Structural modeling study reveals regulatory and technological drivers of low-carbon competitiveness in construction firms, highlighting an environment-organization-technology transmission path.
This study aims to identify the key factors affecting the low-carbon competitiveness of construction firms and clarify their interrelationships. First, 17 potential influencing factors were identified through a literature review. Subsequently, 15 experts evaluated these factors, and 15 factors were ultimately retained. Drawing on the technology–organisation–environment (TOE) framework, these factors were grouped into three dimensions: technology, organisation, and institutional environment. An integrated Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory–interpretive structural modelling–Matrice d’Impacts Croisés Multiplication Appliquée à un Classement approach was then applied to analyse the relationships among the factors, develop a multi-level hierarchical structure, and evaluate their driving power and dependence. The results show that policy and regulatory support is the most fundamental driving factor, while the social low-carbon atmosphere also plays an important driving role. Low-carbon technology maturity, application of low-carbon building design, and level of low-carbon supply chain management are identified as direct influencing factors. The findings further reveal a hierarchical transmission pattern of ‘institutional environment–organisation–technology’, in which institutional environmental factors provide external driving conditions, organisational factors play a mediating and transmission role, and technological factors are more directly associated with the improvement of low-carbon competitiveness. These findings provide practical implications for construction firms and policy references for government authorities promoting the low-carbon development of the construction industry.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: