Advancements and Applications of Life Cycle Assessment in Sustainable Construction Practices

Abstract

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has emerged as a pivotal methodology in evaluating the comprehensive environmental impacts associated with construction projects. By systematically analyzing the entire lifecycle of building materials and systems—from the intricate processes of raw material extraction, through manufacturing, transportation, construction, operational use, and ultimately to demolition, deconstruction, and end-of-life disposal or recycling—LCA provides profound insights into the ecological footprint of the built environment. This detailed report delves into the intricate methodologies of conducting LCAs, explores the diverse array of environmental impact categories considered beyond mere carbon emissions, examines the sophisticated software and analytical tools utilized for robust analysis, discusses the persistent and evolving challenges in data collection and interpretation, and presents illustrative case studies that powerfully showcase how granular LCA findings inform sustainable material selection, optimize design strategies, and influence policy development in real-world construction projects.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

1. Introduction

The construction industry stands as one of the most significant contributors to global environmental degradation, accounting for a substantial proportion of worldwide energy consumption, resource depletion, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, waste generation, and habitat destruction. Estimates suggest that the sector is responsible for approximately 38% of global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions when considering both embodied and operational emissions, alongside consuming vast quantities of virgin resources and producing immense volumes of waste [UNEP, 2021; IEA, 2022]. In response to these pressing and multifaceted environmental challenges, there has been an accelerating global emphasis on transitioning towards sustainable construction practices. This paradigm shift aims not only to minimize ecological impacts but also to foster resource efficiency, enhance building performance, and promote healthier indoor environments.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has emerged as an indispensable and critical tool in this transformative endeavor. Offering a systematic, standardized, and quantitative approach, LCA allows for the rigorous evaluation of the potential environmental consequences of construction activities and products across their entire life cycle. Unlike traditional assessments that might focus solely on operational energy or specific material components, LCA provides a holistic ‘cradle-to-grave’ or ‘cradle-to-cradle’ perspective, identifying environmental ‘hotspots’ and potential trade-offs that might otherwise remain hidden. This comprehensive report aims to provide an in-depth exploration of LCA, focusing on its foundational methodologies, the wide spectrum of environmental impact categories it addresses, the advanced analytical tools facilitating its application, the inherent challenges in data acquisition and interpretation, its increasingly vital integration with digital design workflows, and its practical applications in fostering truly sustainable construction.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

2. Methodologies of Conducting Life Cycle Assessments

LCA is a structured, iterative process guided by international standards, notably ISO 14040:2006 (Principles and Framework) and ISO 14044:2006 (Requirements and Guidelines) [ISO 14040, 2006; ISO 14044, 2006]. These standards outline four interconnected phases, each contributing significantly to a comprehensive and robust evaluation of environmental impacts:

2.1 Goal and Scope Definition

The foundational phase of any LCA involves meticulously defining the study’s purpose, the precise system boundaries, and the functional unit. This clarity is paramount as it directly influences the subsequent phases and the eventual interpretation of results.

2.1.1 Goal Definition

The goal explicitly states the intended application of the LCA, the reasons for carrying it out, and the target audience. For instance, a goal might be ‘to compare the environmental performance of a timber-framed residential building versus a concrete-framed residential building over a 60-year service life to inform material selection for sustainable housing projects’. The goal also dictates the depth and breadth of the study, whether it is a comparative analysis, a hotspot analysis, or a product development tool.

2.1.2 Functional Unit

The functional unit serves as a quantifiable reference basis to which all inputs and outputs are related. It allows for consistent comparisons between different systems or products that deliver the same function. In a construction context, the functional unit is highly specific and critical. Examples include:
* ‘One square meter of habitable floor area maintained for a 50-year service life’ for an entire building.
* ‘One linear meter of load-bearing wall with a specified U-value and fire rating, maintained for 60 years’ for a specific building element.
* ‘One cubic meter of concrete with a specified compressive strength and workability’ for a material component.
Careful definition of the functional unit ensures that the comparison truly reflects equivalent services or functions, preventing ‘apple-to-orange’ comparisons.

2.1.3 System Boundaries

Establishing precise system boundaries is crucial to ensure that all relevant processes are included and irrelevant ones are excluded, thereby enhancing the accuracy, relevance, and manageability of the assessment. Common boundary approaches in construction LCA include:
* Cradle-to-Gate: Encompasses raw material extraction, transportation to the manufacturer, and manufacturing processes up to the factory gate. This is common for Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs).
* Cradle-to-Grave: The most comprehensive boundary, covering all stages from raw material extraction, manufacturing, transportation, construction, operational use (energy, water, maintenance), and end-of-life (demolition, transport to landfill/recycling, processing).
* Cradle-to-Cradle: An extension of cradle-to-grave that incorporates the circularity aspect, where end-of-life materials are recycled or reused to produce new products, thus closing the loop and avoiding virgin material extraction.
* Gate-to-Gate: A partial LCA focusing on specific processes within a defined system, often used for process optimization within a factory.

The system boundary also defines which elementary flows (substances entering the environment from nature, or leaving the environment as waste) are considered. This includes decisions on cut-off criteria for minor inputs/outputs, although these must be justified and transparent.

2.2 Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)

The LCI phase involves a rigorous and detailed compilation of all quantifiable inputs and outputs associated with each identified stage within the defined system boundaries. This is often the most data-intensive and time-consuming phase of an LCA.

2.2.1 Data Collection

LCI data includes the quantification of raw materials (e.g., sand, cement, timber, steel ore), energy consumption (e.g., electricity, natural gas, diesel), water usage, emissions to air (e.g., CO2, SOx, NOx, volatile organic compounds – VOCs), emissions to water (e.g., heavy metals, nutrients), waste generation (e.g., construction and demolition waste, industrial by-products), and other environmental releases. The data collection process can be highly complex, often requiring collaborative efforts with multiple stakeholders, including material suppliers, manufacturers, contractors, building operators, and waste management companies.

Data sources can be categorized as:
* Primary Data: Directly measured or collected data from specific sites, facilities, or processes relevant to the study. This provides the highest accuracy and specificity but can be costly and time-consuming to obtain.
* Secondary Data: Data obtained from existing databases, literature, industry averages, or Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs). While more readily available, secondary data may lack specificity regarding geographical location, technology, or time period, requiring careful selection and documentation.

2.2.2 Data Quality Indicators (DQIs)

Given the reliance on diverse data sources, ensuring the quality and representativeness of LCI data is paramount for the reliability of subsequent impact assessments. DQIs are used to evaluate data along several dimensions, including:
* Completeness: The percentage of elementary flows accounted for.
* Reliability: How trustworthy the data source is (e.g., measured vs. estimated).
* Temporal Correlation: How current the data is (e.g., reflecting current manufacturing processes).
* Geographical Correlation: How representative the data is of the specific region under study.
* Technological Correlation: How well the data represents the specific technology or process used.

2.2.3 Allocation Procedures

In processes where multiple products (co-products) are generated or where recycled materials are used, ‘allocation’ procedures are necessary to distribute the environmental burdens fairly among the different outputs or life cycles. ISO 14044 provides a hierarchy for allocation, preferring system expansion (avoiding allocation by expanding the system to include alternative ways of providing the co-product) or physical relationships (e.g., mass, energy content) before economic relationships. This can be particularly complex in construction, where materials might be recycled multiple times or used in different applications.

2.3 Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)

In the LCIA phase, the raw LCI data is translated into a set of environmental impact indicators, allowing for the assessment of potential environmental harm. This phase involves several mandatory and optional steps:

2.3.1 Classification

LCI results (e.g., specific emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O) are grouped into specific environmental impact categories based on the type of environmental problem they contribute to. For example, all greenhouse gases are classified under Global Warming Potential.

2.3.2 Characterization

Within each impact category, the LCI results are converted into common equivalence units using scientifically derived characterization factors. These factors express the relative contribution of each substance to a given impact category. For example, for Global Warming Potential (GWP), methane (CH4) has a GWP of 28-36 over 100 years, meaning one kilogram of CH4 has the same warming potential as 28-36 kilograms of CO2 [IPCC, 2021]. The result is a single indicator value for each impact category (e.g., kg CO2 equivalent for GWP, kg SO2 equivalent for Acidification).

Widely recognized LCIA methodologies, each with their own characterization factors, include:
* CML: Developed by Leiden University, focusing on ‘midpoint’ indicators (closer to the emission source, e.g., climate change).
* ReCiPe: A more recent methodology that offers both ‘midpoint’ and ‘endpoint’ indicators (closer to the damage, e.g., human health, ecosystem quality, resource scarcity) [Huijbregts et al., 2017].
* TRACI (Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other Environmental Impacts): Developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, specifically tailored for North American conditions.

The choice of LCIA method can significantly influence the results and must be transparently justified.

2.3.3 Normalization (Optional)

Normalization involves expressing the impact category results relative to a reference value, such as the total impact of a specific region or country in a given year. This helps to understand the relative magnitude of the impacts compared to other environmental issues but does not imply significance.

2.3.4 Weighting (Optional)

Weighting assigns relative importance or ‘weights’ to different impact categories, allowing them to be aggregated into a single score. This step is inherently subjective and value-based, reflecting societal preferences or policy objectives (e.g., prioritizing climate change over acidification). Due to its subjectivity, weighting is often avoided in comparative LCAs or used only with clear disclosure of the underlying value choices.

2.4 Interpretation

The final phase involves analyzing the results from the LCI and LCIA phases to draw robust conclusions, identify significant environmental issues, evaluate the completeness and consistency of the data, conduct sensitivity and uncertainty analyses, and make actionable recommendations. This iterative phase ensures that the LCA findings are meaningful and can effectively inform sustainable design, material selection, and policy development.

2.4.1 Identification of Environmental Hotspots

Interpretation helps pinpoint the stages of the life cycle or the specific processes/materials that contribute most significantly to the overall environmental impacts. This allows efforts to be concentrated where they will yield the greatest environmental benefits (e.g., focusing on reducing embodied carbon in structural elements if they are identified as the major contributor to GWP).

2.4.2 Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis

Given the inherent uncertainties in data, assumptions, and methodological choices, sensitivity analysis explores how changes in key parameters (e.g., transport distance, energy mix, recycling rates) affect the results. Uncertainty analysis quantifies the range of possible outcomes due to data variability, often using statistical methods like Monte Carlo simulations. This provides a more robust understanding of the reliability of the conclusions.

2.4.3 Completeness and Consistency Check

This step verifies that all relevant data has been included, that the methods used are consistent throughout the study, and that the conclusions are aligned with the initial goal and scope.

2.4.4 Conclusions and Recommendations

The interpretation culminates in clear, actionable conclusions and recommendations for decision-makers. This might include advising on alternative materials, optimizing construction processes, suggesting operational efficiencies, or informing policy development. The iterative nature of LCA means that insights from interpretation can lead back to refinements in the goal and scope or LCI, creating a continuous improvement cycle.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

3. Environmental Impact Categories in LCA

LCA evaluates a wide and diverse range of environmental impacts associated with construction activities, moving far beyond a sole focus on carbon emissions. Understanding these categories is essential for a holistic assessment.

3.1 Global Warming Potential (GWP) / Embodied and Operational Carbon

Global Warming Potential (GWP) quantifies the contribution of greenhouse gas emissions to climate change, typically expressed in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents (kg CO2eq). This is arguably the most recognized and politically significant impact category.

In construction, GWP is often differentiated into:
* Embodied Carbon: Refers to the total GHG emissions associated with the production, transportation, and installation of building materials, as well as their deconstruction and end-of-life processing. It encompasses emissions from raw material extraction (A1), manufacturing processes (A2), logistics to site (A3), construction activities (A4), and end-of-life stages (C1-C4). Embodied carbon represents the upfront emissions incurred before a building is even occupied. Reducing embodied carbon is a critical strategy for achieving low-carbon and net-zero construction targets, especially as operational emissions decrease due to energy efficiency measures and renewable energy adoption. For many new, highly efficient buildings, embodied carbon can constitute 50-70% or more of the building’s whole-life carbon emissions [RICS, 2017].
* Operational Carbon: Pertains to the GHG emissions arising from a building’s energy consumption during its use phase (B6), primarily for heating, cooling, ventilation, lighting, and hot water. While significant, the focus on reducing operational carbon through improved insulation, energy-efficient systems, and renewable energy sources has shifted attention towards the equally important embodied carbon.

3.2 Resource Depletion

This category assesses the consumption of non-renewable and scarce renewable resources, indicating the strain on natural reserves. It is typically expressed in units of a reference resource, such as ‘kg Antimony equivalent’ for abiotic depletion or ‘MJ’ for cumulative energy demand.

• Abiotic Resource Depletion: Evaluates the depletion of non-living resources, including fossil fuels (oil, gas, coal) and minerals (metals like copper, zinc, rare earths, and construction aggregates like sand, gravel). Assessing this impact helps identify opportunities for material substitution, promoting the use of renewable resources, recycled content, or abundant materials, thereby fostering a more circular economy.
• Biotic Resource Depletion: While less commonly quantified in traditional construction LCAs, this considers the consumption of renewable biological resources, such as timber from unsustainable forestry practices, or impacts on fertile land.

3.3 Water Usage / Freshwater Eutrophication

Water Usage quantifies the amount of water consumed throughout the building’s lifecycle, including during material production (e.g., concrete mixing, steel cooling, timber processing), construction activities, and especially during the operational phase (e.g., flushing, washing, irrigation). It is typically expressed in cubic meters (m³).

Beyond simple volume, water impact can be refined:
* Water Scarcity Footprint: Considers the regional availability of water, highlighting impacts in water-stressed areas.
* Blue Water: Surface and groundwater consumed.
* Green Water: Rainwater consumed by vegetation.
* Grey Water: The volume of water required to assimilate pollutants to meet water quality standards.

Freshwater Eutrophication Potential (FEP) evaluates the potential for excessive nutrient enrichment (primarily nitrogen and phosphorus compounds) in freshwater bodies, leading to algal blooms, oxygen depletion, and adverse impacts on aquatic ecosystems. Emissions typically stem from agricultural runoff, industrial discharges, and wastewater treatment, often linked to the production of building materials (e.g., fertilizers for timber, industrial wastewater).

3.4 Waste Generation

This impact category quantifies the amount and type of waste generated throughout the entire life cycle, from raw material extraction and manufacturing to construction, operation, and demolition phases. It is typically expressed in mass units (e.g., kg or tonnes) or volume units (m³).

• Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste: A major component, often constituting a significant portion of national waste streams. Minimizing C&D waste through strategies like design for deconstruction, prefabrication, material optimization, on-site waste segregation, recycling, and reusing materials significantly contributes to environmental sustainability and resource circularity.
• Industrial Waste: Waste generated during the manufacturing processes of building materials (e.g., slag from steel production, dust from cement kilns).
• Hazardous Waste: Special attention is given to waste streams containing toxic or harmful substances requiring specialized disposal methods (e.g., asbestos, lead-based paints, certain chemicals).

3.5 Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ)

While not a direct ‘environmental impact’ in the traditional sense of emissions to nature, IEQ is increasingly recognized as a crucial aspect of sustainable building performance and is often integrated into comprehensive LCA frameworks. It encompasses factors that directly affect occupant health, comfort, and productivity within a building.

Key IEQ parameters include:
* Indoor Air Quality (IAQ): Assessed by levels of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), formaldehyde, particulate matter (PM2.5, PM10), carbon monoxide, radon, and other pollutants. Material choices (e.g., paints, adhesives, flooring, insulation) can significantly impact IAQ through off-gassing.
* Thermal Comfort: Relates to temperature, humidity, and air movement, influenced by building envelope design, HVAC systems, and material properties.
* Visual Comfort: Pertains to adequate and balanced lighting, minimized glare, and access to daylight and views. Glazing selection and building orientation play key roles.
* Acoustic Comfort: Addressing noise levels from external sources (traffic, construction) and internal sources (HVAC, occupants), considering sound insulation properties of materials and assemblies.
* Other Factors: Such as access to views, quality of drinking water, and control over personal environment.

3.6 Other Key Environmental Impact Categories

Beyond the categories above, comprehensive LCAs typically consider a broader spectrum of potential impacts:
* Acidification Potential (AP): Quantifies the potential for emissions (primarily sulfur dioxide – SO2, nitrogen oxides – NOx, ammonia – NH3) to cause acid rain, which damages ecosystems, forests, aquatic life, and deteriorates building materials. Expressed in kg SO2 equivalents.
* Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP): Assesses the potential for emissions of certain substances (e.g., chlorofluorocarbons – CFCs, hydrochlorofluorocarbons – HCFCs, halons, methyl bromide, used in refrigerants and insulation) to deplete the stratospheric ozone layer, which protects Earth from harmful UV radiation. Expressed in kg CFC-11 equivalents.
* Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP) / Smog Formation Potential: Measures the potential for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) to react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone (smog). Smog is harmful to human respiratory systems, vegetation, and materials. Expressed in kg C2H4 equivalents.
* Human Toxicity Potential (HTP): Estimates the potential harm of toxic substances released into the environment to human health via various pathways (e.g., inhalation, ingestion, dermal contact). This is a complex category due to the vast number of potentially toxic substances and exposure pathways. Often expressed in kg 1,4-dichlorobenzene equivalents.
* Ecotoxicity Potential (ETP): Assesses the potential harm of toxic substances released into the environment to ecosystems (aquatic, terrestrial). Like HTP, it is complex and considers different levels of toxicity and persistence. Often expressed in kg 1,4-dichlorobenzene equivalents.
* Land Use Change: Evaluates the environmental impact of converting natural land to built or agricultural land, including impacts on biodiversity, soil quality, and ecosystem services. This can be particularly relevant for large-scale infrastructure projects or those involving extensive material extraction sites.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

4. Software and Tools for LCA in Construction

Advancements in computational power and software development have significantly enhanced the accessibility, efficiency, and robustness of applying LCA in the construction industry. These tools range from comprehensive, expert-level platforms to user-friendly plug-ins integrated with design software.

4.1 Comprehensive LCA Software Suites

These are powerful, professional tools used by LCA specialists for detailed and customizable analyses, relying on extensive, regularly updated life cycle inventory databases.

4.1.1 GaBi Software

Developed by Sphera (formerly thinkstep), GaBi is one of the leading comprehensive LCA software systems globally. It provides a highly modular and flexible framework for modeling, simulating, and analyzing the environmental impact of products, processes, and systems, including complex construction projects. GaBi incorporates vast, regularly updated life cycle inventory databases (such as the GaBi Professional Database, ecoinvent, and others), covering a wide array of materials, energy sources, industrial processes, and transportation modes. Its strengths lie in its ability to create detailed process models, conduct ‘what-if’ scenarios, perform sensitivity analyses, and generate customized reports, making it suitable for rigorous academic research, corporate sustainability reporting, and complex comparative LCAs [Sphera, n.d.].

4.1.2 SimaPro

Developed by PRé Sustainability, SimaPro is another widely used and respected LCA software. It offers a user-friendly interface combined with powerful modeling capabilities, allowing practitioners to analyze the life cycle of products, services, and construction projects in depth. SimaPro provides access to several prominent life cycle inventory databases, including ecoinvent (a globally recognized, high-quality LCI database) and Agri-footprint. It supports various impact assessment methods (e.g., CML, ReCiPe, TRACI), enables scenario analysis, and helps stakeholders visualize environmental impacts through comprehensive charts and graphs. SimaPro is favored for its transparency, extensive database, and suitability for both detailed academic studies and industry applications [PRé Sustainability, n.d.].

4.2 BIM-Integrated and User-Friendly Tools

These tools are designed to streamline the LCA process, particularly for architects, engineers, and non-LCA experts, by integrating directly into building design workflows and offering simplified interfaces.

4.2.1 Tally

Tally is a plugin for Autodesk Revit, a prominent Building Information Modeling (BIM) software. Developed by KT Innovations in collaboration with Autodesk, Tally enables architects and builders to perform LCA directly within their familiar building design environment. By leveraging the material and quantity data already present in the Revit model, Tally automates the Life Cycle Inventory phase for selected components, providing real-time assessment of environmental impacts (primarily embodied carbon, but also other categories) as designs are created and modified. This ‘real-time’ feedback loop is invaluable for early design optimization, allowing designers to make informed material selections and design adjustments to reduce environmental footprints without leaving their primary design software [KieranTimberlake, n.d.].

4.2.2 OneClick LCA

OneClick LCA is a web-based software that has rapidly gained popularity for streamlining the LCA process for construction materials and buildings. It offers a highly user-friendly interface, making complex LCA accessible to a broader audience, including developers, contractors, and public sector organizations. OneClick LCA integrates with various BIM tools and provides a vast database of pre-verified environmental product declarations (EPDs) and generic data, enabling efficient analysis of environmental impacts associated with material choices. Its focus on compliance with various green building certifications (e.g., LEED, BREEAM, DGNB) and emerging regulations makes it a practical tool for achieving sustainability targets and demonstrating performance [OneClick LCA, n.d.].

4.3 Open-Source LCA Tools and Libraries

For researchers and practitioners seeking greater transparency, customization, and cost-effectiveness, open-source options are emerging.

• openLCA: A free, open-source software for life cycle and sustainability assessment. It provides comprehensive features for LCA, LCC (Life Cycle Costing), and social LCA, supporting various databases and impact assessment methods. Its open nature fosters collaboration and allows for community-driven development [openLCA, n.d.].
• Brightway2: An open-source Python framework for life cycle assessment. It is not a ready-to-use software but a powerful library for developing custom LCA models, performing complex data analysis, and integrating with other computational tools. It is favored by researchers and developers who need high flexibility and control over their LCA workflows [Brightway2, n.d.].
• lcpy: An emerging open-source Python package specifically designed for parametric and dynamic Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing, as noted in the references [Gkousis & Katsou, 2025]. Such tools represent a future direction for highly flexible and automated LCA, particularly valuable for exploring a wide range of design scenarios.

4.4 Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)

While not software, EPDs are crucial standardized documents that provide transparent, third-party verified environmental performance data for specific products or materials, based on a cradle-to-gate LCA. EPDs, compliant with ISO 14025, act as the primary data source for many LCA software tools, particularly those focused on material selection in construction. Their increasing availability (e.g., through platforms like EPDN, the International EPD® System) significantly improves data quality and comparability in building LCAs, allowing designers to specify materials with known environmental profiles [Environmental Product Declaration, n.d.].

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

5. Challenges and Limitations in Data Collection and Application for LCA

Despite its immense value, the application of LCA in construction is not without its significant challenges, particularly concerning data collection, which directly impacts the reliability and comparability of results.

5.1 Data Availability and Granularity

Accessing comprehensive, consistent, and up-to-date data on material properties, manufacturing processes, transportation logistics, and end-of-life scenarios can be exceptionally difficult. Many manufacturers, especially smaller ones, may not have conducted LCAs for their products or may not provide detailed environmental data due to proprietary concerns or lack of resources. Publicly available databases, while improving, may have limited coverage for specific regional contexts, nascent technologies, or specialized building materials. The sheer variety and complexity of construction materials, each with unique supply chains and manufacturing processes, compound this challenge. Furthermore, granular data at the individual component level within a complex building system is often scarce, leading to reliance on average data that may not reflect project-specific realities.

5.2 Data Quality and Representativeness

Ensuring the accuracy, reliability, and representativeness of data is crucial for valid LCA outcomes. Variations in data quality can arise from differences in data sources (e.g., measured vs. modeled), methodologies (e.g., different allocation rules in LCI databases), temporal relevance (outdated production data), and geographical applicability (data from one country may not reflect processes in another). The use of generic or proxy data when specific data is unavailable can introduce significant uncertainties and potentially lead to inconsistencies or misleading results. The challenge is compounded by the long service life of buildings, requiring projections for future energy grids, maintenance practices, and end-of-life technologies.

5.3 System Boundaries and Functional Unit Definition

Defining appropriate and consistent system boundaries is essential to include all relevant processes and exclude irrelevant ones while preventing double-counting. Inadequate or inconsistent boundary definitions can result in incomplete assessments, truncated life cycles, and misinformed decisions. For instance, deciding whether to include the impacts of worker commuting or the production of construction machinery can significantly affect results. Similarly, defining the functional unit, especially for comparative studies, can be challenging. For example, comparing the environmental impact of different insulation materials requires ensuring that they provide the same thermal performance over the same service life under similar conditions. Complex allocation procedures for multi-output processes or recycled content also add layers of difficulty.

5.4 Uncertainty and Variability

Addressing uncertainties and variability in data and modeling is a complex but critical task. Variations in material properties, manufacturing efficiencies, transportation modes and distances, operational energy consumption patterns (influenced by occupant behavior), and end-of-life scenarios (e.g., landfilling vs. recycling rates) can all affect the environmental performance of building materials and systems. While sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulations can help quantify these uncertainties, they add to the complexity and computational demands of the LCA. The subjective nature of certain LCIA choices, such as weighting factors, also contributes to variability in interpretation.

5.5 Complexity and Time Investment

Conducting a comprehensive LCA requires specialized knowledge, extensive data gathering, and sophisticated analytical skills. The process can be highly resource-intensive in terms of time, expertise, and financial outlay. This often poses a barrier for smaller firms or projects with limited budgets and timelines, leading to the use of simplified tools that may sacrifice detail for speed, or avoidance of LCA altogether. The need for trained LCA practitioners and access to licensed software also presents a significant hurdle.

5.6 Interpretation and Communication of Results

Translating complex LCA results, often presented as multiple impact categories in technical units, into actionable and easily understandable insights for a diverse audience (e.g., architects, clients, policymakers, contractors) can be challenging. There is a risk of misinterpretation, oversimplification, or even ‘greenwashing’ if the results are not communicated with transparency regarding assumptions, limitations, and potential trade-offs between different environmental impacts. The inherent subjectivity in certain LCIA phases (e.g., weighting) further complicates consistent communication.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

6. Case Studies: LCA in Sustainable Construction

Real-world applications of LCA demonstrate its power in informing sustainable decision-making throughout the construction project lifecycle.

6.1 Case Study 1: Embodied Carbon Reduction in Concrete for an Industrial Building

A comprehensive LCA was conducted for a proposed large-scale industrial building, focusing specifically on optimizing the environmental performance of its concrete elements, which traditionally contribute significantly to embodied carbon. The functional unit for the analysis was defined as ‘the structural integrity and serviceability of the concrete structure for a 75-year operational life’. The study rigorously compared the environmental impact of various concrete mixes used in critical structural components such as foundations, floor slabs, and columns.

The baseline scenario utilized conventional Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) concrete. Alternative scenarios explored the incorporation of Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCMs) as partial replacements for cement, specifically fly ash (a by-product of coal combustion) and ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS, a by-product of steel production). The analysis considered the entire life cycle from raw material extraction, cement production, SCM acquisition, aggregate sourcing, concrete mixing, transportation to site, placement, curing, and anticipated end-of-life scenarios.

Findings: The LCA revealed that by replacing 40–55% of the conventional OPC with recycled binders (SCMs), the embodied carbon associated with the concrete components was reduced by approximately 8.5% on average, depending on the specific mix and application. For instance, specific structural elements showed reductions of up to 15% for mixes with higher GGBS content. This reduction was primarily attributed to the lower energy intensity and GHG emissions associated with producing SCMs compared to OPC. Crucially, the study also confirmed that the performance criteria (e.g., compressive strength, durability) were maintained or even enhanced with the optimized mixes, addressing potential concerns about structural integrity.

Impact: These LCA findings directly informed the project’s material specifications, leading to the adoption of the lower-carbon concrete mixes. This decision not only contributed to a tangible reduction in the building’s overall embodied carbon footprint but also led to an upgrade in the project’s Embodied Carbon Benchmark rating, showcasing measurable progress towards sustainability goals. The study, facilitated by web-based LCA software (potentially OneClick LCA, as per the reference [OneClick LCA, n.d.]), demonstrated how detailed material-level LCA can drive significant environmental benefits without compromising performance or increasing costs, and often leading to cost savings due to reduced material procurement from waste streams.

6.2 Case Study 2: Holistic Sustainable Material Selection in Residential Construction

In a multi-unit residential construction project aiming for a high level of environmental certification, LCA was systematically employed to compare the whole-life environmental impacts of various structural and envelope material choices. The functional unit was defined as ‘one square meter of the residential building, providing specified thermal, acoustic, and structural performance over a 60-year service life’. The study conducted a comparative analysis of three primary structural systems: conventional reinforced concrete, steel frame, and mass timber (specifically Cross-Laminated Timber – CLT).

Methodology: The LCA utilized a ‘cradle-to-grave’ approach, encompassing material extraction, manufacturing, transportation, construction, operational energy use (normalized across all scenarios to isolate material impacts), maintenance, and end-of-life disposal/recycling. All relevant impact categories (GWP, resource depletion, acidification, eutrophication, etc.) were assessed.

Findings: The comprehensive analysis revealed that the timber-based structural system (CLT) had a significantly lower overall environmental impact compared to both steel and reinforced concrete, particularly in terms of embodied carbon and resource depletion. The CLT option demonstrated an approximate 20-30% reduction in GWP over the 60-year lifecycle compared to concrete, largely due to:
* Carbon Sequestration: Trees absorb CO2 during their growth, storing it in the timber. While this is accounted for over the life cycle, the immediate benefit of reduced upfront emissions from manufacturing is notable.
* Lower Manufacturing Energy: Producing engineered timber requires less energy compared to steel or cement.
* Renewable Resource: Timber, when sourced from sustainably managed forests, is a renewable resource, alleviating concerns about abiotic resource depletion.

While timber showed superior performance in several key categories, the LCA also highlighted areas requiring attention, such as the need for fire-retardant treatments (and their associated impacts) and careful consideration of moisture management during construction. Conversely, concrete’s high GWP from cement production was a significant hotspot, and steel’s energy-intensive production processes were also notable.

Impact: The insights from this LCA guided the project team in selecting a mass timber structural system, aligning with the project’s ambitious sustainability goals. This decision directly contributed to a lower overall environmental footprint for the building, demonstrating that LCA is not merely an academic exercise but a practical tool for driving fundamental design and material choices that deliver tangible environmental benefits and resonate with broader sustainability aspirations of stakeholders and future occupants.

6.3 Case Study 3: Comparative LCA of Deep Renovation vs. New Construction

An LCA was performed to assess the environmental implications of renovating an existing, aging commercial building versus demolishing it and constructing a new building of similar function and size. The functional unit was ‘office space providing comfortable and functional environment for 50 years’.

Methodology: Both scenarios were subjected to a cradle-to-grave LCA. The renovation scenario included impacts from demolition of non-structural elements, material production for new systems (e.g., façade, HVAC, interior finishes), construction, and enhanced operational efficiency. The new construction scenario included full demolition of the existing structure (including waste management), raw material extraction for new structural and non-structural elements, construction, and operational energy use of the highly efficient new build.

Findings: The LCA revealed that, despite the new building being more energy-efficient in its operational phase, the deep renovation scenario consistently had a lower overall environmental impact, particularly concerning embodied carbon. The initial embodied carbon associated with demolishing the existing structure and constructing an entirely new one was significant, outweighing the operational energy savings of the new build for several decades. Specifically, the renovation scenario resulted in approximately 30-40% lower embodied carbon and 15-20% lower overall GWP over a 50-year service life when compared to new construction.

Impact: This study underscored the significant environmental benefits of extending the lifespan of existing buildings and minimizing demolition. It provided compelling evidence that the ‘greenest building is often the one already built’, prompting the client to pursue the deep renovation strategy. The LCA helped articulate the environmental value of preserving embodied energy and materials, informing urban planning, policy on building reuse, and architectural decisions that prioritize adaptive reuse over new construction where feasible.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

7. Integration of LCA with Building Information Modeling (BIM) and other Digital Technologies

The integration of Life Cycle Assessment with Building Information Modeling (BIM) has revolutionized sustainable design and construction, transforming LCA from a post-design assessment into an iterative, real-time design optimization tool. Beyond BIM, other digital technologies are further enhancing LCA’s capabilities.

7.1 BIM as a Foundational Enabler for LCA

BIM provides a robust digital representation of a building’s physical and functional characteristics. Its object-oriented nature, which stores detailed information about every component (e.g., material, dimensions, quantities, performance attributes), makes it an ideal platform for streamlining LCA. The key benefits of BIM-LCA integration include:
* Automated Material Take-offs: BIM models inherently contain precise quantity take-offs for all building elements. This automates the most tedious part of the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) phase, significantly reducing manual data entry and human error.
* Real-time Environmental Feedback: As designers create or modify the BIM model, integrated LCA tools (like Tally or OneClick LCA) can provide immediate feedback on the environmental impacts of their choices. This allows for ‘what-if’ scenario analysis and design optimization at early stages, where changes are least costly to implement.
* Improved Collaboration and Communication: BIM facilitates a common data environment that can be accessed by all project stakeholders (architects, engineers, contractors, clients). Integrating LCA data into this environment fosters better communication about environmental performance and ensures that sustainability goals are aligned across the project team.
* Parametric Design Exploration: BIM’s parametric capabilities enable designers to quickly generate and evaluate multiple design alternatives. When coupled with LCA, this allows for the rapid assessment of environmental impacts across numerous iterations, leading to more optimized solutions.
* Enhanced Data Transparency and Traceability: A BIM-based LCA maintains a clear link between building components and their associated environmental data, improving transparency and traceability throughout the project life cycle.

However, effective BIM-LCA integration requires semantic interoperability—ensuring that data can flow seamlessly between BIM software and LCA databases without loss of information or misinterpretation. Standards like Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) play a crucial role in enabling this interoperability.

7.2 Beyond BIM: Leveraging Other Digital Technologies

The future of LCA in construction is increasingly intertwined with broader digital transformation:

• Parametric Design and Generative Design: These approaches, often leveraging algorithms and artificial intelligence (AI), can explore thousands of design permutations based on predefined objectives and constraints. Integrating LCA as a performance criterion allows for the automated generation of designs that are optimized not only for structural integrity or cost but also for environmental impact. This can uncover novel, highly sustainable solutions that might not be conceived through traditional manual design processes.
• Digital Twins: A digital twin is a virtual replica of a physical asset, system, or process that is continuously updated with real-time data from sensors. For buildings, digital twins can integrate operational energy consumption, water use, and material degradation data with initial embodied LCA data. This allows for dynamic, real-time whole-life cycle assessments, enabling facilities managers to optimize operational performance and predict maintenance needs with environmental implications in mind. For example, a digital twin could predict the environmental impact of varying HVAC setpoints or detect anomalies that lead to increased energy use.
• Blockchain Technology: Blockchain offers a decentralized, immutable ledger for recording transactions. In the context of LCA, it holds potential for enhancing supply chain transparency and data integrity. By tracking materials from their origin (e.g., raw material extraction) through manufacturing, transportation, and construction, blockchain could provide verifiable environmental data for each component, making LCI data collection more reliable and trustworthy. This could revolutionize the auditing and verification of EPDs and supply chain environmental claims.
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML): AI and ML algorithms can process vast amounts of data, identify patterns, and make predictions. In LCA, AI can be used to:
  • Predict Environmental Impacts: Based on high-level design inputs, AI could quickly estimate environmental performance, providing early feedback even before detailed BIM models are developed.
  • Optimize Material Selection: ML algorithms could recommend optimal material combinations based on environmental performance, cost, and structural requirements.
  • Improve Data Quality: AI could help identify inconsistencies or gaps in LCI data, suggesting appropriate proxies or missing data points.
  • Automate LCA Processes: Certain repetitive or rule-based aspects of LCA could be automated, freeing up human experts for more complex analysis and interpretation.

By leveraging these interconnected digital technologies, the construction industry can move towards a more proactive, data-driven, and holistic approach to sustainability, where environmental performance is integrated from the earliest design stages through to operational management and end-of-life planning.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

8. Policy and Regulatory Landscape for LCA in Construction

The increasing awareness of the construction sector’s environmental footprint has spurred a growing number of policies, regulations, and certification schemes globally that mandate or incentivize the use of LCA. This shift marks a transition from voluntary best practices to compulsory requirements, particularly concerning whole-life carbon.

8.1 European Union Frameworks

Europe is at the forefront of integrating LCA into building regulations and policies:
* Level(s): Developed by the European Commission, Level(s) is a common European framework for assessing and reporting on the sustainability performance of buildings throughout their life cycle. It provides a set of indicators and methodologies, including those for life cycle assessment (specifically modules A1-A3 for embodied carbon, and B6 for operational energy, among others), designed to promote sustainable construction practices across the EU [European Commission, n.d.]. It aims to provide a common language for building sustainability.
* Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD): While historically focused on operational energy, the revised EPBD (Directive 2010/31/EU, and its forthcoming revisions) increasingly emphasizes whole-life carbon. It mandates that from 2027, all new public buildings must report on their whole-life GWP, extending to all new buildings from 2030. This is a significant step towards making LCA a regulatory requirement for carbon accounting.
* EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities: This classification system defines environmentally sustainable economic activities. Construction and real estate activities that contribute to environmental objectives (e.g., climate change mitigation) must demonstrate compliance, often through LCA-based metrics (e.g., low embodied carbon thresholds).
* National Policies: Several EU member states have already implemented or are developing national regulations requiring LCA or whole-life carbon assessments:
* France (RE2020): The latest French building regulation, RE2020, mandates a whole-life carbon assessment for all new buildings, setting increasingly stringent caps on embodied carbon alongside operational energy performance targets.
* Netherlands (Dutch Building Decree): Requires environmental performance assessments (including embodied carbon) for new buildings, often using national LCA tools and databases.
* Denmark: Has introduced embodied carbon limits for new buildings, requiring LCA calculations to demonstrate compliance.
* Finland and Sweden: Are also moving towards integrating embodied carbon limits into their building codes.

8.2 United Kingdom Initiatives

While the UK does not yet have a mandatory whole-life carbon regulation, significant proposals and industry drivers are pushing for its adoption:
* Part Z (Proposed): An industry-led proposal for an amendment to the Building Regulations (specifically Approved Document Z) that would mandate the assessment and limiting of whole-life carbon emissions for all building projects. It draws heavily on LCA principles and industry best practices.
* London Plan: The spatial development strategy for Greater London includes policies that require major developments to submit whole-life carbon assessments as part of their planning applications, demonstrating a strong push from local authorities.
* Green Building Council (UKGBC): The UKGBC actively promotes and provides guidance on whole-life carbon roadmaps and LCA best practices, advocating for regulatory changes.

8.3 Green Building Certification Schemes

Major international and national green building certification schemes have progressively integrated LCA requirements, rewarding projects that conduct comprehensive assessments and demonstrate superior environmental performance:
* LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design): The most widely used green building rating system globally, LEED offers credits for conducting whole-building life cycle impact assessments and for selecting materials with EPDs that demonstrate superior environmental performance.
* BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method): A leading sustainability assessment method for buildings, BREEAM includes significant credits for demonstrating reductions in life cycle impacts through LCA, covering various impact categories beyond just carbon.
* DGNB (German Sustainable Building Council): Known for its holistic approach, DGNB strongly emphasizes life cycle assessment as a core criterion for building certification, assessing environmental performance across the entire building life cycle.
* Passivhaus: While primarily focused on operational energy efficiency, some extended Passivhaus standards and related initiatives (e.g., EnerPHit for retrofits) are increasingly considering embodied carbon and other life cycle impacts.

These evolving policies and certification schemes signify a clear global trend towards integrating LCA as a fundamental tool for accountability, transparency, and continuous improvement in the environmental performance of the built environment. They are shifting the focus from simply reporting on impacts to actively driving reductions and setting performance benchmarks for a more sustainable future.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

9. Future Directions and Research Gaps

The field of LCA in construction is dynamic, with continuous advancements and emerging challenges. Several key areas represent future directions and critical research gaps that need to be addressed to maximize LCA’s potential:

9.1 Standardization and Harmonization

While ISO standards provide a framework, differences in LCI databases, LCIA methodologies (e.g., characterization factors, allocation rules), system boundaries, and reporting formats across regions and software tools can lead to inconsistencies and limit comparability. Future efforts must focus on greater standardization and harmonization of methodologies, data, and reporting protocols to ensure consistent, reliable, and globally comparable LCA results. This includes developing universal functional units for various building types and components.

9.2 Integration with Circular Economy Principles

Traditional LCA, particularly ‘cradle-to-grave’, often views end-of-life as disposal. However, the paradigm of the circular economy emphasizes waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery. Future LCAs need to more effectively integrate circularity indicators and robustly assess scenarios involving multiple life cycles of materials (e.g., considering the impact of closed-loop recycling, urban mining, and design for disassembly). This requires better data on material circularity, purity, and availability for secondary use, as well as developing new allocation methods that incentivize circularity.

9.3 Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC)

To achieve true holistic sustainability, LCA needs to be systematically integrated with Social LCA (S-LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC). S-LCA assesses the social impacts of products and processes across the life cycle (e.g., labor conditions, human rights, community well-being, health and safety). LCC evaluates the total cost of a building or product over its entire life cycle, including initial investment, operational costs, maintenance, and end-of-life costs. The combined application of Environmental LCA, S-LCA, and LCC provides a comprehensive ‘Triple Bottom Line’ assessment, enabling decision-makers to optimize for environmental, social, and economic sustainability simultaneously. Research is needed to develop more robust and standardized methodologies for S-LCA and integrated assessment tools.

9.4 Dynamic LCA and Long-Term Projections

Buildings have long lifespans, often 50-100 years or more. Current LCAs often use static data for energy grids, material compositions, and climate impacts. However, these factors evolve over time (e.g., decarbonization of electricity grids, changes in manufacturing processes, climate change impacts). Dynamic LCA approaches, which account for these temporal changes and project them into the future, are crucial for more accurate long-term assessments. This requires developing robust forecasting models for various environmental parameters.

9.5 Addressing Rebound Effects and Behavioral Aspects

Highly energy-efficient or ‘green’ buildings can sometimes lead to ‘rebound effects’ where occupants consume more energy (e.g., keeping temperatures higher, using more appliances) because the unit cost of energy is lower, partially offsetting the intended savings. Future LCA models need to better account for occupant behavior and potential rebound effects, moving beyond purely technical assessments to include socio-technical considerations.

9.6 Expanding Database Coverage and Accessibility

Despite advancements, comprehensive and reliable LCI databases are still a limiting factor, particularly for specific regional contexts, emerging materials, and innovative construction techniques. Future efforts should focus on expanding the coverage of high-quality, geographically specific, and up-to-date databases, making them more accessible to a broader range of users, including through open-source initiatives and standardized EPD proliferation.

9.7 Simpler and More Intuitive Tools

While sophisticated tools cater to experts, there is a continuous need for simpler, more intuitive, and highly integrated tools (e.g., directly within CAD/BIM software) that can provide early-stage, indicative LCA results for non-experts. These tools need to balance simplification with methodological rigor and transparency regarding underlying assumptions.

By addressing these future directions and research gaps, LCA can further solidify its role as an indispensable tool, guiding the construction industry towards genuinely sustainable practices and contributing significantly to global environmental goals.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

10. Conclusion

Life Cycle Assessment stands as an indispensable and increasingly critical tool in advancing sustainable construction practices. By providing a comprehensive, systematic, and quantitative evaluation of environmental impacts associated with building materials, systems, and design choices across their entire life cycle, LCA moves beyond traditional, fragmented assessments to offer a holistic perspective on ecological footprints. It empowers stakeholders to identify environmental hotspots, understand complex trade-offs, and make truly informed decisions that promote resource efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, minimize waste, and enhance overall building performance.

Despite the inherent challenges in data collection, ensuring data quality, and navigating methodological complexities, significant advancements in specialized software tools (such as GaBi, SimaPro, Tally, and OneClick LCA), coupled with the growing integration of LCA with Building Information Modeling (BIM) and other digital technologies (like parametric design, digital twins, and AI), have substantially enhanced its applicability and accessibility within the construction industry. These technological enablers facilitate earlier and more accurate environmental feedback, allowing for proactive design optimization and more efficient material selection.

Furthermore, the evolving global policy and regulatory landscape, particularly within the European Union and through green building certification schemes, increasingly mandates or incentivizes the use of LCA, especially for whole-life carbon assessments. This signifies a maturation of the field, shifting from voluntary adoption to a foundational requirement for demonstrating environmental responsibility and achieving ambitious climate goals.

Looking ahead, the ongoing need for greater standardization, the deeper integration with circular economy principles, the development of holistic social and economic life cycle assessments, and the exploration of dynamic LCA approaches represent critical future directions. By leveraging LCA, stakeholders across the construction value chain can make decisions that not only mitigate adverse environmental impacts but also contribute to a resilient, resource-efficient, and truly sustainable built environment for generations to come.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

References

• Brightway2. (n.d.). Brightway2: An open-source framework for life cycle assessment. Retrieved from https://brightway.dev/
• Crawford, R. H., Stephan, A., & Prideaux, F. (2018). Hybrid life cycle inventory methods—a review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 1–12.
• Environmental Product Declaration. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Product_Declaration
• European Commission. (n.d.). Level(s): The European framework for sustainable buildings. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/environment/levels/
• Gkousis, S., & Katsou, E. (2025). lcpy: an open-source python package for parametric and dynamic Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing. arXiv preprint. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.13744
• Huijbregts, M. A. J., Slagter, S., van Oers, L., Guinée, J. B., Sprecher, B., & Hellweg, S. (2017). ReCiPe 2016: A harmonized life cycle impact assessment method with both midpoint and endpoint indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 159, 137-145.
• IEA (International Energy Agency). (2022). Buildings: A sector on the cusp of an emissions slowdown?. Retrieved from https://www.iea.org/reports/buildings
• IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). (2021). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.
• ISO 14040:2006. (2006). Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization.
• ISO 14044:2006. (2006). Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Requirements and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
• KieranTimberlake. (n.d.). Tally: The industry’s first fully integrated LCA tool. Retrieved from https://kierantimberlake.com/pages/tally/
• OneClick LCA. (n.d.). Life cycle assessment for construction materials of an industrial building using web-based software. Discover Sustainability. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43621-025-01466-5
• OneClick LCA. (n.d.). About One Click LCA. Retrieved from https://www.oneclicklca.com/about/
• openLCA. (n.d.). openLCA – The open source LCA software. Retrieved from https://www.openlca.org/
• PRé Sustainability. (n.d.). SimaPro LCA Software. Retrieved from https://simapro.com/
• RICS (Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors). (2017). Whole life carbon assessment for the built environment. RICS Professional Statement.
• Sphera. (n.d.). GaBi LCA Software. Retrieved from https://sphera.com/life-cycle-assessment-software-gabi/
• UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). (2021). 2021 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction: Towards a Zero-emission, Efficient and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector. Retrieved from https://globalabc.org/resources/publications/2021-global-status-report-buildings-and-construction