Exploring the Impact of Construction 4.0 on Industrial Relations: A Comprehensive Thematic Synthesis of Workforce Transformation in the Digital Era of Construction

Abstract

The rise of Construction 4.0—driven by digitalisation, automation, and data-intensive technologies—is radically reshaping the construction industry. While its technological innovations are widely acknowledged, their implications for industrial relations remain underexplored. In this study, we conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) of 91 peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2024, aiming to synthesise emerging knowledge on how Construction 4.0 is transforming workforce dynamics, employment models, and labour relations. Using NVivo software and an inductive thematic approach, we identify seven key themes: workforce transformation, the attraction of new generations and women, skill requirements and workforce development, supply chain and logistics optimisation, digital twin technology in project management, the emergence of new business models, and safety and risk assessment. Our findings highlight both opportunities—such as improved collaboration, skill diversification, and enhanced productivity—and challenges, including job displacement, digital ethics, and widening disparities between developed and developing countries. Recent studies from 2023 and 2024 underscore routine-biased changes in workforce structure, evolving project management practices through digital twins, and critical skill shortages within the sector. Furthermore, contemporary policy shifts and increasing labour tensions in some regions reveal deeper socio-economic implications of digital construction. This review contributes to a more holistic understanding of how technological innovation intersects with social systems in the built environment. The insights presented offer valuable guidance for policymakers, educators, and industry leaders seeking to navigate the evolving landscape of Construction 4.0.

1. Introduction

The construction industry stands at a technological crossroads. As it adopts automation, artificial intelligence (AI), digital twins, and data-driven platforms under the banner of Construction 4.0, the sector is being reshaped not only in terms of productivity and process optimisation but also in the makeup and dynamics of its workforce. These transformations are unfolding rapidly: the global Construction 4.0 market surpassed USD 16 billion in 2023 and is projected to grow at a compound annual rate of 14.9% over the next decade [1]. Yet, as technologies are deployed across design, planning, and on-site operations, questions remain regarding their impact on employment structures, skills demand, and labour relations.

While prior research has extensively documented the technical and operational benefits of digitalisation in construction—such as reduced costs, faster delivery times, and improved safety outcomes [2]—the human implications remain comparatively underexplored. A growing number of studies have recently drawn attention to potential risks: widening skill gaps, digital exclusion, and the erosion of traditional labour protections [3,4]. For instance, recent qualitative analyses suggest that digital disruption in the construction sector is disproportionately affecting lower-skilled workers, intensifying precarious employment and shifting power dynamics within organisations [5,6].

This oversight is especially critical in the context of rising industrial tensions and policy interventions. In Australia, the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) in 2023 coincided with a spike in strike activity across major projects [7]. In the UK, the government pledged GBP 600 million in 2025 to address workforce shortages and upskill workers for an increasingly digital construction sector [8]. These developments signal not only the urgency of addressing workforce impacts but also the need for a more nuanced and evidence-based understanding of how industrial relations are evolving in the digital era.

Despite the relevance of these issues, no prior study has systematically reviewed the scholarly literature at the intersection of Construction 4.0 and industrial relations. This paper fills that critical gap. Through a systematic literature review (SLR) of 91 peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2024, we examine how digital transformation is reshaping employment models, skills ecosystems, and labour–management relations across the global construction industry. Using NVivo-facilitated qualitative coding, we identify seven interrelated themes: workforce transformation, the attraction of new generations and women, skill requirements and workforce development, supply chain and logistics optimisation, digital twin technology in project management, the emergence of new business models, and safety and risk assessment.

By focusing on the social and institutional dimensions of Construction 4.0, this study provides a novel, human-centred perspective that complements existing technical discourses. The insights offered here are intended to inform ongoing policy debates, guide educational priorities, and support industry efforts toward more inclusive and resilient digital transitions.

2. Theoretical and Practical Background

The construction industry stands on the precipice of profound transformation as it confronts the challenges and opportunities posed by Construction 4.0. Broadly understood as the application of Industry 4.0 technologies to the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) sectors, Construction 4.0 encompasses innovations such as artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, robotics, additive manufacturing, digital twins, blockchain, big data analytics, and the Internet of Things (IoT). These technologies are increasingly integrated across the lifecycle of built assets—from conceptual design and cost planning through to on-site execution, commissioning, and facility operations [9].

Driven by the imperatives of productivity, cost efficiency, safety, and sustainability, Construction 4.0 has ushered in a reconfiguration of how value is produced, coordinated, and measured in the built environment. At the operational level, digital tools such as Building Information Modelling (BIM), real-time sensor networks, and cyber–physical systems enable high-resolution visualisation, real-time decision-making, and predictive maintenance [10]. More recently, digital twins—dynamic, data-rich models of physical assets—have become emblematic of this shift, supporting not only technical efficiency but also strategic planning and post-construction asset management [4].

Indeed, the pace of digital transformation is accelerating rapidly. The global Construction 4.0 market, valued at over USD 16 billion in 2023, is forecast to triple by 2032, underscoring widespread industry uptake and governmental support for digitalisation [1]. Countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany, China, and the United Arab Emirates have rolled out national strategies to encourage digital maturity across construction ecosystems. Despite this momentum, most scholarly and industry discourse remains largely techno-centric, focusing on process innovation, automation potential, and economic return on investment.

What is often neglected, however, is the labour dimension of Construction 4.0: how these technologies are reshaping workforce composition, employment relations, skills regimes, and institutional arrangements within the construction industry. While the existing literature has begun to acknowledge the disruptive potential of automation on employment patterns, the focus is often narrow—limited to forecasting job displacement or skill mismatch [3,5]. Much less attention has been paid to the broader implications for industrial relations systems, including changes to bargaining power, work autonomy, occupational identity, and the organisation of labour.

Theories of labour process transformation [11,12] offer valuable insights here, particularly in relation to technological control, de-skilling, and the fragmentation of collective agency. In the context of Construction 4.0, these dynamics are compounded by the rise of platform-based project delivery, which can disintermediate traditional employment relationships and replace them with algorithmically mediated subcontracting models. For workers, this can mean not only greater flexibility but also greater precarity, surveillance, and marginalisation from strategic decision-making.

Moreover, this technological shift is occurring unevenly across global regions and organisational tiers. While well-capitalised firms and governments in the Global North are investing in digital infrastructure and workforce upskilling, construction ecosystems in low- and middle-income countries face multiple structural barriers—including inadequate training programs, a lack of digital literacy, and constrained access to enabling infrastructure [6]. These asymmetries risk exacerbating what some scholars call a digital divide in construction innovation, in which the benefits of Construction 4.0 accrue primarily in technologically advanced contexts while bypassing labour-intensive, low-wage segments of the industry.

At the policy level, responses have been uneven and reactive. The UK’s 2025 pledge of GBP 600 million to address digital skills shortages in the construction sector [8] and the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) amid rising industrial unrest [7] are examples of a growing awareness that digital transformation must be accompanied by robust labour frameworks and social protections. However, these interventions remain piecemeal, often trailing behind the pace of technological change.

In this context, a number of unresolved questions remain: How can industrial relations mechanisms evolve to accommodate digital labour platforms? What governance models can ensure transparency, equity, and worker voice in algorithmic management systems? And how might training ecosystems be restructured to support not just upskilling but also the redistribution of power and value across the construction workforce?

Despite the centrality of these issues, there remains a significant gap in the literature: no study to date has systematically reviewed and synthesised how Construction 4.0 is transforming the social, organisational, and political dimensions of construction work. Existing reviews typically concentrate on technical capabilities or implementation frameworks, leaving labour, ethics, and inclusion on the periphery.

To address this gap, the present study conducts a systematic literature review (SLR) of 100 peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2024. Using a qualitative thematic coding framework, we explore how digitalisation is reshaping employment models, workforce structures, and labour–management relations in the global construction sector.

Specifically, this study addresses the following research questions:

• RQ1: How is Construction 4.0 impacting industrial relations and workforce dynamics in the global construction industry?
• RQ2: What ethical and organisational tensions are emerging in response to automation and AI-driven management in construction workplaces?
• RQ3: How do regional disparities in digital infrastructure and workforce readiness shape the equitable implementation of Construction 4.0 across developed and developing economies?

By critically engaging with these questions, this paper contributes a labour-centred and institutionally grounded perspective to ongoing debates around Construction 4.0. In doing so, it expands the scope of construction innovation research to include not only how buildings are constructed but also how the people who build them are supported, valued, and empowered in the digital age.

3. Materials and Methods

This study employed a systematic literature review (SLR) approach to explore how Construction 4.0 is influencing industrial relations and workforce dynamics in the global construction industry. The SLR followed a structured and transparent process for identifying, screening, analysing, and synthesising relevant peer-reviewed academic publications (Figure 1).

3.1. Search Strategy and Data Sources

This review considered studies published between 2010 and 2024, across three academic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. A comprehensive and iterative keyword strategy was developed to reflect both the technological and socio-labour dimensions of the topic. The final Boolean search strings included combinations of the following terms:

• Technology and sector terms: “Construction 4.0”, “Industry 4.0”, “Digital Transformation”, “Smart Construction”, “Digital Construction”, “Automation in Construction”, “Construction Robotics”, and “Artificial Intelligence in Construction”.
• Labour and organisational terms: “Industrial Relations”, “Labour”, “Labor”, “Workforce”, “Employment”, “Human Resources”, “HR”, “Organisational Change”, “Workplace Transformation”, “Skill Requirements”, “Digital Skills”, “Job Displacement”, “Workforce Development”, “Digital Labour”, “Unionisation”, and “Work Conditions”.
• Contextual/regional terms (when relevant): “Construction Sector”, “AEC Industry”, “Building Industry”, “Developing Countries”, and “Global South”.

Boolean operators (AND/OR) were used to combine these terms across database searches. Keywords were refined through preliminary screening to improve search sensitivity and specificity.

This review considered studies published between 2010 and 2024, across three academic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. These databases were selected due to their complementary strengths and wide coverage of peer-reviewed research in the construction, engineering, and social science domains.

• Scopus was chosen for its extensive multidisciplinary indexing, particularly in engineering-, technology-, and management-related fields. It is widely regarded as one of the most comprehensive and reliable databases for high-quality academic literature.
• Web of Science was selected to provide rigorous coverage of peer-reviewed and high-impact journals, with robust citation data and a curated selection of sources relevant to both technical and labour-focused construction research.
• Google Scholar was included to ensure the capture of additional relevant academic content, particularly from open-access journals, interdisciplinary publications, and grey literature that may not be indexed in the other two databases. Although less selective, it broadens the search’s inclusivity and mitigates database bias.

The initial search yielded the following results:

• Scopus: 412 articles.
• Web of Science: 257 articles.
• Google Scholar: 743 articles.

After removing duplicates and screening for relevance and quality, 100 articles were included in the final analysis.

3.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

To ensure the relevance, quality, and academic rigour of the studies included in this review, a set of well-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria was developed and applied consistently throughout the screening process.

3.2.1. Inclusion Criteria

Studies were included if they met all of the following conditions:

• Topical relevance: the primary focus of the study was on Construction 4.0, Industry 4.0, or related digital technologies (e.g., BIM, digital twins, robotics, AI), as applied within the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) sector.
• Human-centric focus: the study addressed issues related to industrial relations, labour dynamics, workforce transformation, employment models, organisational change, or HR and skills development within a construction context.
• Peer-reviewed journal article: only original, peer-reviewed journal publications were considered to maintain the academic quality of this review.
• Timeframe and language: articles were published between 2010 and 2024 and written in English to ensure relevance to the period in which Construction 4.0 has emerged and evolved.
• Accessibility: full-text access was available to allow for detailed qualitative analysis and coding.

3.2.2. Exclusion Criteria

Articles were excluded if they met any of the following criteria:

• Technical exclusivity: studies that focused solely on the technical, engineering, or software development aspects of Construction 4.0, without any discussion of human, workforce, or organisational impacts, were excluded.
• Non-academic or non-peer-reviewed sources: conference proceedings, white papers, policy briefs, magazine articles, and student theses were excluded due to the lack of peer review and inconsistent methodological transparency.
• Irrelevant sectoral context: studies focused on Industry 4.0 in non-construction industries (e.g., manufacturing, logistics, agriculture) without a clear transferability to the built environment were omitted.
• Language or access limitations: articles not written in English, or those that were paywalled or otherwise inaccessible in full-text form, were excluded to ensure transparency and consistent quality appraisal.

The inclusion and exclusion process was applied at three stages: (1) title and abstract screening, (2) full-text assessment, and (3) quality appraisal using the [13] grid system (see Section 3.3). Disagreements between reviewers were resolved through discussion and the re-evaluation of borderline cases.

3.3. Quality Appraisal

To ensure the academic integrity and relevance of the studies included in the final synthesis, a structured quality appraisal process was conducted using the Grid System for Literature Evaluation proposed by Fink [13]. This framework was selected for its clarity, replicability, and suitability for systematic literature reviews spanning interdisciplinary domains. It enables researchers to evaluate the strength and suitability of the literature across both methodological and conceptual dimensions.

Each full-text article that passed the initial screening was assessed against four core criteria:

• Relevance to the research question:
  • The degree to which the study directly addressed one or more dimensions of the research aim: digital transformation in the construction sector and its impact on industrial relations, workforce, or organisational change.
• Methodological rigour:
  • The clarity, consistency, and transparency of the study’s research design, data collection methods, and analytical approach. Studies with vague, poorly described, or unsupported methods were downgraded.
• Theoretical grounding:
  • The extent to which the study was anchored in relevant theoretical or conceptual frameworks (e.g., socio-technical systems theory, organisational change theory, labour process theory).
• Contribution to knowledge:
  • The originality, depth, and significance of the study’s findings in advancing the understanding of Construction 4.0 and its social and workforce implications.

Each study was assigned a binary score (1 = meets criterion; 0 = does not meet criterion) for each dimension, resulting in a total score of between 0 and 4. A minimum threshold of 3 out of 4 was required for inclusion in the final synthesis. Studies that scored below this threshold on two or more dimensions were excluded from this review.

The appraisal was conducted by two reviewers independently. Discrepancies in scoring were discussed and resolved by consensus to ensure consistency and minimise individual bias. Figure 2 illustrates the flow diagram of the systematic literature review process for this study.

3.4. Data Coding and Analysis

The final pool of 100 peer-reviewed articles was imported into NVivo 14, a qualitative data analysis software, to facilitate a structured and transparent thematic synthesis. The analysis followed an inductive, bottom–up coding approach, allowing themes to emerge organically from the literature rather than being imposed a priori.

The coding process combined two established qualitative strategies:

• Element Coding: The identification of specific terms, phrases, and concepts relevant to Construction 4.0, workforce dynamics, employment models, organisational change, and industrial relations. These included recurring language around automation, job displacement, digital upskilling, generational shifts, and digital labour governance.
• Syntactic Coding: exploration of linguistic and structural patterns across the texts to capture how authors positioned these issues (e.g., framing of digitalisation as opportunity vs. threat; use of risk or empowerment narratives; shifts in tone across time or geographic regions).

A line-by-line coding procedure was used for each article during the initial cycle. As the coding progressed, recurring concepts were grouped into broader categories. Using NVivo’s node and matrix tools, the research team conducted iterative rounds of comparison and refinement to ensure internal consistency and conceptual saturation.

Thematic clustering and mind-mapping were employed to explore the relationships between codes and to visualise emerging categories. After several rounds of refinement, this process resulted in the identification of seven core themes, which structure the findings presented in the next section.

NVivo’s advanced query features (e.g., word frequency, text search, and matrix coding queries) were also used to cross-check patterns and support triangulation. Memos and annotations were used throughout the process to document analytic decisions and maintain a clear audit trail, enhancing the transparency and trustworthiness of this review.

3.5. Reliability and Validation

To enhance the credibility, trustworthiness, and reproducibility of the thematic coding process, specific measures were implemented to assess and ensure inter-coder reliability and procedural transparency. A subset of 15 articles (15% of the sample) was independently coded by two researchers, each following the same inductive coding framework and protocol developed in NVivo 14.

The level of agreement between the two coders was calculated using a simple percentage agreement metric, resulting in an inter-coder reliability rate of 89%, which is considered acceptable in qualitative research [14]. Minor discrepancies in node allocation and phrasing were discussed collaboratively, and consensus was reached through iterative dialogue and comparison. This process informed minor adjustments to the codebook and ensured alignment in how themes were interpreted and applied.

Following this validation step, the refined coding framework was then applied consistently across the entire dataset of 100 articles by the lead researcher. Regular reflective memos were used to track interpretative decisions, and NVivo’s audit trail features (e.g., coding comparison query and annotation logs) supported consistency checks during the full analysis.

These validation measures helped ensure that the seven emergent core themes reflected both the diversity and depth of the source material while reducing subjectivity and enhancing methodological robustness. Figure 3 illustrates this process.

3.6. Data Analysis

Once the required data, papers, and publications were collected, the process of data analysis started. One of the commonly accepted qualitative data analysis techniques and approaches has been agreed to be thematical analysis [14,15,16]. This method of data analysis guides the researcher and the investigator to identify the reoccurring themes in the raw data and manage and organise the data for clarification while ensuring the consistency of the analysis [15]. More specifically, thematical analysis has been defined as “… a process for encoding qualitative information. The encoding requires an explicit code. This may be a list of themes, a complex model with themes, indicators, and qualifications that are causally related, or something in between these two forms…” [15], p. vi.

The process of thematical analysis begins with becoming familiar with the data, deductively or inductively coding them and identifying themes. In the deductive method, the codes emerge from already existing theories and frameworks, while an inductive method of coding relies merely and directly on the data themselves [14,15,17]. Therefore, all the emerged codes must be carefully considered as long as they align with the research question and goals [14]. This study used an inductive approach of coding to analyse the collected data. The use of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) to code and categorise qualitative data has been encouraged by scholars [14,18,19]. However, the challenge facing this study, and most case studies, is the diversity of the evidence. To overcome this challenge, the majority of the collected data were transferred to CAQDAS for coding and further analysis. Three of the prevalent CAQDASs are Atlas, MAXQDA, and NVivo 14. NVivo 14 was used for coding, categorising, and creating themes in this study. Generally, coding is separated into six methods: grammatical, elemental, affective, literary and language, exploratory, and eventually procedural [18]. Two coding methods, elemental and grammatical, were used to code the data. The elemental coding method is considered as the primary approach to data analysis in most of the qualitative studies. This coding method offers preliminary and basic but focused and attentive filters for interrogating the data and creating solid foundations for the data analysis process [18]. The grammatical coding method is generally based on linguistic “principles of technique” [18]. These generated codes were then grouped based on their synonymity and the similarity of their meanings to create categories. These categories were re-categorised and summarised to create the prevailing themes of the study and to provide a comprehensive synthesis of the data.

4. Thematic Synthesis of Results

This systematic review and thematic analysis of 100 peer-reviewed articles revealed a diverse yet converging set of insights into how Construction 4.0 is transforming workforce dynamics and industrial relations within the construction industry. Through iterative inductive coding in NVivo 14, we identified seven core themes that capture the most prominent and recurrent concepts across the literature. These themes emerged through the constant comparison of coded segments and the clustering of related concepts based on frequency, depth, and contextual richness.

The following sections present each theme individually, highlighting key patterns in the literature while also synthesising novel insights which surfaced through our thematic framework. Each theme is analysed in relation to the overarching research questions posed in this study, drawing attention to underexplored tensions, emerging trends, and implications for both developed and developing construction contexts.

4.1. Workforce Transformation

The advent of Construction 4.0 has ushered in a paradigm shift within the construction industry, characterised by the integration of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), and Building Information Modelling (BIM). These innovations are automating routine tasks, enhancing decision-making processes, and fostering a more interconnected and efficient construction environment. Consequently, traditional manual labour roles are evolving, necessitating a workforce adept in digital competencies and capable of navigating complex technological ecosystems [3,20,21,22].

4.1.1. Emergence of New Roles and Skill Sets

As automation assumes responsibility for repetitive and hazardous tasks, there is a growing demand for professionals skilled in data analysis, machine learning, and systems integration. Roles such as BIM coordinators, drone operators, and IoT specialists are becoming increasingly prevalent, reflecting the industry’s shift towards a more technologically proficient workforce. This transition underscores the importance of reskilling and upskilling initiatives to equip existing workers with the necessary competencies to thrive in this new landscape. For instance, the World Economic Forum estimates that by 2025, 50% of all employees will need reskilling due to the adoption of new technologies, highlighting the urgency of continuous learning and adaptation [23,24,25,26,27].

4.1.2. Platform-Based Labour Models

A notable development within Construction 4.0 is the rise of platform-based labour models, including remote site management and app-based subcontracting. These models, reminiscent of gig economy structures, offer increased flexibility and efficiency but also introduce complexities regarding accountability, transparency, and workers’ rights in digitally mediated environments. The decentralisation of work facilitated by digital platforms necessitates a re-evaluation of traditional labour practices and the establishment of frameworks that ensure fair treatment and protection for all workers involved [28,29,30].

4.1.3. Global Disparities in Technological Adoption

While Construction 4.0 offers transformative potential, its adoption varies significantly across regions, particularly between developed and developing economies. In developing countries, challenges such as limited infrastructure, insufficient funding, and a shortage of skilled professionals hinder the widespread implementation of advanced construction technologies. For instance, a study assessing the readiness for Construction 4.0 technologies in Nigeria highlighted low awareness and adoption levels, primarily due to these barriers. Addressing these disparities is crucial to ensure that the benefits of digital transformation are equitably distributed across the global construction industry [31,32,33,34,35].

4.1.4. Challenges and Opportunities

While the integration of advanced technologies presents opportunities for increased productivity and efficiency, it also poses challenges related to workforce readiness and adaptation. The construction industry must address potential resistance to change, ensure equitable access to training programs, and develop strategies to mitigate job displacement risks. Collaborative efforts between industry stakeholders, educational institutions, and policymakers are essential to create supportive ecosystems that facilitate smooth transitions and promote inclusive growth [23,24,25,26,27,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38].

In summary, Construction 4.0 is fundamentally transforming the construction workforce, redefining job roles, and emphasising the need for digital proficiency. Proactive measures focused on education, training, and policy development are crucial to navigate this transformation successfully and to harness the full potential of technological advancements within the industry.

4.2. Attraction of New Generations and Women

The digital transformation underway in the construction industry presents a powerful opportunity to reshape its historically homogenous workforce. Construction 4.0 is not only changing how projects are delivered—it is also challenging long-standing assumptions about who participates in construction. Through the introduction of advanced technologies such as Building Information Modelling (BIM), digital twins, augmented reality (AR), and AI, the industry is gradually shifting away from its image as a physically demanding, male-dominated field toward one that is more knowledge-driven, tech-enabled, and inclusive of diverse demographics [22,23].

Several studies point to the emergence of new digital roles—such as data analysts, digital HR managers, BIM coordinators, and user-interface designers—which are inherently more accessible to women and younger professionals with backgrounds in ICT and design thinking [22]. These roles align with the broader automation trend that is phasing out low-skilled, repetitive labour while increasing demand for workers with digital competencies. In this context, Construction 4.0 creates an opening to broaden participation, reduce gender-based barriers, and attract the next generation of construction professionals.

However, our review highlights that technological advancement alone is not sufficient to deliver meaningful inclusion. Persistent structural barriers—including gender-biased recruitment practices, limited visibility of women in leadership, and unequal access to training opportunities—continue to inhibit the full participation of women and underrepresented groups. For example, although digital tools may reduce the physical burden of work, they do not address cultural norms and workplace dynamics that often exclude non-traditional participants from promotion, decision-making, or visibility in project leadership [22,39,40,41].

A novel contribution of this review is its emphasis on the disconnect between inclusion narratives and institutional realities. While many studies frame digitalisation as a pathway to diversity, relatively few critically examine the systems that prevent equitable access to these opportunities. This study underscores the importance of coupling digital innovation with intentional organisational and policy reforms, such as inclusive leadership development, mentorship programs, and targeted digital literacy initiatives.

This theme addresses both RQ1, by exploring how Construction 4.0 is altering workforce composition and participation patterns, and RQ3, by emphasising how the inclusive potential of digitalisation is unevenly realised across regions, institutions, and socio-economic contexts. Without deliberate action, digitalisation may reproduce existing inequalities in new, more technologically sophisticated forms.

4.3. Skill Development and Workforce Training

The acceleration of digital technologies across the construction industry has dramatically shifted the skillsets required of workers. As digitalisation becomes embedded in everyday operations—from on-site automation to cloud-based project management platforms—there is an urgent need to equip both current and future construction professionals with the competencies needed to thrive in a Construction 4.0 environment [22,23,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53].

This transformation requires not only technical knowledge (e.g., BIM, IoT integration, data analytics) but also adaptability, collaborative problem-solving, and digital literacy. Studies indicate that a large proportion of the construction workforce lacks sufficient training in these areas, posing a significant barrier to effective technology adoption [54]. In response, governments and industry organisations have begun launching targeted initiatives to address digital skill gaps. For example, Australia’s “Driving Digital Skills” program and the UK’s GBP 600 million investment in construction training are both aimed at upskilling workers to meet emerging demands [54,55].

However, our review reveals a deeper challenge: skills development initiatives are often fragmented and unequally distributed, particularly in lower-income regions and within small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Many programs target high-level professionals or focus solely on emerging roles, leaving behind large segments of the workforce—especially older workers, migrant labourers, and those in subcontracting roles.

A novel insight from our synthesis is the need for a lifelong, tiered skills strategy that goes beyond one-off training programs. This includes embedding digital literacy into vocational curricula, incentivising continued professional development (CPD), and ensuring that training is accessible across geographic and socio-economic boundaries [56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78].

This theme speaks directly to RQ2, addressing the preparedness of the workforce to adapt to technological change, and indirectly to RQ3, as skill development access is highly dependent on local infrastructure and institutional support.

4.4. Supply Chain and Logistics Optimisation

Construction 4.0 is not only transforming project delivery and workforce dynamics—it is also revolutionising supply chain and logistics management. Traditionally fragmented and reactive, construction supply chains are now increasingly supported by real-time data, automation, and predictive analytics, enabling greater efficiency, coordination, and risk mitigation [4,79].

A key enabler in this shift is digital twin technology, which allows for the creation of virtual models of construction projects that synchronise with physical progress on site. These digital environments support scenario simulation, real-time inventory tracking, and proactive disruption management, thereby improving the reliability and responsiveness of supply chains. Integration with the Internet of Things (IoT) and AI enhances this further by allowing the smart monitoring of materials, equipment, and logistics routes [80,81,82].

Our review finds that while the technical potential of digital supply chains is well documented, the organisational implications are underexplored. For example, many companies still struggle with data silos, a lack of interoperability between software platforms, and insufficient digital skills among procurement teams. Moreover, small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)—who form the backbone of global construction supply networks—often lack access to the capital and expertise needed to implement advanced logistics tools [81,83], Wan and Bai [84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91].

A novel contribution of this review is the identification of emerging decentralised logistics models, including platform-based supply coordination and blockchain-enabled procurement chains. These models suggest a shift toward collaborative, transparent, and digitally governed networks, which could significantly enhance resilience against disruptions such as pandemics, geopolitical shocks, and material shortages.

This theme responds primarily to RQ3 by illustrating how digital supply chain technologies both enable and depend upon regional infrastructure, institutional capacity, and policy frameworks.

4.5. Digital Twin Technology in Project Management

Digital twin technology is emerging as one of the most transformative innovations within Construction 4.0, offering a virtual mirror of physical construction assets that evolves in real time alongside the project. This enables more proactive and data-driven project management by allowing stakeholders to simulate construction processes, track progress, and identify issues before they escalate [92,93].

At its core, a digital twin integrates Building Information Modelling (BIM), IoT sensors, AI-based analytics, and cloud platforms to form a real-time digital replica of a construction asset. Unlike static BIM models, digital twins continuously update based on live data inputs from the field. This empowers project teams to anticipate delays, optimise schedules, and make decisions grounded in actual conditions rather than assumptions [94].

Our review reveals growing adoption of digital twins in large-scale infrastructure and commercial projects. These systems have been shown to enhance coordination between contractors and clients, reduce rework, and support lifecycle asset management by continuing to inform maintenance and operations post construction [95]. However, the implementation of digital twins requires significant investment, robust data governance protocols, and a cultural shift toward collaborative digital practices—challenges that remain under-addressed, particularly among SMEs and public sector projects.

A novel insight from this review is the growing use of digital twins for predictive safety and sustainability monitoring—for example, integrating environmental sensors into the twin to track energy use or monitor site air quality. Such applications move beyond project tracking to support holistic, strategic project management aligned with long-term performance goals [96,97].

This theme contributes directly to RQ2 by demonstrating how digitalisation is not merely a technological upgrade but a new paradigm for project delivery. It also has implications for RQ3, particularly in terms of the accessibility and scalability of digital twin implementation across different national and regional contexts.

4.6. Emergence of New Business Models

Construction 4.0 is not only transforming tools and processes—it is redefining the fundamental business models that underpin the construction industry. Traditional models based on linear, project-by-project delivery are giving way to data-driven, platform-based, and service-oriented approaches that place digital capability at the centre of value creation [98].

Digitalisation enables construction firms to move beyond delivering physical infrastructure toward offering integrated lifecycle services, such as digital facilities management, predictive maintenance, and embedded sustainability reporting. These models are facilitated by tools like BIM, digital twins, and IoT ecosystems that extend the contractor’s role from builder to long-term performance partner [23,99].

The shift towards digitalisation in construction is reshaping traditional employment models, raising important considerations regarding labour rights. Automation and the integration of advanced technologies may lead to job displacement for certain roles, necessitating proactive measures to protect affected workers. Implementing policies that promote reskilling and upskilling is essential to facilitate workforce transitions into new roles created by Construction 4.0. Moreover, ensuring that labour regulations evolve in tandem with technological advancements will help safeguard workers’ rights in this changing landscape [100,101].

Our review finds that many firms are experimenting with hybrid business models, combining core construction activities with offerings like software development, data analytics, and digital consulting. Some organisations have launched in-house technology incubators or partnered with start-ups to co-develop construction tech products, while others are creating digital platforms that connect clients, subcontractors, and suppliers in one coordinated environment [23,98,99,100,101].

However, this shift is not without challenges. Many construction firms—particularly small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)—face significant barriers to strategic transformation, including a lack of digital leadership, resource constraints, and resistance to cultural change. Moreover, the industry’s fragmented structure and reliance on subcontracting can hinder the integration of cross-organisational data, which is essential for these models to succeed [23,99].

A novel insight from this review is the identification of “ecosystem-based business models”, where construction firms operate not as isolated entities but as nodes in a digitally governed network. These models promote collaboration, transparency, and agility and may prove more resilient in the face of future disruptions such as pandemics, climate events, or geopolitical instability.

This theme speaks directly to RQ3, highlighting how Construction 4.0 is not only a technological phenomenon but also a driver of organisational innovation that varies significantly across regional and market contexts.

4.7. Safety and Risk Assessment

Construction 4.0 technologies play a pivotal role in enhancing sustainability and climate resilience within the industry. Tools such as Building Information Modelling (BIM) and digital twins enable more efficient resource management, reducing waste and minimising the environmental footprint of construction projects. Additionally, these technologies facilitate the design of structures that are better adapted to withstand climate-related challenges, contributing to the overall resilience of the built environment. Integrating sustainability considerations into safety and risk assessment frameworks ensures that construction projects not only prioritise worker safety but also promote environmental stewardship [102,103,104,105,106].

The integration of Construction 4.0 technologies has significantly advanced safety management and risk assessment practices across the construction industry. Traditionally, construction has been among the most hazardous sectors globally—characterised by high accident rates, reactive safety procedures, and the limited real-time visibility of site conditions. However, the adoption of tools such as AI-powered hazard detection, wearable sensors, digital twins, and augmented reality is shifting the paradigm from reactive to predictive and preventative safety strategies [102,107,108].

AI-driven systems are now capable of identifying safety risks in real time, using image recognition and machine learning to monitor site conditions, flag anomalies, and prioritise interventions [69]. For example, computer vision tools can scan video feeds from construction sites to detect workers not wearing PPE or identify unsafe scaffolding [109]. These insights can be automatically linked to alerts and dashboards, allowing safety officers to respond proactively rather than after incidents occur.

Digital twins enhance safety further by simulating construction sequences and stress-testing scenarios under different conditions. When integrated with environmental and physiological data from IoT devices or wearables, they can model heat stress risks, detect fatigue, or trigger evacuation protocols if thresholds are breached. These capabilities make risk assessment more dynamic, data-driven, and tailored to the specific project environment.

Despite these advances, our review highlights key limitations. Many organisations struggle with data overload, integration complexity, and privacy concerns—especially regarding the continuous tracking of workers. Additionally, adoption tends to be concentrated in high-budget, flagship projects, with SMEs often lacking the infrastructure or technical capacity to implement these tools at scale.

A novel insight from this study is the emerging use of AI-augmented safety audits and digital ethics protocols, which aim to balance data collection with worker consent, transparency, and trust. These developments mark a shift toward human-centred safety systems, where digital tools enhance—not replace—professional judgment and worker agency.

This theme answers RQ2, demonstrating how digitalisation is transforming the tools and processes of construction safety. It also contributes to RQ3, as the effectiveness and accessibility of these innovations remain uneven across different socio-economic and institutional contexts.

5. Discussion

This study provides a comprehensive and interdisciplinary synthesis of how Construction 4.0 is reshaping industrial relations, workforce structures, and organisational dynamics within the construction sector. By conducting a systematic thematic analysis of 100 peer-reviewed articles, we identified seven core themes that illustrate the scope and complexity of this transformation: (1) workforce transformation, (2) the attraction of new generations and women, (3) skill development and training, (4) supply chain optimisation, (5) digital twin technology, (6) the emergence of new business models, and (7) safety and risk assessment.

Taken together, these themes reveal a construction industry in flux—balancing innovation and disruption, promise and precarity. The digitisation of the built environment is not merely a technological upgrade but a socio-technical evolution with far-reaching consequences for labour, equity, and governance.

5.1. Responding to the Research Questions

Our findings provide clear responses to this study’s three research questions:

• RQ1: How is Construction 4.0 transforming labour practices and workforce identity in the construction sector?
  Across the reviewed literature, it is evident that Construction 4.0 is catalysing the emergence of new job roles centred on digital technologies, data analytics, and remote collaboration [22,23]. This transformation is altering the identity of the construction worker, with increasing emphasis on hybrid skillsets that combine traditional expertise with digital fluency. Moreover, platform-based labour models—facilitated by digital project coordination tools—are blurring the boundaries of employer–employee relationships, raising questions about industrial protections, worker surveillance, and algorithmic management [23].
• RQ2: To what extent is the current workforce equipped to engage with digital construction technologies?
  Although several training initiatives are emerging (e.g., Driving Digital Skills NSW; UK Construction Skills Fund), our review identified critical gaps in preparedness, especially among SMEs and workers with subcontracted or informal employment arrangements. Many firms lack formal digital training programs, while national policies have yet to mandate digital literacy as a core skill requirement. This misalignment creates an urgent need for lifelong learning frameworks, industry–academia collaboration, and policy incentives that promote inclusive upskilling.
• RQ3: What are the global, institutional, and socio-economic factors influencing the adoption of Construction 4.0?
  The benefits of Construction 4.0 are not evenly distributed. High-income countries and large multinational firms lead adoption, while developing countries and SMEs face systemic barriers, including limited infrastructure, skills shortages, and policy inertia. This uneven landscape raises concerns about a digital divide in construction innovation that could exacerbate global disparities in productivity, labour standards, and sustainability outcomes.

Figure 4 presents a heat-mapped matrix linking the seven core themes identified through the thematic synthesis to this study’s three research questions. The intensity of each cell reflects the degree of relevance, based on inductive coding frequency, thematic richness, and contextual alignment. Themes such as workforce transformation, skill development, and safety and risk assessment demonstrate strong alignment with RQ1 (Workforce and Industrial Relations) and RQ2 (Technological Transformation), while themes like supply chain optimisation and new business models exhibit particular resonance with RQ3 (Structural and Regional Contexts). This visual illustrates the interconnectedness of thematic findings and their contribution to a nuanced understanding of Construction 4.0’s socio-technical impact.

5.2. Thematic Interconnections and Emerging Contradictions

A key insight from our synthesis is that these themes are not discrete—they are deeply interconnected, with changes in one domain catalysing effects in others. The following are examples:

• The effectiveness of safety technologies (Theme 7) relies on adequate workforce training (Theme 3).
• The inclusive recruitment of women and younger generations (Theme 2) is necessary to sustain emerging business models (Theme 6).
• Supply chain optimisation (Theme 4) requires both digital infrastructure and skilled personnel to interpret and act on system outputs.

These interdependencies highlight the need for systems thinking in Construction 4.0 research and implementation.

We also identified several tensions in the literature:

• While automation is framed as democratising labour, it also risks exacerbating inequalities if not paired with institutional reforms.
• Digital business models increase flexibility yet may contribute to labour precarity, especially when traditional employment contracts are replaced with task-based subcontracting.
• Advanced tools like digital twins are celebrated for sustainability gains, but their high implementation costs make them inaccessible to many SMEs and public agencies—creating a risk of two-tier innovation.

5.3. Contributions to the Field

This study offers several novel contributions to the Construction 4.0 literature:

• Human-centred focus:
  While most reviews focus on technological capabilities, our study places the worker, organisation, and socio-political context at the centre of analysis. This shift offers new insights into labour relations, digital inclusion, and institutional transformation.
• Interdisciplinary integration:
  Drawing on sources across construction management, sociology, education, and policy, we offer a synthesis that bridges technical, organisational, and social domains.
• Global and ethical lens:
  By highlighting equity gaps between regions, genders, and firm sizes, we underscore the need for ethical digital transformation. Future progress must be inclusive, accountable, and responsive to the evolving needs of all workers.
• Research and practice alignment:
  Our findings call for closer alignment between research, training programs, and industry practice. The current disconnect between technological innovation and workforce readiness poses a major constraint on sustainable transformation.

5.4. Implications

The findings of this study hold significant implications for the future of the construction industry and the broader transition toward Construction 4.0.

5.4.1. Implications for Industry Practice

Construction firms must proactively invest in workforce development and organisational transformation to fully realise the benefits of digitalisation. This includes creating inclusive pathways for digital upskilling, redesigning roles around emerging technologies, and embedding safety and sustainability objectives into project delivery through tools like digital twins and AI. Furthermore, leadership must foster a digital culture that supports experimentation, cross-disciplinary collaboration, and ethical data use—especially as platform-based business models and algorithmic management structures gain traction.

5.4.2. Implications for Policy and Education

Policymakers have a critical role to play in ensuring an equitable and inclusive digital transition. National strategies should conduct the following:

• Mandate digital skills training in vocational and tertiary education;
• Provide funding and incentives for SMEs to adopt Construction 4.0 technologies;
• Update labour laws to protect rights within flexible, digitally mediated work structures.

Education providers should also rethink traditional curricula by integrating interdisciplinary content (e.g., construction + data analytics + ethics) and co-developing training with industry partners to ensure real-world relevance.

5.4.3. Implications for Future Research

There remains a need for longitudinal, empirical studies that examine the lived experiences of workers navigating Construction 4.0 transitions, particularly in underrepresented contexts such as the following:

• Developing economies;
• Informal labour markets;
• Women and migrant workers.

Moreover, future research should explore the governance of digital construction ecosystems, including questions of data ownership, algorithmic bias, and the ethical deployment of AI in labour management.

Table 1. Strategic implications of Construction 4.0 for industry, policy, and research.

Domain	Implication
Industry practice	Inclusive digital upskilling pathways
Industry practice	Redesign roles around emerging tech
Industry practice	Embed safety and sustainability (AI, digital twins)
Industry practice	Foster digital culture and ethical leadership
Policy and education	Mandate digital skills in education
Policy and education	Support SMEs with funding and incentives
Policy and education	Update labour laws for digital work
Policy and education	Integrate interdisciplinary curricula
Future research	Longitudinal studies on worker experience
Future research	Focus on informal/marginalised labour
Future research	Governance of digital construction ecosystems
Future research	Ethics of AI and algorithmic management

illustrates the strategic implications of Construction 4.0 for industry, policy, and research.

5.5. Future Research Agenda

While this study has synthesised major developments in the evolving relationship between Construction 4.0 and industrial relations, several areas remain underexplored and present rich opportunities for future investigation:

5.5.1. Labour Experience and Workforce Adaptation

More empirical, worker-centred studies are needed to understand how different groups within the construction workforce experience the digital transition. In particular, future studies could explore the following:

• How do older workers, migrant labourers, or those in informal economies navigate digital upskilling?
• What forms of resistance, stress, or adaptation arise in response to algorithmic supervision, automation, and remote work platforms?

Ethnographic and longitudinal research could provide valuable insight into how digital transformation affects workers’ identities, relationships, and well-being over time.

5.5.2. Global South and Low-Income Contexts

The vast majority of current research on Construction 4.0 is situated in high-income countries. Yet, the barriers, risks, and opportunities in low- and middle-income regions remain critically underexamined. Future research should explore the following:

• How contextual factors—such as infrastructure limitations, regulatory capacity, or education systems—shape Construction 4.0 adoption;
• How digital technologies might support equitable development, climate resilience, and informal labour transitions in these settings.

5.5.3. Ethics, Policy, and Governance of Construction 4.0

As Construction 4.0 tools increasingly mediate employment, productivity, and safety, questions of governance and ethics become more urgent. Future studies could investigate the following:

• How digital platforms impact labour protections and collective bargaining;
• What frameworks are needed to govern algorithmic decision-making in construction;
• How legal and ethical standards can evolve to ensure responsible digital transformation.

5.5.4. Gender, Inclusion, and Intersectionality

While some work has examined gender and generational change in construction, there is a need for more intersectional research that explores how race, migration status, disability, and socio-economic background intersect with digital inclusion. Future work could also investigate the following:

• The success of specific mentorship and recruitment programs in increasing participation;
• The cultural barriers that persist despite technological shifts.

5.5.5. Evaluating Impact at Scale

Finally, there is a need for robust evaluation frameworks to measure the impact of Construction 4.0 initiatives across projects, firms, and countries. This includes the following:

• Metrics for digital maturity;
• Benchmarks for workforce transformation;
• Cross-sector comparisons to evaluate what success looks like in practice.

Such studies could support policymakers and industry leaders in refining investment strategies and ensuring that digital transformation delivers both productivity gains and social value.

Table 2. Future research agenda for Construction 4.0: a compass for scholarly exploration.

Future Research Area	Key Research Gaps	Suggested Methods
Labour experience and workforce adaptation	Limited understanding of lived experiences, adaptation, and resistance to digitalisation	Longitudinal, ethnographic, and qualitative fieldwork
Global South and low-income contexts	Underrepresentation of developing countries and local constraints on tech adoption	Comparative case studies and contextual analysis
Ethics, policy, and governance of Construction 4.0	Lack of regulatory, ethical, and policy frameworks for emerging tech in labour management	Policy analysis and legal and ethical review
Gender, inclusion, and intersectionality	Insufficient intersectional research on digital inclusion and cultural barriers	Mixed methods with inclusive demographic sampling
Evaluating impact at scale	No standard frameworks to measure impact, maturity, or long-term transformation	Cross-national benchmarking and framework development

maps five strategic research domains that emerged from the thematic synthesis, highlighting underexplored areas critical to the equitable and effective digital transformation of the construction industry. These include the following: (1) labour experience and workforce adaptation, (2) the unique challenges and opportunities in Global South and low-income contexts, (3) the ethical and governance implications of digital construction technologies, (4) intersectional inclusion with a focus on gender, race, and socio-economic status, and (5) robust frameworks for evaluating Construction 4.0 impact at scale. Together, these zones offer a navigational tool for future empirical, interdisciplinary, and policy-relevant research.

6. Conclusions

This study presents a comprehensive and critical synthesis of how Construction 4.0 is reshaping industrial relations, workforce composition, and organisational models within the global construction industry. Through the systematic review of 100 peer-reviewed publications and a thematic analysis of emerging patterns, we identified seven core themes that reflect both the promise and complexity of digital transformation: workforce transformation; the attraction of new generations and women; skill development and training; supply chain optimisation; digital twin integration; the emergence of new business models; and evolving approaches to safety and risk.

Our findings respond to three key research questions by demonstrating that Construction 4.0 is accomplishing the following:

• Fundamentally altering the identity and role of the construction workforce;
• Creating uneven challenges and opportunities in terms of digital readiness and inclusion;
• Driving systemic changes in business models, project governance, and labour dynamics, particularly across diverse global contexts.

This study highlights critical tensions between innovation and inequality, showcasing that digital technologies—while powerful—must be supported by institutional reform, inclusive policies, and ethical frameworks to deliver their full social potential. Without deliberate intervention, the benefits of Construction 4.0 risk being unevenly distributed, reinforcing existing disparities in gender, geography, and organisational scale.

By shifting the analytical lens from purely technical to socio-technical, this review contributes to a more holistic and human-centred understanding of the construction sector’s digital future. It provides actionable insights for industry leaders, educators, and policymakers aiming to build a workforce that is not only technologically capable but also empowered, resilient, and inclusive.

Future research should build on this foundation by exploring the lived experiences of digital transformation across varied regions and populations and by developing governance models that ensure Construction 4.0 leads to progress—not just productivity.