Go to content

5. Systemic barriers

This chapter looks at the systemic barriers that make it difficult to reduce emissions from construction sites. These barriers are built into the industry and society and affect processes. They include issues such as the fast pace of construction projects, gaps in data and measurement, a lack of knowledge and communication, resistance to change, and complexity.
These barriers often overlap, making it even harder to implement emission-free construction. For example, not knowing enough about new technologies can lead to resistance, and the fast pace of the construction can lead to fewer opportunities for dialogue. These barriers are shaped by cultural habits, regulatory gaps, and the deep-rooted ways in which the construction industry operates. Matti Kuittinen, Associate Professor in the Department of Architecture at Aalto University, argues that we need a profound value shift when discussing sustainable architecture.
“What we need now is a new enlightenment, similar to the European enlightenment in the late 18th century, when strong shifting values spread in society. This is wishful thinking, but at times I think I can see it happening in the actions and thinking of the younger generation.”
Malin Zimm and Pernille Martiny Modvig, ‘Legislation and policies for sustainable architecture’, Nordic Innovation, May 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.nordicsustainableconstruction.com/knowledge/2024/may/legislation-and-policies-to-pave-the-way-for-sustainable-architecture

5.1. Speed and timeline constraints

Reducing emissions from construction sites requires additional processes which need to fit into the typical timeline in construction projects. For example, establishing grid connections and improving the on-site utilisation of building materials and energy are essential yet time-consuming steps. Time constraints in projects can limit the willingness to integrate new methods and technologies that might initially slow the process.
The speed of the construction process poses a significant barrier, which can be a consequence of financial barriers (see Chapter 3) since more time usually means more costs. It can also be a consequence of knowledge gaps since stakeholders need to realise that additional time is needed for certain aspects when reducing emissions at a work site, especially when experience needs to be gained in new methods.
The fast pace of construction projects can also increase the distance between different actors, reducing opportunities for dialogue. That can create misunderstandings or disbelief among subcontractors when they first encounter the project’s functional requirements and design specifications.
I. Andresen, M. K. Wiik, S. M. Fufa, and A. Gustavsen, ‘The Norwegian ZEB definition and lessons learnt from nine pilot zero emission building projects’, IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 352, no. 1, p. 012026, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/352/1/012026.
Ultimately, prioritising short-term gains over long-term sustainability not only impedes efforts to reduce emissions but can also lead to higher costs in the future.

5.2 Process complexity and integration issues

The construction industry is known for the complexity of its processes, which create significant challenges for implementing new innovative practices such as emission reductions. Involving multiple contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and various stakeholders across different phases of a project with different backgrounds and requirements makes it difficult to implement changes which affect the entire project. Each contractor and subcontractor may follow different standards and practices and have their own interests to protect. For example, a contractor may prioritise cost efficiency over sustainability, whereas the client may be focused on achieving carbon neutrality. Aligning these goals across multiple parties adds layers of complexity.
Emission-reduction practices in construction require changes in different systems within the industry. This often involves integrating multiple new technologies at the same time, such as electric machinery, renewable energy sources, programmes to improve transportation performance, etc. These technologies are interconnected, meaning a change in one area affects another, slowing down work when there is a need to try different technologies. This requires co-ordination between stakeholders such as equipment suppliers, energy providers, and site managers.
In building projects with a high degree of innovation and development, the lack of communication can make it difficult to achieve the goal of reducing emissions. With new methods, there is often a need to adjust and improve solutions directly on the building site. This requires an understanding of the intentions behind the new methods and project plans within the team working on site. This further requires collaboration between design teams, who understand the intention of the work, and the on-site teams, who execute the project.
I. Andresen, M. K. Wiik, S. M. Fufa, and A. Gustavsen, ‘The Norwegian ZEB definition and lessons learnt from nine pilot zero emission building projects’, IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 352, no. 1, p. 012026, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/352/1/012026.
However, communication gaps between stakeholders remain a significant barrier, such as between those who understand the project’s intent and those who execute the work. A recent paper highlights the gap between theoretical knowledge and on-site practices, and underscores that collaboration among stakeholders and policymakers is not just beneficial but crucial for driving meaningful progress in reducing the construction sector’s environmental footprint.
L. Hasselsteen, S. M. Lindhard, and K. Kanafani, ‘Resource management at modern construction sites: Bridging the gap between scientific knowledge and industry practice and needs’, J. Environ. Manage., vol. 366, p. 121835, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121835.
Solutions/successful examples:
To achieve fossil-free or emission-free construction sites, it is essential to prioritise practical co-operation among stakeholders, establish precise requirements and goals, and foster open sharing of knowledge, experiences, and methods for implementation and documentation. These findings were identified during the construction phase of two Norwegian zero-emission construction sites, providing a pathway to success in similar projects.
S. M. Fufa, M. K. Wiik, S. Mellegård, and I. Andresen, ‘Lessons learnt from the design and construction strategies of two Norwegian low emission construction sites’, IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 352, no. 1, p. 012021, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/352/1/012021.

5.3 Data and measurement challenges

Accurately measuring and tracking emissions is essential for reducing the environmental impact of construction sites, yet several systemic barriers complicate this task. Without reliable data, achieving emission-reduction goals remains challenging, as stakeholders lack the insights to make informed, effective decisions. As Harpa Birgisdóttir, Professor at Aalborg University, states:
“Municipalities need to know what the climate effect is when deciding on new construction, compared to the effects of reuse or renovation.”
Malin Zimm and Pernille Martiny Modvig, ‘Legislation and policies for sustainable architecture’, Nordic Innovation, May 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.nordicsustainableconstruction.com/knowledge/2024/may/legislation-and-policies-to-pave-the-way-for-sustainable-architecture
A significant barrier is the lack of a clear, standardised way to collect and report data on emissions from various construction activities. While Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) systems help guide what data should be collected, there is still no consistent method for collecting it. Without standard approaches, comparing emissions across projects or setting clear goals becomes difficult, which slows progress in reducing emissions.
Another challenge is the complexity of measuring emissions accurately at construction sites. Although some emissions data is gathered during building certifications such as BREEAM or LEED, this data is often limited and not used effectively for broader sustainability goals.
L. Hasselsteen, S. M. Lindhard, and K. Kanafani, ‘Resource management at modern construction sites: Bridging the gap between scientific knowledge and industry practice and needs’, J. Environ. Manage., vol. 366, p. 121835, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121835.
Instead, it is primarily focused on meeting certification requirements rather than providing a comprehensive emissions database for use across the industry.
Once data is collected, it also needs to be processed into accurate averages for each LCA module. Although the Nordic countries have some estimated emissions data, this data needs to be more precise. Significant gaps have been found between estimated and actual emissions in life cycle studies across the Nordic countries. For example, a study from Norway showed a 44% difference between estimated and actual emissions, mostly related to the use of construction machinery.
S. M. Fufa, M. K. Wiik, and I. Andressen, ‘Estimated and Actual Construction Inventory Data in Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations for a Norwegian Zero Emission Building (ZEB) Construction Site’, in Sustainability in Energy and Buildings 2018, vol. 131, in Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol. 131. , Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 138–147. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-04293-6_14.
Other studies show that actual emissions from waste management are often much higher than initially estimated.
S. M. Fufa, K. Fjellheim, C. Venås, J. T. Vevatne, T. M. Kummen, and L. Henke, ‘Waste free construction site–A buzzword, nice to have or more’, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. Adv., vol. 18, p. 200149, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.rcradv.2023.200149.
Currently, the same estimated emissions value is used for many building types, but more accurate average data for each specific building type is needed. Creating precise data for each building type will allow for more accurate and meaningful comparisons and insights.
Overcoming these data and measurement challenges will require better technology and regulatory support.

5.4 Lack of knowledge and resistance to change

New methods in construction require time, effort, and a willingness to learn, as well as collaboration at all levels in the industry. Awareness of new practices is crucial, yet a typical barrier is the lack of knowledge and experience among stakeholders, as highlighted in a study on two Norwegian low-emission construction sites.
L. Hasselsteen, S. M. Lindhard, and K. Kanafani, ‘Resource management at modern construction sites: Bridging the gap between scientific knowledge and industry practice and needs’, J. Environ. Manage., vol. 366, p. 121835, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121835.
Many stakeholders lack training and skills in these areas, which limits their ability to apply low-emission methods. New technologies often require specialised training, yet these programmes are currently limited and difficult to find. Although awareness of low-carbon strategies is growing, stakeholders often don’t fully understand how to apply these strategies in practice. Many remain unaware of the impact of construction site emissions and the available ways to reduce them. This knowledge gap slows the adoption of emissions-reduction practices and contributes to hesitancy, ultimately holding back progress towards achieving emission-free construction.
A report on Overcoming Barriers to Supply Chain Decarbonization: Case Studies of First Movers
A. Zhang, M. F. Alvi, Y. Gong, and J. X. Wang, ‘Overcoming barriers to supply chain decarbonization: Case studies of first movers’, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., vol. 186, p. 106536, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106536.
identified knowledge-related obstacles such as “lack of awareness”, “lack of expertise”, and a “resistant mindset”. These barriers also affect efforts to achieve emission-free construction sites. According to the report, resistance persists because some organisations do not see the shift to carbon neutrality as urgent or essential. This reluctance can be due to a lack of awareness about emissions-related environmental issues, disbelief or a belief that proposed measures will have minimal effect on the overall outcome, leading to low motivation for decarbonisation efforts.
The construction industry is typically conservative and relies on established methods, with cultural resistance to new sustainable technologies. Contractors often doubt the feasibility of emission-free transportation, questioning the reliability of electric vehicles and alternative fuel technologies. Without confidence in the availability, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of these solutions, many stick with conventional methods that produce emissions. Concerns about upfront costs, project delays, and limited knowledge of long-term benefits also hinder adoption. This lack of understanding and resistance to change leads many stakeholders to view emission reduction strategies negatively.
I. Amarasinghe, T. Liu, R. A. Stewart, and S. Mostafa, ‘Paving the way for lowering embodied carbon emissions in the building and construction sector’, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10098-024-03023-6.
In some cases, communication breakdowns lead to evident problems on site. For example, during the construction of the Lia Nursery School, the plan was to use biodiesel in large construction machinery, but the machines arrived on site with their tanks filled with diesel.
S. M. Fufa, M. K. Wiik, S. Mellegård, and I. Andresen, ‘Lessons learnt from the design and construction strategies of two Norwegian low emission construction sites’, IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 352, no. 1, p. 012021, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/352/1/012021.

5.5 Current economic structure

As highlighted in previous reports from the Nordic Sustainable Construction project, building less is the most effective way to reduce emissions from construction sites. By focusing on better utilising existing buildings – renovating and reusing structures as a whole – we can prevent the need for demolition and new construction, which reduces both embodied and operational emissions. However, the current economic model often favours new construction over the reuse or renovation of existing buildings. This growth-focused economy, particularly in its drive to increase GDP, poses a significant barrier to reducing emissions, not only in construction but across various sectors.
“I think that the first structural move is to really consider why we build. This includes the question of whether we have to build anything at all. Failing to ask this basic question is probably the main obstacle to understanding the structure of legal matters at the level of the first intuitive thought of building. That gut feeling saying that ‘we need to build’ comes with an economy that tells us to get rid of what is there so that we can build new. It is almost a philosophical task to challenge the current go-to solution, where we ‘build our way out of each problem’.”
Malin Zimm and Pernille Martiny Modvig, ‘Legislation and policies for sustainable architecture’, Nordic Innovation, May 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.nordicsustainableconstruction.com/knowledge/2024/may/legislation-and-policies-to-pave-the-way-for-sustainable-architecture
As Kai Reaver, Head of Architecture and Chief Advisor at the Norwegian Architecture Association, NAL, highlights in an interview, the core question is why we need to build. This “build-to-solve” mindset, driven by growth-focused economies, replaces existing structures instead of repurposing them, prioritising short-term gains over environmental sustainability. The traditional “linear economy” of construction – extract, use, discard – continues to dominate because it aligns with business models prioritising quick returns. Renovation and reuse face hurdles such as complex regulations, unpredictable costs, and limited incentives, further reinforced by policies favouring new builds.
One consequence of this growth-driven mindset is the so-called rebound effect. While energy use per square metre has decreased through efficiency gains, overall energy consumption per person and household has actually increased. This is due to larger heated areas, more electronic devices, and the tendency to consume more when things become efficient and cheaper. An example of a possible rebound effect at the construction site is if recycling processes become highly efficient, some companies may generate more waste with the assumption that it can be effectively reused or recycled, reducing the incentive to minimise waste generation in the first place.
As Harpa Birgisdóttir points out in a recent article, tackling environmental impact is not just about technological solutions; it requires a societal shift in what we value. Reducing environmental impact means rethinking our perception of consumption and space, and considering sufficiency as a core principle in construction.
William Sass, ‘Sådan voksede det danske parcelhus med 100 kvadratmeter. Forstå byggeriets klimaaftryk’, Information. Accessed: Nov. 18, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.information.dk/indland/2024/11/saadan-voksede-danske-parcelhus-100-kvadratmeter-forstaa-byggeriets-klimaaftryk
In addition, while some strategies and innovations appear sustainable, they are often undermined by the pressures of the growth economy. Many approaches that seem eco-friendly, such as energy-efficient buildings or “green” certifications, often encourage increased construction and the same unsustainable consumption patterns. This misalignment reveals the urgent need to shift from supporting growth to adopting sustainable practices built on principles of sufficiency and respect for the planet’s limits.
‘Beyond the Roadmap: A transition plan for the Danish building industry’, Reduction Roadmap, Version 2., 2024. [Online]. Available: www.reductionroadmap.dk