Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose Construction firms must digitalise and decarbonise simultaneously, but whether they combine the two programmes is not known. This review maps how the twin transition, the joint pursuit of digitalisation and sustainability, is conceptualised and implemented in the construction sector, and sets out an agenda for firm-level research. Design/methodology/approach Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, searches were run in Web of Science and Scopus, combining “twin transition” with digitalisation and sustainability terms. After two-stage screening, 78 peer-reviewed papers were coded against a structured protocol, complemented by a VOSviewer keyword co-occurrence analysis. Findings The literature is expanding rapidly but remains conceptually fragmented. Only a small minority of studies use the term “twin transition” explicitly, none uses the firm-level term twin transformation and most frame digitalisation as the driver of sustainability rather than the reverse. A clear gap separates recommendation from observation: few papers examine the direction of the relationship or whether digital and green programmes are run jointly or in parallel, and firm-level empirical evidence is limited and concentrated in Chinese companies. Technical and data barriers, missing standards and capability gaps dominate the obstacles, while digital tools, organisational capabilities and policy mechanisms dominate the enablers. Originality/value The review applies the firm-level construct of twin transformation, developed in management research, to construction, shows that the field has produced sector-level evidence but almost none on how firms integrate the two programmes, and sets out testable priorities for closing that gap.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Palasics et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: