Readiness of Regions for Digitalization of the Construction Complex

Abstract

The construction industry is high-tech and is one of the key areas for the strategic development of regions in terms of their digitalization. The construction complex provides regions with infrastructure of various levels from design documentation to commissioning, as well as reconstruction and major repairs of buildings. The article adopts an isolated regional approach, which is due to the need to assess specific territories by the level of readiness for digitalization of the construction complex. The purpose of the research is to determine the level of readiness of Russian regions for the digitalization of the construction complex by forming a rating of regions according to the indicator “the level of readiness of the region for digitalization of the construction complex”. To build the rating, the fuzzy sets method was applied using a triangular membership function, which allows to describe the influence of various processes on the formation of digitalization processes in the construction complex of the region. When forming the rating, a scale of fuzzy variable values is set which allows one to classify regions by levels, namely very low, low, medium, high, and very high. The generated rating is illustrated according to the specified scale. Based on the rating, the leading regions and outsider regions are identified by the formed indicator. It was determined that Moscow and Saint Petersburg are highly prepared for the digitalization of their construction complexes, and 53 regions of Russia are potentially prepared. In the future, it will be possible to create a rating of Russian regions on the level of readiness for digitalization of the construction complex with a two-year lag. Then, using the DEA shell analysis method, a quantitative assessment will be carried out that allows you to form performance boundaries and, against the background of four years, adjust the data to identify the most realistic picture. Also, the rating methodology considered by the authors allows us to scale this research to the international level, which will allow us to assess the level of digital development of construction complexes in other countries. The proposed rating algorithm is suitable for other sectors and complexes of the economy. It is enough to determine the main aggregate indicator and select groups of factors.

Analyzing the Level of Digitalization among the Enterprises of the European Union Member States and Their Impact on Economic Growth

“…With regard to this area, it can be helpful to use solutions contained in the concept of open innovation, which in the light of the digitalization of companies can be a driving force and significantly accelerate this process [100]. In the light of the conducted research, countries of the so called "new union" seem to be an ideal area where digitalization is at a low level and the implementation of the IO concept gives great opportunities to benefit from the experience of other countries and companies [101][102][103]. The application and inclusion of the IO concept in the development strategy of this region should enable its rapid development and entry into new markets, while stimulating the activities of the "old union" countries (synergy phenomenon).…”

Antifragile Philosophy in R&D Projects: Applying Q Methodology and the Possibility of Open Innovation

“…Alternatively, Q-Methodology can also be integrated in the value chain of other methodologies. Some applicable cases would include generating the input set for system dynamics analysis such as the those performed in entrepreneurship assessment [46] or the complementation of strictly indicator-based works [47,48]. For the later type of research, the opinion of policy makers and R&D agents would allow visualizing not only what is strictly bound to indicators but also the feeling of the open innovation community.…”

Development of Approaches and Organizational Models for the Mass Implementation of Information Modeling Technologies in the Investment and Construction Sphere

“…Key factors blocking mass implementation of BIM technologies according to a 2019 survey (CONCU-RATOR 2019) included the high overall cost of obtaining and implementing technologies, limited availability of qualified professionals, and insufficient regulatory basis for using the technology. Other factors included limited owner and investor demand displayed during the construction tenders, and the contradictory system of national standards regarding the matter (Tereshko et al 2021;Blinov and Belyaeva 2020). Key advantages of implementing and using BIM in Russia perceived by the survey participants (CONCURATOR 2019) included improved understanding of project goals and deliverables by stakeholders (70-72%), improvement of work quality and overall project implementation (72-74%), and data availability and accelerated data exchange (60-61%).…”