Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) has the potential to reshape workflows across the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) sector. While previous research has offered valuable technical demonstrations and conceptual analyses, empirical evidence quantifying GAI-related impacts across AEC occupations and systematic assessment of adoption readiness remain limited. This study develops a domain-specific socio-technical evaluation framework that provides occupational-level analysis of technical capabilities, social risks, and adoption barriers across thirteen O*NET-defined AEC occupations. Data were collected through a six-month survey of 162 AEC professionals, complemented by six expert interviews and a systematic literature review. The findings reveal: (1) Technical Capability , measured using exposure scores ranging from −1 (low applicability) to +1 (high applicability), shows moderate applicability in design-oriented roles (e.g., architectural drafters: 0.16) and minimal alignment for site-based and manual activities (e.g., construction laborers: −0.89). (2) Social Risks , assessed on a 0–1 scale of concern, identify hallucinations (0.71), data privacy (0.70), and intellectual property issues (0.69) as critical concerns. (3) Socio-Technical Adoption highlights limited technical expertise (26.0%) and uncertain return on investment (16.8%) as primary barriers, while respondents emphasized the need for usage guidelines and standards (29.6%) and targeted training (29.2%) to facilitate responsible integration. Based on these findings, the study outlines strategic priorities for responsible GAI deployment, including AEC-specific standards, targeted workforce training, human-in-the-loop validation mechanisms, and domain-tailored digital infrastructure. The framework and empirical evidence provide a foundation for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seeking to guide the safe and effective integration of GAI into AEC workflows. • A socio-technical evaluation framework tailored to AEC GAI integration. • Task- and occupation-level analysis of capability readiness across thirteen O*NET roles. • Quantitative assessment of risks, adoption barriers, and organizational support needs. • Evidence-based recommendations on guidelines, training, human oversight, and digital infrastructure.
Xiong et al. (Wed,) studied this question.