 21 March 2025).
30. Alvur, E.; Anaç, M.; Mert Cüce, A.P.; Cüce, E. The Potential and Challenges of BIM in Enhancing Energy Efficiency in Existing
Buildings: A Comprehensive Review. Sustain. Clean Build. 2024, 1, 42–65.
31. Mehraban, M.H.; Alnaser, A.A.; Sepasgozar, S.M.E. Building Information Modeling and AI Algorithms for Optimizing Energy
Performance in Hot Climates: A Comparative Study of Riyadh and Dubai. Buildings 2024, 14, 2748. [CrossRef]
32. Al-Raqeb, H.; Ghaffar, S.H. The Role of BIM 6D and 7D in Enhancing Sustainable Construction Practices: A Qualitative Study.
Technologies 2025, 13, 65. [CrossRef]
33. Jamoussi, B.; Abu-Rizaiza, A.; Al-Haij, A. Sustainable Building Standards, Codes and Certification Systems: The Status Quo and
Future Directions in Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10314. [CrossRef]
34. Nguyen, T.P.; Nguyen, V.-A.; Pham, D.D.; Do, H.Q. Intergrating Building Information Modelling (BIM) and Tools with Green
Building Certification System in Designing and Evaluating Water Efficiency of Green Building for Sustainable Buildings. IOP
Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 1079, 032063. [CrossRef]
35. Batista, L.T.; Franco, J.R.Q.; Fakury, R.H.; Porto, M.F.; Alves, L.V.R.; Kohlmann, G.S. BIM-IoT-FM integration: Strategy for
implementation of sustainable water management in buildings. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2023, 13, 1096–1116. [CrossRef]
36. Mathews, M.E.; Shaji, A.E.; Anand, N.; Andrushia, A.D.; Chin, S.C.; Lubloy, E. IoT-based BIM integrated model for energy and
water management in smart homes. In Intelligent Edge Computing for Cyber Physical Applications; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA,
USA, 2023; pp. 45–66. [CrossRef]
37. Raya, R.K.; Gupta, R. Application of BIM framework on rural infrastructure. Asian J. Civ. Eng. 2022, 23, 249–268. [CrossRef]
38. Alhumayn, S.; Chinyio, E.; Ndekugri, I. The Barriers and Strategies of Implementing Bim in Saudi Arabia; WIT Press: Southampton,
UK, 2017; pp. 55–67.
39. Azhar, S.; Khalfan, M.; Maqsood, T. Building Information Modeling (BIM): Now and Beyond. Constr. Econ. Build. 2015, 12, 15–28.
[CrossRef]
40. Abdelazim, A.S.; Abdelaal, M.; Mohamed, W. Towards Sustainable Buildings Using Building Information Modelling As A Tool
For Indoor Environmental Quality And Energy Efficiency. In WIT Transactions on the Built Environment; WIT Press: Southampton,
UK, 2021; pp. 25–33. [CrossRef]
41. Jiang, L. Environmental Benefits of Green Buildings with BIM Technology. Ecol. Chem. Eng. S 2023, 30, 191–199. [CrossRef]
42. Donkers, A.; Yang, D.; de Vries, B.; Baken, N. Semantic Web Technologies for Indoor Environmental Quality: A Review and
Ontology Design. Buildings 2022, 12, 1522. [CrossRef]
43. Domjan, S.; Fink, R.; Medved, S. Coupling the assessment of indoor environmental quality and cognitive performance in Building
Information Modelling with integral indicators. Energy Build. 2025, 330, 115354. [CrossRef]
44. Hasanain, F.A.; Nawari, N.O. BIM-based model for sustainable built environment in Saudi Arabia. Front. Built Environ. 2022,
8, 950484. [CrossRef]
45. Veerendra, G.; Dey, S.; Mantle, E.J.; Manoj, A.P.; Padavala, S.S.A.B. Building information modeling—Simulation and analysis of a
University Edifice and its environs—A sustainable design approach. Green Technol. Sustain. 2025, 3, 100150. [CrossRef]
46. Schamne, A.N.; Nagalli, A.; Soeiro, A.A.V.; Martins, J.P.d.S.P. BIM in construction waste management: A conceptual model based
on the industry foundation classes standard. Autom. Constr. 2024, 159, 105283. [CrossRef]
47. Eze, E.C.; Aghimien, D.O.; Aigbavboa, C.O.; Sofolahan, O. Building information modelling adoption for construction waste
reduction in the construction industry of a developing country. Eng. Constr. Arch. Manag. 2022, 31, 2205–2223. [CrossRef]
48. Murti, C.K.; Muslim, F. Analyzing the Awareness, Drivers, and Barriers of Building Information Modelling (BIM) Implementation
for Sustainable Construction: Indonesia Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Civil Engineering and
Architecture Conference; Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering; Springer: Singapore, 2024; Volume 389, pp. 913–926. [CrossRef]
49. Marzouk, M.; Ayman, R.; Alwan, Z.; Elshaboury, N. Green building system integration into project delivery utilising BIM. Environ.
Dev. Sustain. 2021, 24, 6467–6480. [CrossRef]
50. Cascone, S. Digital Technologies and Sustainability Assessment: A Critical Review on the Integration Methods between BIM and
LEED. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5548. [CrossRef]
51. Abougamil, R.A.; Thorpe, D.; Heravi, A. An Investigation of BIM Advantages in Analysing Claims Procedures Related to the
Extension of Time and Money in the KSA Construction Industry. Buildings 2024, 14, 426. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 28 of 29

52. Zhang, Y.; Jiang, X.; Cui, C.; Skitmore, M. BIM-based approach for the integrated assessment of life cycle carbon emission intensity
and life cycle costs. Build. Environ. 2022, 226, 109691. [CrossRef]
53. Djuedja, J.F.T.; Karray, M.H.; Foguem, B.K.; Magniont, C.; Abanda, F.H. Interoperability Challenges in Building Information
Modelling (BIM). I-ESA 2018, 9, 275–282. [CrossRef]
54. Abbasi, S.; Noorzai, E. The BIM-Based multi-optimization approach in order to determine the trade-off between embodied and
operation energy focused on renewable energy use. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 281, 125359. [CrossRef]
55. Kozlovska, M.; Petkanic, S.; Vranay, F.; Vranay, D. Enhancing Energy Efficiency and Building Performance through BEMS-BIM
Integration. Energies 2023, 16, 6327. [CrossRef]
56. Alhammad, M.; Eames, M.; Vinai, R. Enhancing Building Energy Efficiency through Building Information Modeling (BIM) and
Building Energy Modeling (BEM) Integration: A Systematic Review. Buildings 2024, 14, 581. [CrossRef]
57. Chen, B.; Liu, Q.; Chen, H.; Wang, L.; Deng, T.; Zhang, L.; Wu, X. Multiobjective optimization of building energy consumption
based on BIM-DB and LSSVM-NSGA-II. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 294, 126153. [CrossRef]
58. Rogers, M. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2025. Available online: https://books.google.es/
books/about/Diffusion_of_Innovations_5th_Edition.html?id=9U1K5LjUOwEC&redir_esc=y (accessed on 21 March 2025).
59. Wang, H.; Meng, X. BIM-Based Knowledge Management in Construction Projects. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Proj. Manag. 2018, 9, 20–37.
[CrossRef]
60. Lourenço, M.P.; Arantes, A.; Costa, A.A. Barriers to the Implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in Late-Adopting
Countries in the European Union: The Case of Portugal. Preprints 2024. [CrossRef]
61. Sun, C.; Jiang, S.; Skibniewski, M.J.; Man, Q.; Shen, L. A literature review of the factors limiting the application of BIM in the
construction industry. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 2015, 23, 764–779. [CrossRef]
62. Altassan, A.; Othman, M.; Elbeltagi, E.; Abdelshakor, M.; Ehab, A. A Qualitative Investigation of the Obstacles Inherent in the
Implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM). Buildings 2023, 13, 700. [CrossRef]
63. Onososen, A.; Musonda, I. Barriers to BIM-Based Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment for Buildings: An Interpretive Structural
Modelling Approach. Buildings 2022, 12, 324. [CrossRef]
64. Gledson, B.J.; Greenwood, D. The adoption of 4D BIM in the UK construction industry: An Innovation Diffusion approach. Eng.
Constr. Arch. Manag. 2017, 24, 950–967. [CrossRef]
65. Bryde, D.; Broquetas, M.; Volm, J.M. The project benefits of Building Information Modelling (BIM). Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2013, 31,
971–980. [CrossRef]
66. Eadie, R.; Odeyinka, H.; Browne, M.; Mckeown, C.; Yohanis, M. Building Information Modelling Adoption: An Analysis of the
Barriers to Implementation. J. Eng. Archit. 2014, 2, 77–101.
67. El Hajj, C.; Montes, G.M.; Jawad, D. An overview of BIM adoption barriers in the Middle East and North Africa developing
countries. Eng. Constr. Arch. Manag. 2021, 30, 889–913. [CrossRef]
68. Ahmed, A.L.; Kassem, M. A unified BIM adoption taxonomy: Conceptual development, empirical validation and application.
Autom. Constr. 2018, 96, 103–127. [CrossRef]
69. Hamma-Adama, M.; Kouider, T. What are the Barriers and Drivers toward BIM Adoption in Nigeria? In Proceedings of the
Creative Construction Conference, Budapest, Hungary, 29 June 2019. [CrossRef]
70. Lu, N.; Korman, T. Implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in Modular Construction: Benefits and Challenges.
In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2010, Banff, AB, Canada, 8–10 May 2010. [CrossRef]
71. Thneibat, M.; Thneibat, M.; Al-Shattarat, B.; Al-Kroom, H. Development of an agent-based model to understand the diffusion of
value management in construction projects as a sustainability tool. Alex. Eng. J. 2022, 61, 747–761. [CrossRef]
72. Hosseini, M.R.; Banihashemi, S.; Chileshe, N.; Namzadi, M.O.; Udaeja, C.; Rameezdeen, R.; McCuen, T. BIM adoption within
Australian Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs): An innovation diffusion model. Constr. Econ. Build. 2016, 16, 71–86.
[CrossRef]
73. Xu, J.; Shi, Y.; Xie, Y.; Zhao, S. A BIM-Based construction and demolition waste information management system for greenhouse
gas quantification and reduction. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 229, 308–324. [CrossRef]
74. Lee, S.; Yu, J.; Jeong, D. BIM Acceptance Model in Construction Organizations. J. Manag. Eng. 2015, 31, 252. [CrossRef]
75. Mahajan, V.; Muller, E.; Bass, F.M. New Product Diffusion Models in Marketing: A Review and Directions for Research. J. Mark.
1990, 54, 1252170. [CrossRef]
76. Samuelson, O.; Björk, B.C. Adoption processes for EDM, EDI and BIM technologies in the construction industry. J. Civ. Eng.
Manag. 2013, 19, S172–S187. [CrossRef]
77. Schwab-Mccoy, A. Developing A First-Year Seminar Course In Statistics And Data Science. In Proceedings of the Roundtable
Conference of IASE, Berlin, Germany, 19–22 July 2016.
78. Ilieva, J.; Baron, S.; Healey, N.M. Online Surveys in Marketing Research. Int. J. Mark. Res. 2002, 44, 1–14. [CrossRef]
79. Kale, S.; Arditi, D. Innovation Diffusion Modeling in the Construction Industry. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2010, 136, 329–340.
[CrossRef]
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3843 29 of 29

80. Gholizadeh, P.; Esmaeili, B.; Goodrum, P. Diffusion of Building Information Modeling Functions in the Construction Industry.
J. Manag. Eng. 2018, 34, 04017060. [CrossRef]
81. Lissitz, R.W.; Green, S.B. Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: A Monte Carlo approach. J. Appl. Psychol. 1975, 60,
10–13. [CrossRef]
82. Brown, J.D. The Cronbach alpha reliability estimate The Cronbach alpha reliability estimate How should we interpret Cronbach
alpha? JALT Test. Eval. SIG Newsl. 2002, 6, 17–18.
83. Alvi, S.A.; Kumar, H.; Khan, R.A. Integrating BIM with carbon footprint assessment of buildings: A review. Mater. Today Proc.
2023, 93, 497–504. [CrossRef]
84. Liu, Z.; Li, P.; Wang, F.; Osmani, M.; Demian, P. Building Information Modeling (BIM) Driven Carbon Emission Reduction
Research: A 14-Year Bibliometric Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12820. [CrossRef]
85. Alreshidi, E.; Mourshed, M.; Rezgui, Y. Factors for effective BIM governance. J. Build. Eng. 2017, 10, 89–101. [CrossRef]
86. Damanpour, F.; Sanchez-Henriquez, F.; Chiu, H.H. Internal and External Sources and the Adoption of Innovations in Organiza-
tions. Br. J. Manag. 2018, 29, 712–730. [CrossRef]
87. Vitente, L.S.; Ong, A.K.S.; German, J.D. Assessment of Adoption and Acceptance of Building Information Modeling for Building
Construction among Industries in Qatar. Buildings 2024, 14, 1433. [CrossRef]
88. Waldman, B.; Huang, M.; Simonen, K. Embodied carbon in construction materials: A framework for quantifying data quality in
EPDs. Build. Cities 2020, 1, 625–636. [CrossRef]

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.