Factors driving consumer adoption of smart and green building materials: the role of civil engineers and architects

ABSTRACT

This study aims to investigate the role of civil engineers and architects in driving consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India. A mixed-method approach is employed, including quantitative surveys of 350 consumers and qualitative interviews with 30 civil engineers and architects. The data are analyzed using descriptive, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), and thematic analysis. Income acts as a moderating variable influencing the consumers in adoption. Civil engineers and architects use innovative marketing strategies, public education campaigns, and consumer involvement in decision-making. However, various barriers such as initial costs, limited availability, lack of expertise, and complex regulations prevent widespread adoption. The qualitative analysis highlighted the environmental benefit as the most relevant factor, increasing awareness and providing education as the most powerful strategy. Conversely, the lack of a uniform rating system and certification system is the most critical challenge affecting the adoption of these materials from a consumer behaviour perspective. Therefore, the study recommended incentivising green building materials, promote knowledge via professional development, and expedite regulatory procedures to encourage widespread use. The study uses civil engineers and architects as consumer acceptability influencers to help policymakers create a smart and green building material consumption roadmap.

KEYWORDS:

• Eco-friendly building materials
• green building materials
• mixed methods research
• sustainable construction
• consumer behaviour

1. Introduction

Smart building materials refer to the technologically advanced materials created to improve the functionality and efficiency of buildings (Ejidike and Mewomo 2023). On the other side, green building materials are eco-friendly materials that reduce environmental impact throughout a building’s lifecycle (Khoshnava et al. 2020). In recent years, there is a noticeable surge in the popularity of smart and green building materials for construction. According to a report by Fortune Business Insights published in 2023, the global market for green building materials is anticipated to expand from US $422.27 billion in 2023 to US $951.15 billion by 2030, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12.3% from 2023 to 2030. Smart and green building materials are gaining popularity for various reasons such as, increased environmental awareness of the people, technical advancements, government regulations and green certifications. This rising popularity of smart and green building materials implies a notable shift toward construction methods and materials that are eco-friendly and energy-saving. In recent years, there has been a considerable shift in consumer behaviour towards smart and green building materials. As concerns about sustainability and energy efficiency rise, consumers are prioritising environmentally friendly options when it comes to construction and home renovation projects. The main drivers for this change are cost-effectiveness, environmental benefits, aesthetics, and functional advantages (Barbu et al. 2022). These factors have a big impact on how consumers perceive green building materials. Cost-effectiveness guarantees affordability and environmental benefits support sustainability objectives. Rapid urbanisation and rising environmental concerns have substantially expanded the awareness of the usage of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru. As the demand for environmental sustainability and energy-efficient solutions is recognized and accepted, more and more people and businesses are implementing these materials in their building and construction projects. Bengaluru consumers are becoming more aware of the long term benefits of these technology, including cheaper utility costs and a lower carbon footprint. According to a report by Knight Frank India, Bengaluru has 90,10,595 sq ft area of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified buildings (Livemint 2022). Similarly, green building materials have gained popularity in Bengaluru due to their environmental benefits. Consumers are favoring materials with less harmful environmental consequences and more longevity, such bamboo, recycled steel, and wood from sustainable sources (Rajasekar et al. 2023). Consumers are placing an increasing emphasis on resource conservation, waste reduction, and the enhancement of living conditions. They are actively looking for products with certifications like LEED and IGBC (Indian Green Building Council) to ensure the sustainability of their projects. The Bengaluru city has registered the highest number of gold-certified buildings accounting for 12 buildings during the Jan to Oct 2022 period in India (Source: Livemint (2022, November 16). NCR has highest gross floor area of LEED certified buildings). Hence, Bengaluru indicates a positive shift towards more environmentally and personally advantageous construction methods. The construction industry greatly relies on the perception and expertise of civil engineers and architects, these professionals help shape consumer’s behaviour towards adopting green and smart building materials. Therefore, it is essential to understand the perception of civil engineers and architects on the approach consumers take to adapt these types of building materials. The perceptions of civil engineers and architects, especially on critical details that can affect the acceptance of smart and green building materials such as the challenges, strategy, and recommendations – can significantly help in promoting its use. This study is unique in terms of its contribution to under.

2. Aim of the study

This study has two distinct objectives: (I) The study investigates consumers regarding the factors influencing their adoption of smart and green building materials, encompassing general factors, strategies, and challenges using a quantitative approach. (II) This study investigates the role of civil engineers and architects in driving consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India by using qualitative research approach.

The study mainly addresses the following research questions. (i) What factors drive consumer behavior and the adoption of smart and green building materials? (ii) What challenges are perceived by consumers while adopting smart and green building materials? (iii) How do civil engineers and architects perceive, promote awareness and encourage the adoption of smart and green building materials among consumers?

3. Literature review

3.1. Factors affecting consumer behaviour towards smart and green building materials

Cost-effectiveness is a significant factor for consumers when choosing building materials (Samosir et al. 2020). Smart and green building materials may cost more at first, but they end up being financially beneficial in the long term. Consumers value them for their energy efficiency, longer building lifespan, and increased property value. Environmental benefits are yet another crucial factor that influences the consumer behaviour (Khoshnava et al. 2020). As awareness of climate change and the necessity for sustainable practices increases, consumers are turning more and more towards environmentally friendly building materials (X. Zhang and Dong 2020). Aesthetics have a significant role in influencing consumer behaviour as well (Y. Zhang, Song, and Luo 2023). Consumers want products that help them save money, protect the environment, and enhance the aesthetics of their homes and buildings (Y. Zhang, Song, and Luo 2023). Consumers choose aesthetically appealing building materials while maintaining their commitment to sustainable choices. Additionally, functional advantages are critical factors influencing consumer behaviour towards smart and green building materials (Ejidike and Mewomo 2023). Consumers prefer high-performance smart and green building materials for their buildings because they see the value in how these materials can improve their living spaces.

3.2. Role of civil engineers and architects in affecting consumer behaviour towards green and smart building materials

Researchers (Gu et al. 2023; Mukherjee, Deepmala, and Sandhu 2023; S. Sun 2021; Xiang et al. 2022) have found that civil engineers and architects have a big impact on consumer acceptance of smart and green building materials. Architects influence consumer behaviour towards adoption of smart and green building materials in several ways. Akadiri and Olomolaiye (2012) along with Isah et al. (2018) emphasize the architect’s part in appraising and selecting sustainable building materials. Architects employ strategies of knowledge management to select green building material. Civil engineers impact customer attitudes and behaviors toward eco-friendly building materials in many ways. Jia-Yao (2021) emphasizes the use of green construction materials in civil engineering to prevent resource depletion and ecological deterioration. Civil engineers demonstrate leadership and explain the multiple benefits of green building materials to influence customers by seamlessly incorporating them into their projects. Civil engineers and architects play a crucial role in promoting the adoption of smart and green building materials by informing consumers about their long-term benefits, including energy efficiency, durability, and positive environmental impact. This information is delivered through workshops, consultations, and presentations that feature real-world examples and success stories (White, Habib, and Hardisty 2019). Civil engineers and architects collaborate with suppliers and manufacturers to ensure the accessibility and affordability of smart and green building materials (Mukherjee, Deepmala, and Sandhu 2023). By promoting the development and production of these materials, they expand consumer choices and access to sustainable solutions, contributing to the collective effort of various stakeholders, including civil engineers and architects, in influencing consumer behavior towards green and smart building materials (Wen and Qiang 2022). They influence consumer perceptions and attitudes towards sustainable solutions by actively marketing green and smart building materials (Weniger, Del Rosario, and Backes 2023). Stakeholders change consumer behaviour by increasing awareness and providing education through social media by writing informative posts, sharing case studies and success stories, hosting live Q&A sessions, sharing relevant articles and videos, and interacting with followers (Y. Sun and Xing 2022). Access to this information empowers consumers to make informed decisions based on reliable data, which encourages them to prioritise sustainability in their construction choices. Stakeholders influenced consumer behaviour by displaying successful case studies and real examples of buildings that have effectively incorporated smart and green materials (Kirby, Inacio, and Delai 2023). By highlighting the benefits of these materials through specific and accessible examples, they provide consumers with solid evidence of the positive outcomes that can be achieved. This example of success encourages customers to adopt new products and technology. By emphasizing the durability and longevity of smart and green building materials, civil engineers persuade consumers regarding the cost-effectiveness and encourage their usage. Stakeholders influence consumer behaviour by actively involving consumers in the decision-making process (White, Habib, and Hardisty 2019). Engaging consumers through presentations and seminars allows civil engineers and architects to address concerns and expectations, fostering a participatory approach that enhances the likelihood of consumer adoption of green and smart building materials. Additionally, civil engineers and architects influence consumer behavior by securing green certifications such as LEED and BREEAM, showcasing their commitment to sustainability.

3.3. Influence of awareness on the adoption of smart and green building materials in India

Although the concept of sustainability has evolved over the years, there is a vast community in India which is unaware of the green building concept and its benefits. Therefore, currently, the concept of green building is in its formative stage (Kulshresth 2020). This is reflected in the lack of enthusiasm to adopt smart and green building materials by all stakeholders in Indian construction ecosystem. Majority of the materials used for construction are traditional and only 0.7% of constructed projects are “green certificated” in Pune city (Dewalkar et al. 2016). The primary hindrances in the adoption of smart and green building materials are a lack of awareness among stakeholders and knowledge about sustainable construction practices and materials (Durdyev et al. 2018). Therefore, there is a substantial need for increasing the promotion of smart and green building materials adoption.

3.4. Perceived challenges in the adoption of smart and green building materials in India’s construction industry

One of the main challenges is the high initial cost of these materials (Saha et al. 2021). Smart and green building materials are usually made using advanced technology and eco-friendly manufacturing processes, which raises production costs, particularly in the startup stage. This cost barrier prevents many developers, especially those on limited budgets, from using these materials widely. Another challenge is the limited availability and accessibility of smart and green building materials in the Indian market (Abraham and Gundimeda 2018). Furthermore, logistic difficulties and weak distribution networks make it difficult to get these supplies in remote places. The lack of knowledge and experience among industry stakeholders is also a problem (Saha et al. 2021). Majority of architects, engineers, and contractors are unaware of the advantages and technical characteristics of smart and green building materials (Dewalkar et al. 2016). These experts are reluctant to employ these materials without the appropriate training due to worries about unfamiliarity, compatibility, and performance. Another obstacle to the use of sustainable construction materials is the absence of government regulations and incentives (Gounder et al. 2021). These concerns arise from issues such as unclear guidelines, complex permit processes, and insufficient government incentives that pose obstacles to the integration of eco-friendly materials. Furthermore, the fragmented nature of the construction industry makes it difficult to employ smart and green building materials (Pramanik et al. 2021). It becomes challenging to promote collaboration and align the interests of diverse construction stakeholders (governmental agencies, suppliers, contractors, and developers), especially when introducing innovative and unfamiliar materials. Technical challenges with installation and maintenance are another barrier to the use of smart and green building materials (Dewalkar et al. 2016). These materials usually require specific knowledge and skills to install, use, and maintain which hinders the consumer adoption process. Finally, it is concerning that there is not a standardized certification and rating system for eco-friendly and smart construction materials. Mayhoub et al. (2021) emphasize how crucial it is to have an assessment framework that complies with well-established green building rating standards in order to guarantee consistency and dependability when evaluating the qualities of these building materials. Without the proper certification, it becomes challenging for consumers to evaluate the dependability and performance of these materials.

3.5. Empirical studies and it’s outcomes of eco-friendly building materials

Ayarkwa et al., (2022) aimed to analyse the challenges in the adoption of sustainable building processes by surveying 200 Ghanaian construction industry professionals. Insufficient training and education, lack of familiarity with eco-friendly technologies, and the higher initial expenses associated with green construction practices and materials have been identified as significant obstacles to the adoption. Marsh et al., (2021) surveyed 108 participants in the South African construction industry, revealing that factors such as increased awareness, knowledge, enthusiasm, training, and education positively influence the adoption of sustainable building practices. However, the study identified significant barriers, with implementation costs standing out as a major obstacle to the widespread adoption of sustainable building practices. Xie et al., (2023) aimed to examine the influence of self-face awareness (SA) on green construction behaviour and its impact on green building plant performance. A survey of 407 employees and managers of construction project teams revealed that perceived behavioural control and self-face awareness were key factors promoting green construction. Eze et al. (2023) examined the primary obstacles hindering the integration of sustainable/green building materials, specifically focusing on Nigeria by surveying 135 key players in the construction industry. The study identified several factors hindering the adoption: resistance and information barriers, regulatory and R&D funding constraints, cost and market challenges, government incentives and supplier availability, and barriers linked to green building professionals’ expertise and the labour force.

3.6. Conceptual framework

In consideration of the information derived from the existing research, the following conceptual framework has been developed and shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the study.

Source: Own.

Figure 1 illustrates a holistic conceptual model in which mixed methods research is presented in a single diagram, focusing on both quantitative and qualitative aspects in this study. The consumer adoption of smart and green building materials is influenced by various factors, including those affecting consumer behavior, challenges impeding adoption, and the role of civil engineers and architects in influencing consumer adoption.

4. Material and methods

The epistemology research paradigm and the pragmatism research philosophy were chosen for this study due to the presence of knowledge and the need to verify the information using statistical methods. Herein, to understand the variation in consumer adoption, the linkage is developed between variables, thus an explanatory research design was used.

4.1. Data type

The study employed a mixed research methodology to assess both consumer perceptions and the perspectives of influential construction stakeholders, namely civil engineers and architects. Quantitative data: This study deploys quantitative data to ascertain the factors, strategies, and challenges influencing consumer adoption of smart and green building materials. To achieve this, a survey targeting consumers of construction materials, specifically residents of Bengaluru city in India was surveyed.

Qualitative data: The study also uses qualitative data to discover the perception of civil engineers and architects on consumers adoption behavior of smart and green building materials. Among various stakeholders, civil engineers and architects were most influential on consumers with regard to adoption of building materials.

4.2. Data collection method

Quantitative study: The consumers were reached using online and offline (face-to-face) surveys to get the information on various factors influencing the adoption of smart and green building materials.

Qualitative study:The face-to-face interviews with civil engineers and architects were carried out, comprehensively capturing their perceptions and attitudes through meticulous documentation of their interview. The stakeholders were contacted by shortlisting the construction companies who were using smart and green building materials along with usage of traditional building materials. Only individuals with at least 1 year of work experience in the construction business were chosen

4.3. Sampling plan

Quantitative study: Purposive sampling was used to collect data for quantitative analysis (consumer survey) to ensure each participant provided meaningful information. A sample size of 400 respondents were selected in Bangalore, India. Out of the 400 customers contacted, only 363 responded despite multiple follow-ups. After thorough data cleaning, the sample size of the study was reduced to 350 respondents.

Qualitative study: Purposeful sampling was employed among civil engineers and architects who have experience using traditional, smart, green, and sustainable building materials. This study has incorporated the concept of data saturation technique.

As per the data saturation technique, the interview process completion and receiving information without any new data suggest that the sampling is complete (Shah, Mehta, and Shah 2024). The data saturation is achieved after interviews from 27 respondents; however, we conducted three extra interviews to confirm data saturation. Thus, the sample size for qualitative study conducted among civil engineers and architects is 30. Furthermore, grounded theory in qualitative studies advocates a sample size ranging from 20 to 30 interviews, thereby reinforcing the adequacy of our chosen sample size (Marshall et al. 2013). Among the 30 respondents, 60% (18) were designated as civil engineers and 40% (12) were architects.

4.4. Questionnaire

Quantitative data: A closed-end questionnaire was formulated for the quantitative survey, consisting of three sections: demographic, background, and inferential. The demographic section consisted of questions on demographic characteristics such as age, gender, or income; the background section included questions on the knowledge of consumers about green and sustainable materials; and the inferential section had questions related to study objectives, i.e. strategies, factors, challenges, and consumer adoption of materials. A 5-point Likert scale was used for the survey where 1 represents a strongly disagree and 5 is a strongly agree.

Qualitative data: On the other hand, an open-ended questionnaire was used for the qualitative interview, having demographic and interview questions. The themes were selected based on the study objectives, civil engineers and architects were contacted for interview scheduling, and face-to-face interviews were conducted.

4.5. Data analysis method and Hypothesis

Quantitative data analysis: With the collected data from consumers, the quantitative analysis was examined using SPSS. Frequency analysis was used to analyse demography and background information of participants and CFA and SEM were used to understand awareness about smart and green building materials. Further, to determine the role of civil engineers and architects in the adoption of these materials, the below-stated hypotheses were tested at a 5% level of significance.

H₀₁: Factors do not significantly influence consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India.

H_A1: Factors significantly influence consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India.

H₀₂: Strategies and practices employed by civil engineers and architects do not significantlyinfluence awareness and consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India.

H_A2: Strategies and practices employed by civil engineers and architects significantly influence awareness and consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India.

H₀₃: Challenges do not have a significant influence on the consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in the construction industry in Bengaluru, India.

H_A3: Challenges have a significant influence on the consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in the construction industry in Bengaluru, India.

For testing the above-stated hypotheses, SEM analysis was performed using SPSS AMOS software.

Qualitative data analysis: Textual analysis and text mining were performed for both the collected literature reviews to extract meaningful themes and the interview data. Software like QSR NVIVO was used for qualitative textual analysis. However, thematic analysis was purely performed on transcribed qualitative data collected from civil engineers and architects.

4.6. Data reliability and validity

Quantitative data: To maintain the data validity and reliability of quantitative data, rigorous data collection methods, standardized measurement tools, AVE, CR, and Cronbach’s alpha test were employed.

Qualitative data: Interview protocols, coding schemes, and analytical notes were used to avoid biases and enhance the credibility and trustworthiness of the findings.

4.7. Ethical considerations

For primary data, ethical considerations included obtaining informed consent from participants, ensuring data confidentiality, anonymity, and voluntary participation in the study. Ethical concerns for secondary data encompassed proper citation and adherence to copyright regulations, acknowledging the sources used in the research.

5. Results

Data analysis is the process of closely examining raw data to derive conclusions about that information (Bhatia 2017). Herein, to understand the consumer adoption behaviour for green and smart building materials, two methods of analysis are used, i.e. quantitative and qualitative analysis.

5.1. Quantitative analysis

Quantitative data analysis is the method of collecting and examining quantifiable, verifiable data systematically (Ali 2020). The section below presents the demographic characteristics of the respondents, and inferential analysis for the hypothesis testing based on 350 consumer surveys. This sample size of 350 is supported by previous research findings of Figer et al., (2021) which conducted a similar survey of 350 participants for their study.

5.1.1. Descriptive analysis

From the data that have been collected, the characteristics of respondents, including age, gender, marital status, income, qualification, and occupation were obtained.

An extensive demographic breakdown of the study participants is presented in Table 1. It shows that the majority of the group is male, between the ages of 25 and 35, and married. The bulk of people earn between Rs 60,000 and Rs 90,000. The sample has a wide range of educational backgrounds, with a sizable percentage having graduate degrees. The majority of respondents' occupations fall in the private sector.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the respondents (N = 350).

		Frequency	Percentage (%)
AGE	18–25 years	72	20.6
	25–35 years	135	38.6
	35–45 years	103	29.4
	45–55 years	35	10.0
	Above 55 years	5	1.4
	Total	350	100
GENDER	Male	219	62.6
	Female	123	35.1
	Prefer not to say	8	2.3
	Total	350	100
MARITAL STATUS	Unmarried	132	37.7
	Married	197	56.3
	Divorced	15	4.3
	Widow	6	1.7
	Total	350	100
INCOME	Below Rs 30,000	34	9.7
	Rs 30,000–60000	43	12.3
	Rs 60,000–90000	125	35.7
	Rs 90,000–120000	75	21.4
	Rs 120,000–150000	49	14
	Above Rs 150,000	24	6.9
	Total	350	100
QUALIFICATION	uneducated	7	2
	Secondary education	11	3.1
	Senior secondary	33	9.4
	Graduate	117	33.4
	Post graduate	89	25.4
	Professional degree	63	18
	diploma	26	7.4
	Other	4	1.1
	Total	350	100
OCCUPATION	Self employed	80	22.9
	private sector employed	156	44.6
	public sector employed	44	12.6
	unemployed student	13	3.7
		57	16.3
	Total	350	100

5.1.2. Constructs and indicators

Table 2 shows all the collected statements with their sub-statements also known as codes used in CFA and SEM analysis.

Table 2. Constructs and indicators.

Statements	Code
The cost-effectiveness of the material defines whether the investment in the materials has any financial benefit in the form of energy savings or increased property value or not	Cost-effectiveness
As consumers value the environment, the presence of environmental benefits from product usage can motivate the consumer to adopt the materials	Environmental benefits
The existence of appealing designs and sustainability adds to the aesthetics of the consumer	Aesthetics
The performance of the materials is better than traditional ones resulting in adding functional advantages to the materials.	Performance
Do active marketing and lobbying for green and smart materials to create an inclination towards materials usage	Active marketing
Increase awareness and provide education via social media, informative posts, hosting live Q&A sessions, interacting with followers, or sharing relevant videos and articles	Awareness
Discussing real-life examples and their success stories	Real-life example
Focusing on building structural integrity by emphasizing on longevity and durability of the buildings	Structural integrity
Involving consumers in the decision-making process in the form of seminars, presentations, or portal-based open discussions to build a participatory approach	Participatory approach
Obtain green certifications and labelling for projects from BREEAM and LEED	Green Certification
The high initial cost of the process prevents the adoption of smart and green building materials	Cost
Limited availability and accessibility of smart and green building materials restrict materials usage in India	Limited availability
Logistics difficulties and weak distribution networks make supply availability in remote places a troublesome process	Logistic
Lack of knowledge and experience among industry stakeholders about the materials used creates reluctance	Lack of knowledge
Regulatory concerns in the form of unclear guidelines, insufficient government incentives or complex permit processes create the employment of these materials a complex process	Regulatory concern
A fragmented industry makes the process challenging	fragmented
Technical limitations or lack of advanced skill presence among employees makes the process more difficult	Technical limitation
The lack of a uniform rating system and certification system presence prevents authenticating the certification	Lack of uniform rating
Availability of knowledge about the materials from many government or international organizations	Knowledge availability
Replacement products like compressed earth block, porotherm clay bricks, sand, bamboo, and fly ash are available which are considered smart and green materials	Replacement product
More participation of people in the promotion of sustainable practices	More participation
The willingness to bear some additional cost for having usage of smart and green building materials	Willingness for additional cost
Willingness to move forward in a more eco-friendly environment by shifting from traditional to sustainable practices.	Shift to sustainable practices

5.1.3. Structural Model

The structural model illustrates the relationship between the influence of factors (cost-effectiveness, environmental benefits, aesthetics, and performance), strategies (active marketing, awareness, real-life example, structural integrity, participatory approach, and green certification), and challenges (cost, limited availability, logistic, lack of knowledge, regulatory concern, fragmented, technical limitation, and lack of uniform rating) on the adoption (replacement product, more participation, willingness for additional cost, shift to sustainable practices) of smart and green building materials. Each of the latent variables factors, strategies, challenges and adoption is unmeasurable, so observed variables (sub-statements) are used to record the perspective of civil engineers and architects.

By including all variables, the below CFA model has been developed for factors, strategies, and challenges.

Figure 2 CFA model is plotted for all independent variables so that the efficiency of the model can be checked. In this model, there are three independent variables, i.e., factors, challenges, and strategies and all their sub-statements have been included in the model.

Figure 2. The CFA model for assessing the independent variables of the model i.e. The strategies, challenges, and factors.

Source: Own.

Now, another part of CFA model including a dependent variable (adoption) is developed and shown in Figure 2.

In Figure 3 adoption is a dependent variable which has various sub-statements. Based on the developed CFA model, the validity and reliability are tested.

Figure 3. The CFA model for assessing the fitness of dependent variable i.e. adoption of sustainable and green materials.

Source: Own.

In Table 3, the value of AVEs (average variance extracted) is more than 0.5, Cronbach alpha is more than 0.7 and CR (composite reliability) is more than 0.7, showing fulfilment of convergent validity, internal consistency, and composite reliability criteria.

Table 3. Path model reliability and validity.

	Cronbach alpha	CR	AVE	Sqrt AVE
Factor	0.93	0.92	0.76	0.87
Strategy	0.95	0.95	0.77	0.88
Challenge	0.94	0.93	0.69	0.83
Adoption	0.95	0.93	0.79	0.89

Table 4 shows that the correlation values are less than the square root of AVE, showcasing the presence of discriminant validity. Therefore, the developed path model is valid and reliable. Further, the model fitness of the path model is determined to understand the goodness-of-fit of the model. Since the validity has been established, SEM model is executed and fitness is checked.

Table 4. Discriminant validity of path model.

	Factor	Strategy	Challenge	Adoption
Factor	0.87
Strategy	0.27**	0.88
Challenge	0.15**	0.12**	0.83
Adoption	0.24**	0.26**	0.20**	0.89

In Table 5, the value CMIN/Df (normed/relative Chi-Square) is 1.94 < 5, GFI (Goodness-of-fit) is 0.83 and AGFI (adjusted goodness-of-fit) is 0.81 which is less than 0.9, while of RMSEA (root mean square of approximation) is 0.05 which is less than 0.10. This shows that the model is fit but as the value of GFI and AGFI are lower than desired threshold, thus there is scope for improvement in the model for having a better assessment of relationship between variables. Further, the NFI (normal fit index) is 0.85 which is slightly lower than the required value, the CFI (comparative fit index) value is 0.92, the TLI (Tucker Lewis index) is 0.91, and the IFI (incremental fit index) is 0.92. As the value of 3 out of 4 is more than the required level of 0.9, incremental fitness measures have required indices values, the model is incrementally fit. For PGFI (parsimony goodness-of-fit index) is 0.75, the PCFI (parsimony comparative fit index) is 0.87, and the PNFI (parsimony normed fit index) value is 0.80 > 0.5. As all the parsimonious fitness indices have required indices values, the model is parsimoniously fit. Hence, the model is incrementally and parsimoniously (simple but efficient) fit but improvement could be derived in absolute fitness. To improve the fitness of the model, the modifications have been done using co-variances and the new value derived for AGFI is 0.88, GFI is 0.9 and NFI is 0.91. The new modified model can now be used to examine the influence of factors, strategies, and challenges on the adoption of smart and green building materials.

Table 5. Model fitness indices of path analysis in SEM.

Name of category	Name of index	Index value	Adequate fit
Absolute fit measure	CMIN/Df	1.94	Less than 5
	GFI	0.83	Greater than 0.90
	AGFI	0.81	Greater than 0.90
	RMSEA	0.05	Less than 0.10
Incremental fit measure	NFI	0.85	Greater than 0.90
	CFI	0.92	Greater than 0.90
	TLI	0.91	Greater than 0.90
	IFI	0.92	Greater than 0.90
Parsimonious fit measure	PGFI	0.75	Greater than 0.50
	PCFI	0.87	Greater than 0.50
	PNFI	0.80	Greater than 0.50

After establishing the model’s fitness, the SEM model has been developed with the inclusion of moderating variables. In Figure 4, the SEM path model is depicted with all variables, including Factors, Strategies, Challenges, and the moderating variables: age, gender, income, and qualification.

Figure 4. SEM path model with moderating variables (age, gender, income and qualification).

Source: Own.

The above model shows that demographic variables such as age, gender, income and qualification have been included as moderating variables because the demography of the respondents influences consumer perception (David 2022).

Now all hypotheses are tested with its significant values mentioned in Table 6.

Table 6. Hypothesis summary.

Dependent Variable	Variables/Factors	Estimate	S.E.	C.R. (z-value)	P
Adopt	<—Factors	0.26	0.06	4.34	0.00**
Adopt	<—Strategies	0.21	0.06	3.50	0.00**
Adopt	<—Challenges	0.09	0.05	1.77	0.08
Adopt	<—FactorAge	−0.01	0.05	−0.23	0.82
Adopt	<—Factorgender	−0.09	0.05	−1.88	0.06
Adopt	<—ChallengeAge	0.11	0.05	2.36	0.02*
Adopt	<—ChallengeGender	−0.11	0.05	−2.46	0.01*
Adopt	<—ChallengeIncome	0.06	0.05	1.09	0.28
Adopt	<—ChallengeQualification	0.04	0.05	0.77	0.44
Adopt	<—StrategyQualification	−0.05	0.05	−1.03	0.30
Adopt	<—StrategyIncome	0.00	0.05	0.00	1.00
Adopt	<—StrategyGender	0.05	0.05	0.89	0.37
Adopt	<—StrategyAge	−0.03	0.05	−0.67	0.50
Adopt	<—Factorincome	0.11	0.05	2.13	0.03*
Adopt	<—FactorQualification	0.00	0.06	−0.02	0.98
Adopt	<—Age	−0.08	0.05	−1.53	0.13
Adopt	<—Gender	0.04	0.09	0.46	0.65
Adopt	<—Income	−0.10	0.04	−2.79	0.01*
Adopt	<—Qualification	−0.02	0.04	−0.46	0.65

* for significance at 5% level and ** for significance at 1% level.

Testing Hypothesis 1 - Factors do not significantly influence consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India.

Table 6 shows that “Factors” has an S.E (standard error) value less than 0.1, i.e., 0.06, p-value as 0.00 < 0.05 and the CR value is 4.34 > 1.96 (z-value at 95% significance). Thus, the null hypothesis that “factors do not significantly influence consumer adoption of smart and green building materials” is rejected. Only factor income has a significant p-value representing that income is the moderating variable affecting the influence of factors on sustainable and green building materials. Hence, the study proves that the adoption of smart and green sustainable building materials is influenced by factors. Table 6 presents the interaction effect moderation results, where the bold values and * indicates significance at the 5% level and ** indicates significance at the 1% level.

Testing Hypothesis 2 - Strategies and practices employed by civil engineers and architects do not significantly influence awareness and consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in Bengaluru, India

“Strategies” depicts that the value of S.E (0.06) is low showing fewer biases present in results computation. Further, the p-value of the model is 0.00 < 0.05 and the z-value is more than 1.96, thus the null hypothesis that “strategies and practices employed by civil engineers and architects do not significantly influence awareness and consumer adoption of smart and green building materials” is rejected. With strategy, no interaction with demographics has significant value representing no role of demographics in influencing strategies role in adoption of sustainable and green materials. Hence, the study proves that the adoption of smart and green sustainable building materials is influenced by strategies.

Testing Hypothesis 3 - Challenges do not have a significant influence on the consumer adoption of smart and green building materials in the construction industry in Bengaluru, India.

S.E value as of “challenges” is 0.05 < 0.1, the p-value is 0.08 > 0.05 and even the z-value for the statement is less than 1.96 (1.77), thus the null hypothesis that “challenges do not have a significant influence on the consumer adoption of smart and green building materials” is not rejected. Hence, it is proven the adoption of smart and green building materials is not directly influenced or hindered by challenges, but there is presence of demographical characteristics which tend to affect the influence of challenges on the adoption of smart and green building materials as shown with moderating variables, i.e. “challengeage” and “challengegender” have values less than 0.05 p value. Therefore, the challenges are not directly affecting the adoption but other factors like demographical characteristics of residents results in having role of challenge in adoption of green and sustainable materials.

5.2. Qualitative analysis

Qualitative data was gathered through interviews conducted with 30 respondents which include 18 architects and 12 civil engineers. The collected responses were subjected to a systematic coding process using the NVIVO data analysis tool. This involved categorizing and organizing the data to identify recurring themes. For this, nodes were created and under each node, relevant words and sentences were coded. To preserve interviewee’s privacy we have purposefully anonymized the names of the interviewee/respondents.

Table 7 shows that among 30 selected respondents 60% (18) are designated as architects, while 40% (12) are civil engineers. All their affiliated organizations have adopted green and sustainable materials in their construction projects. Further, the experience level demonstrates that every responder taken into consideration for the survey has at least 1 year of experience, which helps to provide more precise information about the use of green and smart building materials.

Table 7. Anonymised demography of the participants (civil engineers and architects) (N = 30).

Interviewee	Designation	Experience	Whether adopted green and sustainable materials or not
1 : A	Civil engineer	2 years	Yes
2 : AA	Civil engineer	4 years	Yes
3 : B	Architect	5 years	Yes
4 : BB	Architect	2 years	Yes
5 : C	Architect	1 year	Yes
6 : CC	Civil engineer	1 year	Yes
7 : D	Architect	11 years	Yes
8 : DD	Architect	8 years	Yes
9 : E	Architect	2 years	Yes
10 : F	Civil engineer	1 year	Yes
11 : G	Civil engineer	3 years	Yes
12 : H	Architect	12 years	Yes
13 : I	Civil engineer	5 years	Yes
14 : J	Architect	6 years	Yes
15 : K	Civil engineer	4 years	Yes
16 : L	Architect	12 years	Yes
17 : M	Architect	1 year	Yes
18 : N	Civil engineer	2 years	Yes
19 : O	Architect	4 years	Yes
20 : P	Architect	3 years	Yes
21 : Q	Civil engineer	11 years	Yes
22 : R	Architect	13 years	Yes
23 : S	Civil engineer	4 years	Yes
24 : T	Architect	6 years	Yes
25 : U	Architect	9 years	Yes
26 : V	Civil engineer	2 years	Yes
27 : W	Architect	7 years	Yes
28 : X	Architect	2 years	Yes
29 : Y	Architect	5 years	Yes
30 : Z	Civil engineer	7 years	Yes

The word cloud shown in Figure 5 represents that among the coded responses “materials” with frequency of 81, “green” with 47 count, “energy” with 38, “consumers” with 36, “smart” with 35, “building” and with 28 are the most commonly used terms in resident respondents. All these words and their frequency collectively suggest a resident centric concern for environmentally friendly practices, energy considerations, consumer preferences, awareness of smart technologies, and a general focus on the construction process, forming a comprehensive insight into resident perspectives on smart, green, and sustainable building materials.

Figure 5. Word cloud NVivo result for factors, strategies, and challenges in adoption based on word frequency occurrence.

Source: Own

The tree diagram shown in Figure 6 depicts that the perspectives of residents are classified into six main aspects, i.e. benefits, challenges, impact of challenges, strategies, factors, and initiatives. Herein, A represents the interviewee A. The analysis has the same aspect inclusion for each respondent. These characteristics help in answering the research question of study and also in understanding the consumer adoption of green and sustainable building materials.

Figure 6. Tree diagram NVivo result for nodes.

Source: Own.

The project map shown in Figure 7 represents the information derived from respondents in a thematic manner. Herein, the diagram reveals that when asked from civil engineers, builders, and architects about drivers of consumer adoption for smart and green building materials in Bengalaru, the four major aspects were highlighted, i.e. benefits of smart and green building materials and factors affecting consumer adoption, challenges in the process and their impact, strategies formulated for promoting consumer adoption, and initiatives statemnent which can be taken for improving consumer adoption.

Figure 7. Project map NVivo result for themes identified in the interview.

Source: Own.

Thematic analysis

By analyzing qualitative data, four themes were identified.

Theme 1: Perception on factors influencing consumer adoption

The integration of sleek and visually pleasing smart materials appeals to consumers’ sense of style.

Interviewee C

Using smart and green materials can seem pricey, but long-term savings on energy bills make them cost-effective.

Interviewee L

Smart and green materials contribute to a cleaner environment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Interviewees V and B

Choosing eco-friendly building materials reduces our carbon footprint and mitigate environmental impacts.

Interviewee T

Consumers prioritize better-performing materials that enhance the overall quality and comfort of their spaces.

Interviewees M and W

From the above statements of interviewees, it is evident that one key driver of consumer adoption of smart and green building materials is aesthetics. Consumers are more willing to embrace smart building materials that enhance the aesthetics of their living spaces. The financial benefits of sustainable building materials also encourage more consumers to adopt them. Despite the perception of smart and green building materials being expensive, the potential savings on energy bills and reduced maintenance expenses make these materials an attractive choice in the long run. Furthermore, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and lessening the overall carbon footprint, consumers are becoming more conscious of the positive impact their housing choices can have on the environment. Additionally, the functionality and comfort provided by smart and green building materials are important factors that influence consumer preferences.

Theme 2: Perception on strategies and practices adopted to influence awareness and adoption

We actively market smart, green and sustainable building materials by posting reels about the benefit of sustainable materials, the interviews with the people living in sustainable and non-sustinable houses, and even organized many sessions of interactions in form of discussions or Q&A to encourage people.

Interviewees F and P

Our focus is on educating consumers with reliable data to drive demand for green materials.

Interviewee I

We involve consumers in decisions, highlight successful examples, and obtain green certifications for credibility.

Interviewees R and U

Yes, our social media efforts and case studies have raised awareness significantly. We have witnessed that about 40% of our customers are willing to try green and sustainable building materials and even atleast go through our plan.

Interviewee BB

The involvement of consumers and green certifications served as a means to ensure that we are not making things up. The usage of beautiful home with sustainable building materials is possible and it would include all facilities. This raised the adoption rate by atleast 20%.

Interviewees Y and N

One of the popular strategies employed by Civil engineers and architects for marketing smart and green building materials is showcasing case studies and hosting Question & Answer (Q&A) sessions. The availability of a means to interact with or understand the building materials increases consumer awareness and can motivate them to try environmentally friendly as well as aesthetic building materials. On the other hand, taking a more cooperative approach to promotion is another strategy. The inclusion of consumers in decisions empowers consumers to feel like active participants in sustainable construction, increasing their sense of ownership and commitment to adopting smart and green building materials. Furthermore, some successful examples of eco-friendly projects inspire and motivate others to follow suit. Additionally, obtaining green certifications for their projects adds credibility and authenticity to their claims, further influencing potential adopters to choose green building materials.

Theme 3: Perception on perceived challenges in the adoption

One of the main challenges is the high initial cost of these materials, making them financially unfeasible for many projects.

Interviewee O and D

The limited availability hampers wider adoption; logistics difficulties make it hard to reach remote areas.

Interviewee A

Lack of knowledge and experience, and complex regulations hinder architects and civil engineers from embracing smart and sustainable building materials in the construction.

Interviewees DD and H

Due to high costs and limited availability, consumers often opt for conventional materials.

Interviewees AA and E

The lack of a uniform rating system makes consumers hesitant to invest in uncertified materials.

Interviewees G and J

The high initial cost of these materials emerges as a major concern in the adoption. This financial burden deters many project developers from considering eco-friendly options, especially when they are already operating on tight budgets. Additionally, limited availability and logistics difficulties, present hurdles in the widespread adoption, particularly in remote areas where sourcing and transportation is a challenge. High costs and limited availability often push consumers to choose conventional building materials instead of eco-friendly ones. This preference for familiar and cost-effective options hampers the market demand for smart and green building materials. It is also found that professionals become hesitant to switch to unfamiliar building materials if they lack the necessary expertise or face difficulties navigating the regulatory landscape. Furthermore, without a standardized certification or rating mechanism, consumers find it challenging to differentiate between credible and uncertified materials, leading to hesitancy in investing in smart and green options.

Theme 4: Civil Engineers and architects suggestions for improving the adoption

More public education campaigns highlighting benefits of smart and green materials for sustainable living could be created which would motivate consumers.

Interviewee CC

Availability of tax incentives or subsidies to developers and consumers opting for eco-friendly building materials could serve as a means of reducing cost and have more adoption rate

Interviewees Z and Q

Collaborating with manufacturers to offer a wider range of affordable and aesthetically pleasing green materials.

Interviewee X

Organize workshops and seminars to train architects and engineers on the benefits and use of green materials.

Interviewee S

Chiefly, public education campaigns are a powerful strategy to increase awareness and consumer acceptance. Through these educational campaigns, the general public can become more informed and motivated to embrace eco-friendly alternatives. Another strategy could be related to the availability of tax incentives or subsidies to developers and consumers. By reducing the economic burden associated with choosing green materials, developers and consumers are more likely to prioritize sustainability, leading to a higher consumer adoption rate. Furthermore, with a collaborative effort between architects, engineers, and manufacturers, the industry can innovate and offer a wider variety of visually appealing materials that cater to diverse consumer preferences, further accelerating adoption. Another initiative could be organizing workshops for training construction industries to use more green materials.

According to Table 8, few selected words with perfect positive correlations (correlation = 1.0) indicate an absolute linear relationship between these pairs of terms. Like in the case of Table 8, “eco” “friendly” and “eco” “reducing” underscore a tight association between environmentally conscious practices (“eco” and “friendly”) and the reduction of certain elements, highlighting a holistic approach to sustainability. High positive correlations (correlation >0.7) suggest a strong positive linear relationship between these pairs of terms. The associations between the terms “cost” “make” and “green” “pleasing” and “cost” “wider” imply that discussions about the financial implications of using sustainable building materials and concept of green are pleasing to the stakeholders. This implies that considerations of costs, aesthetics, and broader implications need to be included in the adoption of smart and green building material.

Table 8. Two-term word correlation based on four themes stakeholders responses.

Term 1	Term 2	Pearsons Correlation Coefficient
Architects	Engineers	1.0
Atleast	Raised	1.0
Eco	Friendly	1.0
Eco	Reducing	1.0
Friendly	Reducing	1.0
High	Lack	1.0
High	Limited	1.0
Lack	Limited	1.0
Adoption	Making	0.76
Adoption	Rate	0.76
Adoption	Wider	0.76
Availability	High	0.76
Availability	Lack	0.76
Availability	Limited	0.76
Cost	Make	0.76
Cost	Pleasing	0.76
Cost	Wider	0.76
Materials	Smart	0.76
Living	Sustainable	0.72
Green	Pleasing	0.65
Building	Sustainable	0.64
Adoption	Cost	0.52

6. Discussion

The study proposed three hypotheses. Hypothesis 1 postulated that factors significantly impact consumer adoption of smart and green building materials. Quantitative findings substantiate this hypothesis, revealing a robust connection between factors and consumers’ inclination towards adopting these materials. This finding supports previous research (Weniger, Del Rosario, and Backes 2023) suggesting that factors influence the purchasing or buying behaviour of consumers in the construction industry. Interviews with civil engineers and architects provided deeper insights into the factors affecting this adoption, which include cost-effectiveness, environmental benefits, aesthetics, and performance. Further, Hypothesis 2 examined the impact of strategies employed by civil engineers and architects on consumer adoption of smart and green building materials. Quantitative results provide strong support for this assertion. Similar results were found in a study by (Chan, Darko, and Ameyaw 2017) which revealed that strategies influence consumer awareness and adoption of smart and green building materials. Qualitative data also highlighted that strategies such as active marketing, awareness, real-life examples, structural integrity, participatory approach, and green certification influence consumer adoption of those materials. Moreover, Hypothesis 3 investigating the impact of challenges on consumer adoption of smart and green building materials, the analysis revealed no direct role of challenges in consumer adoption of smart and green building materials but as the demographics of an individual have major role in consumer decisions, so herein the interaction of demographics and challenges led to affecting consumer adoption of green and sustainable materials. With qualitative analysis, civil engineers and architects reported several challenges associated with adoption, such as cost, limited availability, logistics, lack of knowledge, regulatory concern, fragmented, technical limitations, and lack of uniform rating. Finally, the impact of demographic moderating variables on consumer adoption of smart and green building materials was tested. Herein, findings revealed that age, gender, and income play significant moderating roles in the consumer adoption process of smart and green building materials. This result is supported by a study by David (2022) which validated that demographic variables influence the green adoption practice.

7. Conclusion

The adoption of smart and green building materials is essential today to reduce adverse environmental impacts, conserve resources, and create healthier living spaces for future generations. An examination of 350 consumers’ perceptions and 30 civil engineers and architects’ perceptions in Bengaluru was done to understand the aspects influencing consumer adoption of green and smart building materials. Nowadays, consumers exhibit a growing preference for smart and environmentally sustainable building materials, driven by considerations such as aesthetic appeal, economic efficiency, and energy conservation. Likewise, a qualitative examination of chosen civil engineers and architects employs various strategies, including public education, to promote awareness and adoption. However, obstacles persist in the form of substantial initial investments and a lack of awareness among consumers, impeding the broad adoption of these advancements. To overcome the influence of these challenges, it is recommended to launch public education campaigns, offer financial incentives, enforce green building rules, and host professional development workshops. Launching public education campaigns highlighting the benefits of sustainable living will raise awareness and motivate people to choose smart and green building materials. Additionally, providing financial incentives to consumers, such as tax breaks or subsidies, will encourage them to purchase these materials. Enforcing green building rules would also increase market demand for sustainable products and methods, resulting in their wider adoption. The study reveals that civil engineers and architects emphasise green construction and energy-conserving materials during construction. Finally, holding professional development seminars will offer civil engineers and architects the resources and knowledge they need to successfully promote and use these materials in their projects.

8. Implications

The findings of this study have significant implications for the construction industry, government, and academicians in field of management, construction management, marketing and consumer behaviour. For the construction industry, understanding the fundamental variables influencing consumer acceptance of smart and green building materials will help the construction sector meet the rising demand for sustainable practices and eco-friendly products. Construction companies can draw in environmentally sensitive consumers and establish themselves as industry leaders by using such materials in their projects. The government can use the study results to create regulations that encourage the use of smart and green materials, such as enforcing green building codes or providing tax benefits for eco-friendly selections. Academics can use the findings of the study to design specialized courses and workshops on sustainable construction methods, giving future civil engineers and architects the knowledge and abilities, they need to effectively advocate and execute these materials. By coordinating their efforts, these stakeholders may help Bengaluru progress toward a greener and more sustainable future.

9. Limitations

The study location is limited to Bengaluru, Indian location only. In future, an in-dept comparative studies across different geographical locations will be conducted to identify regional variations in consumer adoption patterns, aiding in the formulation of targeted strategies for promoting a broader array of smart, green, sustainable building materials.

Acknowledgements

The authors clearly affirm that the manuscript has been entirely created by their own efforts, without the involvement of any AI tool or large language model (LLM) in generating the research content. However, for the purpose of improving readability, structural logic, and the qualitative data/corpus analysis the authors opted for a minimal application of a Natural Language Processing (NLP). This use of the NLP tool has been explicitly disclosed in this acknowledgments sections, aligning with the ethical guidelines governing research conduct.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability statement

All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear in the submitted article. However, some datasets produced in this study are anonymised due to privacy concerns, in order to safeguard the confidentiality of all participants. All consumer datasets (quantitative survey) and datasets of civil engineers and architects (qualitative survey) have undergone thorough anonymization processes to ensure strict adherence to ethical principles of privacy.

Additional information

Funding

This research received no grant or contribution from any funding body.

Notes on contributors

Rajendra P

Rajendra P, a committed Ph.D. research student at the prestigious M. S. Ramaiah Institute of Technology affiliated with VTU Belgaum, is profoundly exploring the multifaceted domains of consumer adoption processes and consumer behaviour. His study firmly investigates the fields of consumer psychology, marketing management and developing innovative strategies, adoption of sustainability, and the revolutionary influence of artificial intelligence on sustainable and green consumerism, each driven by a deep passion for promoting environmentally friendly habits. Using a careful combination of qualitative and quantitative, aka mixed methods research, his work aims to understand the intricate dynamics influencing customer choices in the adoption of sustainability into their daily lives. His careful examination of customer preferences for smart, green, and sustainable construction materials demonstrates that his contributions go beyond the academic realm and help the world achieve sustainability in the construction industry. Rajendra’s published two research articles in 2023 that share insights about how consumer choices can help shape the sustainable ways of future urban life.

Mohanasundaram T

Dr. T. Mohanasundaram has completed his Doctoral degree in Management from Anna University. He has done his Master of Business Administration (MBA) from Bharathiar University. He has 21 years of total experience in Industry and Academics. He has published 42 research articles in reputed Journals and presented many research papers at International Conferences organized by premier institutions. He is actively involved in research and consultancy works for Government, public and private institutions. He has received grants and financial assistance from various agencies for research projects and for organizing research programmes. He has organised many FDPs/Workshops and MDPs. He has acted as a resource person for more than 60 programmes related to Management research that are organised across the country. He is a certified financial education Resource Person of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). He has received the national level ‘Best Young Teacher Award-2018’ from the Association of Indian Management Schools (AIMS) and Best Young Faculty award from Nehru Group of Institutions, Coimbatore.