Table 5 Stakeholder-specific blockchain... | Emerald Publishing

Table 5

Stakeholder-specific blockchain adoption drivers across CSCs

Stakeholder group	Principal adoption drivers	Relevant blockchain mechanisms	Expected stakeholder value	Supporting studies
Clients, owners and public procuring authorities	Limited supply-chain visibility; weak accountability; quality and provenance risks; procurement, sustainability and regulatory oversight	Shared permissioned ledger; provenance records; smart contracts; auditable lifecycle data	Improved oversight, compliance, quality assurance and lifecycle accountability	Wang et al. (2020), Elghaish et al. (2023), Lee et al. (2023), Eze and Ameyaw (2025), Tezel et al. (2021)
Main contractors and project managers	Coordination failures; unreliable progress information; procurement inefficiency; contractual and quality-control risks	Real-time shared records; BIM–blockchain integration; automated verification; smart contracts	Better coordination, schedule visibility, procurement control and reduced administrative burden	Wang et al. (2020), Amiri Ara et al. (2022), Lee et al. (2023), Heydari et al. (2024), Xu et al. (2025)
Subcontractors and SMEs	Delayed, partial or non-payment; retention; financing costs; limited visibility and bargaining power	Escrow arrangements; project bank accounts; milestone-triggered payment; immutable transaction records	Payment security, faster settlement, lower financing risk and more equitable participation	Hamledari and Fischer (2021), Nanayakkara et al. (2021), Wang et al. (2021), Tezel et al. (2021)
Suppliers and manufacturers	Poor demand visibility; inventory risk; supplier verification; material provenance and quality requirements	Product provenance records; shared demand information; digital identities; IoT-linked traceability	Improved forecasting, reduced inventory costs, verified credentials and stronger market access	Wang et al. (2020), Xu et al. (2023), Li et al. (2022), Sun et al. (2024), Wang et al. (2025a)
Logistics and transport providers	Fragmented shipment information; cross-border supervision; delivery disputes; pressure to share timely data	Time-stamped logistics records; blockchain-IoT tracking; permissioned access; reputation and incentive mechanisms	Improved shipment coordination, evidence for dispute resolution and enhanced service reliability	Wang et al. (2020), Wu et al. (2022), Amiri Ara et al. (2022), Lee et al. (2023)
Designers, engineers and professional consultants	Disconnected design and supply-chain information; change-control problems; verification and certification burdens	BIM–blockchain integration; immutable approval records; reusable digital product information; smart-contract validation	Reliable design information, traceable decisions and more efficient professional verification	Luo et al. (2019), Elghaish et al. (2023), Li et al. (2022), Zhou (2024)
Regulators, auditors and certification bodies	Weak auditability; compliance failures; unreliable certification and environmental records	Tamper-evident compliance records; digital certificates; auditable material and environmental data	Stronger regulatory oversight, evidence verification and enforcement	Zhang and Teng (2022), Eze and Ameyaw (2025), Ma et al. (2024), Wang et al. (2025a)
Technology providers and data intermediaries	Disconnected platforms; unreliable off-chain data; system-security and interoperability requirements	APIs; digital identities; blockchain oracles; BIM–IoT–digital-twin integration	Interoperable and verifiable multi-organisational digital infrastructure	Lu et al. (2021), Li et al. (2022), Sarkar et al. (2023), Zhou (2024)
Financiers, insurers and investors	Separation of physical and financial flows; limited project visibility; financing and transaction risks	Escrow; tokenisation; automated settlement; verified progress records	Greater transaction visibility, more secure fund release and alternative financing opportunities	Hamledari and Fischer (2021), Tezel et al. (2021)
Asset operators and circular-economy actors	Loss of lifecycle information; uncertain component provenance; waste and recovery inefficiencies	Material passports; lifecycle ledgers; ownership-transfer records; circular-material platforms	Improved maintenance information, reuse decisions, waste traceability and residual-value recovery	Elghaish et al. (2023), Rocco (2023), Ma et al. (2024)

Stakeholder group	Principal adoption drivers	Relevant blockchain mechanisms	Expected stakeholder value	Supporting studies
Clients, owners and public procuring authorities	Limited supply-chain visibility; weak accountability; quality and provenance risks; procurement, sustainability and regulatory oversight	Shared permissioned ledger; provenance records; smart contracts; auditable lifecycle data	Improved oversight, compliance, quality assurance and lifecycle accountability	Wang et al. (2020), Elghaish et al. (2023), Lee et al. (2023), Eze and Ameyaw (2025), Tezel et al. (2021)
Main contractors and project managers	Coordination failures; unreliable progress information; procurement inefficiency; contractual and quality-control risks	Real-time shared records; BIM–blockchain integration; automated verification; smart contracts	Better coordination, schedule visibility, procurement control and reduced administrative burden	Wang et al. (2020), Amiri Ara et al. (2022), Lee et al. (2023), Heydari et al. (2024), Xu et al. (2025)
Subcontractors and SMEs	Delayed, partial or non-payment; retention; financing costs; limited visibility and bargaining power	Escrow arrangements; project bank accounts; milestone-triggered payment; immutable transaction records	Payment security, faster settlement, lower financing risk and more equitable participation	Hamledari and Fischer (2021), Nanayakkara et al. (2021), Wang et al. (2021), Tezel et al. (2021)
Suppliers and manufacturers	Poor demand visibility; inventory risk; supplier verification; material provenance and quality requirements	Product provenance records; shared demand information; digital identities; IoT-linked traceability	Improved forecasting, reduced inventory costs, verified credentials and stronger market access	Wang et al. (2020), Xu et al. (2023), Li et al. (2022), Sun et al. (2024), Wang et al. (2025a)
Logistics and transport providers	Fragmented shipment information; cross-border supervision; delivery disputes; pressure to share timely data	Time-stamped logistics records; blockchain-IoT tracking; permissioned access; reputation and incentive mechanisms	Improved shipment coordination, evidence for dispute resolution and enhanced service reliability	Wang et al. (2020), Wu et al. (2022), Amiri Ara et al. (2022), Lee et al. (2023)
Designers, engineers and professional consultants	Disconnected design and supply-chain information; change-control problems; verification and certification burdens	BIM–blockchain integration; immutable approval records; reusable digital product information; smart-contract validation	Reliable design information, traceable decisions and more efficient professional verification	Luo et al. (2019), Elghaish et al. (2023), Li et al. (2022), Zhou (2024)
Regulators, auditors and certification bodies	Weak auditability; compliance failures; unreliable certification and environmental records	Tamper-evident compliance records; digital certificates; auditable material and environmental data	Stronger regulatory oversight, evidence verification and enforcement	Zhang and Teng (2022), Eze and Ameyaw (2025), Ma et al. (2024), Wang et al. (2025a)
Technology providers and data intermediaries	Disconnected platforms; unreliable off-chain data; system-security and interoperability requirements	APIs; digital identities; blockchain oracles; BIM–IoT–digital-twin integration	Interoperable and verifiable multi-organisational digital infrastructure	Lu et al. (2021), Li et al. (2022), Sarkar et al. (2023), Zhou (2024)
Financiers, insurers and investors	Separation of physical and financial flows; limited project visibility; financing and transaction risks	Escrow; tokenisation; automated settlement; verified progress records	Greater transaction visibility, more secure fund release and alternative financing opportunities	Hamledari and Fischer (2021), Tezel et al. (2021)
Asset operators and circular-economy actors	Loss of lifecycle information; uncertain component provenance; waste and recovery inefficiencies	Material passports; lifecycle ledgers; ownership-transfer records; circular-material platforms	Improved maintenance information, reuse decisions, waste traceability and residual-value recovery	Elghaish et al. (2023), Rocco (2023), Ma et al. (2024)

Source(s): Table created by the authors