循環型建設におけるBIMとデジタルツインの統合：ライフサイクル分断への対応

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:BIM/DTと循環経済の統合に関するライフサイクル横断の研究ギャップと、実証・相互運用性の不足を整理した枠組みを提供する。

🏢実務担当者:設計段階に偏りがちなBIM/DT活用を運用・維持管理・解体段階へ拡張し、マテリアルパスポートや解体前監査のデータ基盤整備を優先すべきと示唆する。

🏛政策担当者:循環型デジタルツールの普及には任意導入ではなく、相互運用性・標準化された循環指標・マテリアルパスポート基盤に関する強制力ある基準とインセンティブが必要と提言する。

The construction sector faces increasing pressure to transition toward circular economy (CE) practices to reduce material waste, embodied carbon, and lifecycle environmental impacts. Digital construction technologies from construction 4.0, particularly building information modeling (BIM) and digital twins (DTs), are widely promoted as key enablers of this transition. However, the current body of knowledge remains fragmented, with limited clarity on how BIM and DT collectively support circular strategies across the building lifecycle. This study aims to systematically synthesize and clarify how digital technologies enable CE implementation across lifecycle stages and identify where integration remains weak. A PRISMA-guided review was conducted using Scopus as the primary database. The search strategy was structured around three dimensions: WHAT (digital technologies), TO WHAT (lifecycle phases), and FOR WHAT (circular objectives). A total of 266 peer-reviewed studies were included following screening and eligibility assessment. The review synthesizes frameworks, tools, and application patterns that link BIM, DTs, and complementary construction 4.0 technologies to CE outcomes. The results reveal three insights. First, digital-enabled circular construction remains design-centric, with limited continuity into operation, maintenance, and end-of-life stages. Second, advanced capabilities such as artificial intelligence, predictive analytics, and IoT-enabled feedback are underused for lifecycle-wide circular optimization. Third, interoperable and empirically validated BIM–DT ecosystems are scarce, and context-sensitive implementation frameworks remain underdeveloped. This review relies on Scopus as the sole database, and although justified on its coverage basis, this introduces potential source-selection bias; future syntheses should triangulate with WoS and other databases like Google Scholar. No formal quality-appraisal instrument was applied, consistent with the review’s configurative aim, and the final list of studies remains weighted toward conceptual work and single-project pilots rather than validated, multiproject deployments. Future research should also prioritize longitudinal and multiproject validation of integrated BIM–DT ecosystems, interoperable data infrastructures supporting material passports and predemolition audits, and closer alignment between digital evidence and procurement, certification, and regulatory mechanisms. The findings indicate that circularity cannot be achieved through isolated digital upgrades to BIM or DTs alone; it requires coordinated transformation of workflows, cross-phase data governance and market engagement. Practitioners should prioritize extending digital tools beyond design into operation, maintenance, and end-of-life decision-making, where circular value is most effectively retained but currently underexplored. For policymakers, the results highlight the need to activate digital circular tools through enforceable standards and incentives rather than voluntary adoption, particularly around interoperability, standardized circular indicators and material-passport infrastructure. By clarifying how BIM and DTs can support CE practices across a building’s full lifecycle, this review contributes to reducing construction waste and embodied carbon, extending the useful life of building stock and supporting more resource-efficient urban development. As cities continue to urbanize and existing buildings age, coordinated digital-circular strategies can help reduce landfill burden and reliance on virgin material extraction, offering long-term benefits for environmental quality and the sustainability of the built environment. This review presents a lifecycle-oriented synthesis integrating technologies, lifecycle phases, and circularity objectives into a unified analytical framework, providing a structured foundation for future research, policy alignment, and practice-oriented digital strategies in circular construction.

• semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-04-2026-0235first seen 2026-10-02 05:34:31