The
modern construction industry had its roots in the take-off of industrialization
in the early nineteenth century, and there was a comparable period of rapid,
disruptive technological development not unlike the present one in the late
nineteenth century. Between 1860 and 1900 building and construction was restructured
as an industry by the rise of large, international contractors, and project
management and delivery was reorganized around steam powered machinery and
equipment. Major projects like the Suez Canal, railways, tunnels and the new
factories for mass production were typically built by new, global European
contractors employing workers from around the world on their projects. These
projects also required a new organizational form that integrated components,
systems and processes.
In
materials, the disruptive new technologies of steel, glass and concrete, which
came together in the last decades of the century, led to fundamental changes in
both processes and products, along Peters (1996) three dimensions of industry
development: industrialization, mechanization and organization. Over a hundred
years later construction is a mature system, based around standards and
professional roles, with a high degree of technological lock in due to the age
of the system. The ‘embeddedness’ of the construction technological system is found
across the various combinations of the complex array of professional institutes
and organizations, trade and industry associations, government regulations and
licensing, standards and codes, and insurance and finance providers and
regulators.
The
impacts of new technology on a mature technological system like the
construction industry are often thought to be gradual, changing industry
practice over time without significantly affecting industry structure or
dynamics. This was the case for twentieth century General Purpose Technologies like electricity,
computers and the internal combustion engine. These became universal without
significantly restructuring and reorganising construction in the way steam
powered mechanization did, because they essentially upgraded existing capabilities.
At the starting point for a cycle of development is a new GPT, then industries
and products evolve and develop as the underlying knowledge base and
technological capabilities increase and become more complex.. If, after a
period of development, this GPT gives a technological shock to an existing
system of production, it leads to a transition period where the firms involved
have to adjust to a new business environment, which in turn leads to a
restructuring and consolidation of the industry. This is what happened to
construction in the second half of the nineteenth century, with iron-framed and
steel-reinforced concrete buildings the industry had to not only master the use
of these new materials, but also develop the processes and project management
skills the new technology required. With electricity, computers and the
internal combustion engine in the twentieth century, the construction industry
adopted these new GPTs and used them to improve efficiency, but they did not
require a major change in the form of industry organization that had emerged
during industrialization and mechanization in the nineteenth century.
How and why a new
technology spreads through the economy and society is determined by many
factors, however studies of historical cases such as tractors, electricity, TV
and phones have given good examples of technology diffusion and its dynamics. A
GPT takes time to diffuse through the economy because parallel changes in forms
of organization, methods of production and patterns of consumption are required,
and these are not decisions firms and households make quickly or easily.
Studies on the introduction of new technologies found it takes 15 to 30 years
for a new technology to reach 90 percent of its potential market, for example electrification
in the US, which took 30 years from 1900 because of the fundamental changes
industry and households needed to make to take advantage of electrical power.
Another example is how the tractor displaced horses and mules in US agriculture
between 1910 and 1960. Horses and mules declined from about 26 million in 1920
to about 3 million by 1960, while the number of tractors rose from zero to 4.5
million by 1960. One reason for the slow spread of tractors was the incremental
innovation needed to increase their reliability. A second was an increase in
farm wages after 1940. The relative
price of labour and mechanization has been found to be the most significant factor
in technological innovation, diffusion and automation of work.
How
firms utilise technological capabilities differentiates them within a diverse,
location-based technological system. It is widely recognised there are
differences between industries in the way that technology is adopted, adapted
and applied, but differences within industries generally get less attention. The technology
adoption literature discusses rank effects, which are the different individual
characteristics of firms such as their size, and how they affect the rate and
extent of adoption of new technologies, and the effects of competitive
dynamics, which is how the adoption of new technology by one company in an
industry influences the adoption of technology by other companies in that
industry. For building and construction this is
significant, not only because of the number of small and medium size firms, but
because of the size and reach of the major firms. A global contractor might
have over 50,000 employees, suppliers of basic materials and sophisticated
components are large multinational or multilocational industrial firms, many of
these firms are publicly listed, and so on. These firms have the management and
financial resources required to invest in twenty-first century technology, if
and when they decide to do so. The issue may be the ability of incumbent firms
to capture knowledge externalities, adopt new technologies, and adapt to the
impacts of emerging technologies and their requirements.
Importantly,
there is a class of more nimble, faster growing firms that have been identified
as technology leaders, some of which are incumbents but often are not. Andrews et al. (2015) called these ‘frontier
firms’, or firms pushing at the technological frontier through experimentation
and development. Frontier firms bring with them radical new production
technologies that rely in various ways on smart machines, like the three
studied by Hall et al. (2019) and
firms like Katerra, Esko, FBR and Daqri (from Table 3). Those firms are new
entrants, but incumbents are also on the frontier. Examples are Trimble and
Autodesk, Skanska embedding wireless sensors in buildings, Arup’s data
collection systems and Atkins water infrastructure design system.
The
technological frontier
The
construction technological system is wide and diverse, and the various parts of
the digital construction technological system are in various stages of
development (Gruska et al. 2017).
There are many possible futures that could unfold over the next few decades,
recent industry scenarios for AI include Agarwal et al. (2016), WEF/BCG (2017) and Quezada et al. (2016), but there is little probability of some
breakthrough technology that leads to some different, new industry. Instead,
development of AI and associated digital fabrication and production
technologies will more likely reshape the existing industry, led by fundamental
changes in demand (the function, type and number of buildings), design (the
opportunities new materials offer), and delivery (through project management).
The fourth industrial revolution has already affected demand for structures
like renewable energy sources and buildings like data centres, warehouses and
retail, ‘dark’ kitchens and supermarkets for online delivery services. Some of
these buildings and structures already use forms of applied AI in their
management and operation.
At
the end of the second decade of the twenty-first century, automation technology
is at the point where intelligent machines are moving from operating
comfortably in controlled environments, in manufacturing or social media, to
unpredictable environments, like driving a car or truck. In many cases, like
remotely controlled and autonomous trucks and trains on mining sites, the
operations are run as a partnership between humans and machines, or as Brynjolfsson
and McAfee (2014) put it “running with the machines not against them”. These
innovations might reasonably be expected to affect site processes and project organization,
as concrete and steam power did in the past. Table 1 has examples of where the
technological frontier is in 2020 for plant and equipment, also for
construction materials, as an indication of the range and extent of this wave
of innovations. Missing from these lists is smart contracts using blockchain.
Table
1. The construction technological frontier in 2020
Plant
and equipment
|
New
materials
|
Autodesk
BUILD Space – Boston
UK
construction manufacturing hub
Exoskeletons
– Esko, HULK
Remote
control equipment – CAT, Komatsu
Drone
monitoring – Skycatch, Icon, Vinci
Smart
helmets – Trimble Hololens, Daqri
Platforms
– Katerra Apollo, Project Frog
Build
autonomous skidsteer
FBR
Robotics ‘Wall as a service’
Otis
‘Elevator as a service’
Sensor
fitted cranes
Automated
engineered wood factories
|
3D
concrete printing with boom system – ICON, Aris, 3D Constructor
3D
concrete printing with gantry suspended nozzle – D-Shape, BIG, US Marines
3D
metal printing – GE, MX3D, Aurora
3D
printing of combined steel and concrete - Autodesk
Roller
press printing of smart fabrics
4D
printing of reactive and shape memory materials
Molecular
engineering of materials
Improved
concrete additives and sealants
Components
with cloud-linked sensors
Cloud-based
fixtures and fittings
|
Invention
and innovation based around BIM, digital twins, digital fabrication and
advanced manufacturing technology, is starting to fundamentally affect the
production system through economies of scale. Over time this will alter the
balance between on-site and off-site production of building modules and
components, and how they are handled, assembled and integrated. The combination
of BIM and digital fabrication could be transformational if it allows on-site
production of building components, fundamentally altering the economies of
scale in the industry. Mass production will always have a role, but market
niches currently occupied by some manufacturing firms may disappear, replaced
by new production technologies based on digital fabrication and online design
databases. Adding new materials to the fabrication palette through molecular
design and engineering may be significant, or other new materials, or upgraded
versions of existing structural materials. Combining robotic and automated
machinery with digital fabrication and standardized parts opens up many
possibilities. Exoskeletons combine human skill with machine strength.
While
firms involved in construction of the built environment are facing
technological advances that will affect many aspects of the technological
system, this is a process that happens over years and decades. Lipsey et al. (2005: p. 211) found “the
gestation period of individual GPTs does not seem to have shortened much since the
industrial revolution” and it takes 50 years between invention of a GPT and its
use becoming widespread (their examples were discovering the double-helix and
biotechnology, the dynamo and electricity, and the first electronic computers
in the 1940s). For the tractor and electrification cases used above, starting
from the date of invention of the internal combustion engine and dynamo would add
around three decades to those timelines.
In fact, how long a
transition to a new technological system built on automation and digital
fabrication coordinated by AI takes is unknown. While
machines can replicate individual tasks, integrating different capabilities
into solutions where everything works together is another matter. Combining a
range of technologies is needed for workplace automation, but solving specific
problems involves specific and organizational technical challenges, and once
the technical feasibility has been resolved and the technologies become
commercially available it can take many years before they are adopted.
Importantly, this suggests there will be many new jobs in construction over
coming years, for project information managers, BIM supervisors, integration
specialists and other fourth industrial revolution roles. Because these jobs
will be primarily on new projects, they will not quickly replace the many
existing jobs in the industry required to maintain the built environment. McKinsey
(MGI 2017) sees construction as an industry where AI does not significantly reduce the number of
jobs. In their paper on ‘Construction 4.0’ 2019)
conclude: “there will be a time in which conventional construction and
robotic technologies will coexist, leading to a higher job variability and new
roles.”
Nevertheless,
the technological frontier is moving again, and new construction projects will generally
utilise the most cost-effective technology. Current AI technology provides services
such as GPS navigation and trip planning, spam filters, language recognition
and translation, credit checks and fraud alerts, book and music
recommendations, and energy management systems. It is being used in law, transport,
education, healthcare and security, and for engineering, economic and scientific
modelling. Advanced manufacturing is almost entirely automated. As expected
with a new GPT, there are many new applications under development (Mitchell 2019).
The next
level of AI envisages those capabilities extended in the near future
to a group of intelligent machines that have been individually trained to collect
and manage data from the stages of a construction project, and that outsourced
business processes can provide such data for intelligent machines, supervised
by users and helping them manage complicated processes. An AI acting as an
overall project data manager could integrate the data from many sources to continually
update a project’s schedule, work plan and cost estimates, matching progress
and performance to iterate those plans for the project’s managers. This AI
assists users’ decision-making by generating and evaluating options. Such a
system would be operated by a voice activated interface, with the progress
updates included and access to expert systems for specialist areas provided. It
would generate design options and provide full visualisation of a shared BIM
model linked to the schedule and site work plan. There would be real-time supply
chain data on fabrication and logistics through cloud-based platforms. The AI
can iterate the schedule and cost plans for a project, based on that data,
allowing the project management team to match performance with plans, in
real-time, for every aspect of a project.The data required for the coordination
and management role of intelligent machines can come from widespread use of standardized,
outsourced cloud-based business processes. That data then becomes a series of
training sets needed for deep learning, the current level of AI technology.
References
Agarwal, R., Chandrasekaran, S. and Sridhar, S. 2016. Imagining Construction’s Digital Future, McKinsey & Co
Agarwal, R., Chandrasekaran, S. and Sridhar, S. 2016. Imagining Construction’s Digital Future, McKinsey & Co
Andrews, D., C. Criscuolo and P. N. Gal, 2015. Frontier
Firms, Technology Diffusion and Public Policy: Micro Evidence from OECD
Countries, OECD Productivity Working Papers, 2015-02, OECD Publishing,
Paris.
Brynjolfsson, E. and McAfee, A. 2014. The Second
Machine Age: Work, Progress and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies,
New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
de Soto, B. J., AgustÃ-Juan, I., Joss, S. and
Hunhevicz, J. 2019. Implications of Construction 4.0 to the workforce and
organizational structures, International Journal of Construction Management,
DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2019.1616414
Gruszka, A., Jupp, J. R. and de Valence, G. 2017. Digital
Foundations: How Technology is Transforming Australia's Construction Sector, Sydney:
Startup Australia.
Lipsey, R.
G., Carlaw, K. I. and Bekar, C. T. 2005. Economic Transformations: General
Purpose Technologies and Long-term Economic Growth, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
MGI, 2017. A Future that Works, McKinsey Global Institute.
Mitchell, M. 2019. Artificial
Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans, New York:
Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
Peters, T. F. 1996. Building the Nineteenth
Century, Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.
Quezada, G., Bratanova, A., Boughen, N. and Hajowicz, S. 2016. Farsight
for Construction:
Exploratory scenarios for Queensland’s construction industry to 2036, CSIRO, Australia.
WEF/BCG, 2017. Future Scenarios and Implications for the Construction
Industry, World Economic Forum and the Boston Consulting Group, Geneva.