FUTURE-PROOF FOUNDATIONS: RETHINKING INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE AGE OF CLIMATE, TECH, AND EQUITY

 

Author: AM Tris Hardyanto 

Executive Summary

In a world reshaped by climate disruption, digital acceleration, and deepening social inequities, the way we build infrastructure can no longer remain rooted in outdated paradigms. Today, infrastructure is more than roads, bridges, and buildings—it is the foundation for equitable, sustainable, and resilient societies.

Future-proof Foundations is a nine-chapter series that reimagines global infrastructure through five interlocking pillars: decarbonization, digital innovation, climate resilience, underground systems, and inclusive, human-centred design. Together, these themes highlight a necessary transformation: one that aligns infrastructure development with the pressing demands of the 21st century.

From climate-smart materials to AI-powered planning, from circular construction to child-friendly cities, this series explores how interdisciplinary approaches, inclusive governance, and innovative technologies can shape a future where infrastructure not only serves but uplifts all communities.

Key Takeaways:

• Decarbonization strategies are essential to achieving net-zero emissions and mitigating climate risk, emphasizing lifecycle carbon accounting and circular construction.
• Digital transformation, powered by AI, BIM, IoT, and digital twins, is optimizing infrastructure planning, execution, and maintenance.
• Resilience planning ensures that infrastructure can withstand environmental shocks while also supporting vulnerable communities during crises.
• Subsurface innovation offers solutions for space optimization, innovative utility management, and climate adaptation in rapidly urbanizing areas.
• The inclusive design prioritizes walkability, gender equity, community participation, and public good over profit-driven or car-centric planning.

Why It Matters:

As global cities face intersecting crises—climate emergencies, social fragmentation, and digital divides— the series makes a compelling case: infrastructure must become a tool of justice, innovation, and sustainability. It must evolve from concrete to code, from exclusivity to equity, and from reactive development to anticipatory design.

Who Should Read :

Urban planners, engineers, policymakers, investors, community leaders, sustainability advocates, academics, and anyone invested in building cities that are fair, functional, and future-ready.

 

Future-proof Foundations: Rethinking Infrastructure in the Age of Climate, Tech, and Equity

1. Series Overview

The five-article series explores how global infrastructure is evolving through sustainability, digital innovation, resilience planning, underground transformation, and human-centric design. It highlights trends in decarbonization, artificial intelligence, climate adaptation, and social inclusion to show how infrastructure must adapt to 21st-century challenges.

Infrastructure forms the backbone of modern society, influencing economic growth, social equity, and environmental sustainability. Facing escalating climate challenges, rapid technological advances, and increasing calls for inclusivity, infrastructure development requires a paradigm shift.

 Transformation is especially urgent today as cities confront the cascading effects of climate breakdown, pandemic-era economic recovery, and unprecedented urban growth. Global deadlines for net-zero emissions, such as those in the Paris Agreement and EU Green Deal, demand that infrastructure evolve now, not later.

From Jakarta's sinking coastal districts to the African Union's Agenda 2063 infrastructure ambitions, real-world megaprojects underscore the need for a future-proof design that is both climate-resilient and socially inclusive.

By integrating sustainability, digital innovation, equity, and resilience, we can build "future-proof foundations" to meet emerging global demands.

To begin building infrastructure that is fit for the future, we must first address the foundational issue of climate change, starting with decarbonization.

1.1 Decarbonization and Sustainable Infrastructure

Decarbonization is crucial in combating climate change, as traditional infrastructure significantly contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. Sustainable infrastructure minimizes environmental impact while promoting economic viability and social inclusion. Its effectiveness lies not only in investment volume but also in its broader impacts on communities and ecosystems (Atkočiūnienė et al., 2021; Martin-Utrillas et al., 2014).

To fully understand infrastructure emissions, it is essential to distinguish between embodied carbon—the emissions from the extraction, production, and transportation of materials—and operational carbon, which results from infrastructure use over time. Policymakers must address both challenges through comprehensive decarbonization strategies.

 The approach aligns with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), promoting inclusive, low-carbon, and climate-resilient infrastructure. Sierra et al. (2017) emphasize learning-based decision-making in sustainable projects, underscoring social dynamics. Investment in green infrastructure enhances resilience and addresses socioeconomic inequities in urban areas (Opoku, 2019; Chang et al., 2023), strengthening community ties and fostering long-term sustainability.

A notable example is the United Kingdom's implementation of a whole-life carbon approach in infrastructure planning. This approach requires public projects to account for embodied and operational emissions across the asset's full lifecycle. The framework supports more transparent decision-making and encourages the use of low-carbon materials and processes from the outset.

While decarbonization reduces our environmental footprint, digital innovation reshapes the very tools and methods we use to plan and build future infrastructure.

1.2 Digital Innovation in Infrastructure

Digital technology integration is transforming infrastructure planning, design, and maintenance. Broadband and innovative systems enable economic growth and social inclusion, especially for underserved populations. High-quality digital infrastructure enhances Access to services and opportunities for marginalized groups (Schram et al., 2018; Lekan & Rogers, 2020).

Innovative city technologies improve resource efficiency, civic engagement, and public service delivery. However, unequal Access to digital tools risks deepening existing inequalities (Ersoy, 2017; Drobotiuk, 2019). Therefore, inclusive digital infrastructure must address disparities in Access to ensure broad community benefits, enhancing participatory governance and equitable urban development.

Pune, India—part of the Smart Cities Mission—demonstrates an inclusive approach by using digital dashboards, traffic sensors, and e-governance tools to improve waste collection, public health monitoring, and citizen engagement. Cities Mission—where digital dashboards, traffic sensors, and e-governance tools have improved waste collection, public health monitoring, and citizen engagement. The project illustrates how digital infrastructure when designed with community input and equity in mind, can enhance service delivery in rapidly urbanizing areas of the Global South.

Planners must prepare infrastructure for disruption by pairing digital tools with resilience strategies that help systems withstand shocks and recover swiftly.

1.3 Resilience Planning and Social Preparedness

Resilience planning anticipates and mitigates the effects of increasingly severe climate events. Adequate infrastructure must integrate both technical resilience—the ability of physical systems to resist and recover from disruption—and social resilience, which refers to a community's capacity to adapt, self-organize, and maintain cohesion during crises.

Studies show that communities equipped with shared resources respond better to disasters, enhancing collective resilience (Liu et al., 2022). A  dual approach—reinforcing both complex infrastructure and social systems—is critical for navigating the complex challenges of climate change, pandemics, and economic volatility.

Nature-based solutions (NBS) such as restored wetlands, urban forests, green roofs, and permeable pavements increasingly complement conventional infrastructure. These hybrid systems absorb floodwaters, lower urban temperatures, and support biodiversity while also strengthening community ties and offering recreational spaces. Green corridors and floodable parks, for example, serve as both environmental buffers and public amenities, demonstrating the multifunctional value of integrated resilience design.

 The planning approach strengthensthe infrastructure's adaptability to environmental, economic, and social shocks. Resilient public services protect assets and ensure continuity for vulnerable populations during disruptions (Ogun, 2010; Rahman et al., 2019). Holistic resilience frameworks offer a multifaceted defence against future uncertainties by reinforcing both structural and communal capacities.

Beyond physical strength and digital efficiency, infrastructure must also meet human needs. Resilience is most potent when paired with an inclusive, people-first design.

1.4 Human-Centric and Inclusive Infrastructure Design 

Infrastructure should serve diverse community needs, prioritizing equity and accessibility. The human-centric design fosters well-being and improves health and socioeconomic outcomes, especially for marginalized populations (Broccoli et al., 2022; Slade et al., 2021). Inclusive education, healthcare, and social services enhance quality of life across demographics.

Child-friendly education systems and accessible public spaces promote safety, learning, and social interaction (Alvi et al., 2023; Jannah & Hidayati, 2022). These design principles cultivate cohesion and resilience in urban environments, encouraging inclusive growth and ensuring that infrastructure development leaves no group behind.

"Designing for people also means designing for prosperity—economic inclusion ensures that infrastructure empowers communities and fuels equitable growth."

1.5 Economic Inclusion and Infrastructure Equity

Infrastructure plays a key role in economic empowerment by reducing barriers to market access and lowering transaction costs. High-quality infrastructure investments alleviate poverty and promote economic mobility, particularly in developing regions (Mutiiria et al., 2020; Stawicki & Vaznonienė, 2020).

Social infrastructure—such as libraries, health centres, and community hubs—supports economic opportunity and fosters inclusive growth by providingAccesss to essential services that empower individuals and communities. When equitably distributed, such investments enhance livelihoods, reduce social disparities, and drive long-term development.

However, infrastructure can also become extractive or exclusive when planned without inclusivity at its core. Toll roads, for example, may disproportionately burden low-income commuters, while privatized water systems can limitAccesss to basic services for underserved populations. These models often prioritize profitability over public welfare, reinforcing existing inequalities and excluding vulnerable groups from the benefits of infrastructure.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) offer opportunities to mobilize capital and technical expertise, but stakeholders must explicitly prioritize social outcomes alongside financial returns. Embedding equity goals in PPP frameworks—such as affordability provisions, access guarantees, or community benefit agreements—ensures that infrastructure catalyzes inclusive development rather than deepening social divides (Oktavianus & Mahani, 2018).

Realizing these inclusive, equitable goals demands more than good intentions—it requires interdisciplinary collaboration that unites policy, economics, science, and design.

1.6 Interdisciplinary Pathways for Future Infrastructure 

Future-proof infrastructure requires an interdisciplinary approach, combining insights from economics, policy, social science, and environmental management. Urban systems must be analyzed beyond technical metrics, incorporating social and ecological complexity (Perring et al., 2014; Dappe et al., 2023; Masrom et al., 2024).

Adaptive, inclusive, and resilient infrastructure will be critical in navigating climate uncertainty and technological change. Cross-disciplinary collaboration can create infrastructure systems that integrate digital innovation, economic equity, and community resilience. The holistic shift is essential for building infrastructure that genuinely supports a sustainable and just future.

"Having explored the strategic importance of decarbonization, the next chapter dives deeper into practical methods and materials that support net-zero construction."

2  Carbon Smart – Building for a Net-Zero Future

This chapter builds on the strategic overview presented in Chapter 1 by exploring practical tools and actionable strategies for developing net-zero infrastructure. From low-carbon materials to ESG-aligned financing, these innovations offer tangible pathways to transform the construction sector in response to climate imperatives.

Green Foundations for Decarbonized Infrastructure. Green foundations must reflect the urgent need for construction practices that reduce carbon emissions. Integrating sustainability in infrastructure revolves around low-carbon materials, energy-efficient design, and circular construction methods. As climate change intensifies, the construction sector faces scrutiny from investors on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics, which are now critical indicators of long-term project sustainability and financial performance.

 What is ESG? ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance—a set of non-financial criteria investors and stakeholders use to evaluate the ethical and sustainability performance of a company or project.

• Environmental: Energy use, emissions, waste management.
• Social: Labor practices, community impact, health and safety.
• Governance: Transparency, leadership ethics, shareholder rights. ESG ratings are increasingly tied to acAccesso capital, reputation, and long-term resilience.

2.1 Low-Carbon Materials and Lifecycle Carbon Budgeting 

Low-carbon materials are vital for sustainable construction. Recycled concrete and sustainable timber substantially reduce life cycle emissions (Cumo et al., 2022). Energy-efficient design enhances these benefits by optimizing natural light and thermal performance. Regulatory pressures and investor expectations are driving firms to adopt such practices or risk inefficiencies and ESG noncompliance (Escrig‐Olmedo et al., 2019).

Lifecycle carbon budgeting ensures emissions are managed at every project stage (Thomas et al., 2024). However, ESG assessments often overlook lifecycle impacts, leading to strategic misalignments. Embracing a cradle-to-grave approach helps stakeholders make informed, low-impact decisions from design to demolition (Escrig‐Olmedo et al., 2019).

2.2 Circular Construction and Sustainable Supply Chains 

Circular construction promotes reuse and resource optimization to build resilient supply chains. By minimizing waste and reducing raw material extraction, it lowers greenhouse gas emissions and costs (He et al., 2023; Huang, 2021). Circularity aligns with net-zero goals, encouraging firms to see themselves within broader ecological systems.

Sustainable procurement enhances these efforts. Firms that apply ESG criteria in supplier selection improve climate outcomes and boost investor confidence (Aich et al., 2021). Choosing sustainability-oriented suppliers also helps construction firms stay ahead of regulations while strengthening their brand in environmentally conscious markets (Niblock, 2024).

However, despite the rise in ESG-linked financing, concerns over greenwashing—where companies exaggerate or falsify sustainability claims—persist. Without transparent metrics and third-party validation, ESG labels may mislead investors and policymakers, undermining trust and effective climate action.

2.3 ESG Integration and Climate-Aligned Investment

The rise of ESG investing signals a societal shift favouring sustainability. Firms with strong ESG ratings attract more investment, demonstrating better financial and environmental performance (López-Toro et al., 2021; Peng, 2023). High ESG scores influence portfolio choices for institutional and retail investors alike (Xie et al., 2023).

Reliable ESG evaluation requires robust methodologies to assess sustainability risks and opportunities (Lööf et al., 2023). When aligned with financial metrics, ESG indicators help firms deliver environmental value while enhancing reputational capital and economic resilience (Zhao, 2024).

2.4 Modular Construction and Localized Decarbonization 

Modular construction offers speed, efficiency, and sustainability. Off-site prefabrication improves quality control and minimizes waste (Luke, 2022). It reduces emissions related to transport and onsite debris, enhancing project performance and labour efficiency.

Supply chain decarbonization relies on sourcing local materials, cutting transportation emissions and supporting regional economies (Liu & Jing, 2023; Seow, 2023). Modular systems integrated with decarbonized supply chains exemplify holistic climate-responsive infrastructure (Cumo et al., 2022).

2.5 Systems Thinking in Decarbonized Infrastructure 

The path to net zero requires coordinated action from stakeholders. Incorporating low-carbon materials, energy-efficient designs, circularity, and ESG compliance forms a transparent methodology. Transformation necessitates rethinking traditional roles across construction, policy, and finance.

Industry leaders, investors, and regulators must collaborate to embed sustainability into core operations. With innovation and ESG transparency, organizations can become frontrunners in the global shift toward net-zero infrastructure.

2.6 Emerging Materials for Carbon-Neutral Building

Innovative materials like engineered timber, bamboo, hempcrete, and CO₂-injected concrete reduce embodied carbon and promote healthier indoor environments (Waldman et al., 2020; Sun et al., 2024; Ioana et al., 2024). These alternatives lower emissions linked to steel and cement, which are traditionally among the highest emitters.

Sustainably sourced engineered timber sequesters carbon, while bamboo offers rapid renewability and structural strength (Giménez & Avila, 2022; Wang et al., 2024). The versatility of these materials supports functional, aesthetic, and climate-aligned construction practices.

2.7 Modular Green Buildings and Policy Support 

Modular green buildings are gaining traction for their waste reduction and efficiency. Prefabrication in controlled environments ensures minimal waste and optimized material use (Zhang et al., 2023; Illankoon et al., 2023). aligns with investor interests by lowering risks and increasing project certainty.

Governments increasingly support modular strategies through ESG-aligned policies. These incentives promote faster project delivery and compliance with environmental standards, encouraging innovation and energy efficiency from project inception (Ng, 2015; Hu et al., 2022).

2.8 Circularity in Urban Construction Models 

Urban circular construction emphasizes deconstruction, reuse, and closed-loop systems (Rivas-Aybar et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2022). These strategies reduce landfill waste and the need for virgin materials, contributing to a smaller carbon footprint and enhanced material productivity.

As climate urgency grows, lifecycle assessments are essential. Tools for emission tracking improve transparency and accountability (Ioana et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2024). Circular models ensure that projects meet environmental goals while staying economically viable (Sun et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2024).

2.9 ESG Metrics in Financing and Risk Management 

Infrastructure financing increasingly depends on ESG metrics. Governments and financial institutions demand lifecycle emissions reporting and strict adherence to carbon budgets (Zhang et al., 2023). Transparent ESG performance attracts capital from environmentally conscious investors (Putri et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2023).

Projects with strong ESG credentials secure more funding and manage environmental risks more effectively (Nadoushani & Akbarnezhad, 2015; Wang et al., 2020). Standardized metrics enable fair competition, encouraging widespread adoption of green construction practices (Chan et al., 2022).

However, ESG adoption is not without challenges. A growing number of cases have highlighted greenwashing risks, where projects or funds falsely brand themselves as sustainable without meeting rigorous standards. To prevent this, independent audits, lifecycle carbon reporting, and verified disclosure mechanisms are critical.

2.10 Toward a Climate-Conscious Construction Paradigm 

The convergence of low-carbon design, modular building, circularity, and ESG frameworks signals an industry-wide transformation. Decarbonized infrastructure aligns short-term economic goals with long-term climate objectives.

 Systemic shift redefines infrastructure development as both a climate and market imperative (Liu, 2023; Naboni & Marino, 2021). Each strategy—from material innovation to sustainable financing—contributes to a construction model that supports planetary health, economic strength, and societal well-being.

✍️ "While sustainable materials form the physical core of net-zero buildings, digital technologies now form the nervous system of modern infrastructure."

3. Code and Concrete – The Rise of Smart Construction

3.0 Smart Sites and Digital Transformation 

The construction industry is undergoing a digital revolution driven by Construction 4.0. transformation integrates advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), Building Information Modeling (BIM), the Internet of Things (IoT), drones, robotics, and digital twins (Orooje & Latifi, 2021; Batista et al., 2023). These technologies enhance safety, productivity, and decision-making, requiring a holistic understanding of their impact on infrastructure development.

3.1 Intelligent Infrastructure and Real-Time Data 

Real-time data and predictive modelling are key to developing intelligent infrastructure. AI analyzes large datasets to optimize resource allocation and reduce waste (Villa et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2021). Digital twins simulate performance and detect issues before they escalate, enabling continuous improvement in both construction and operations (Qin et al., 2023; Toyin & Mewomo, 2022).

3.2 AI and Automation in Project Execution 

AI minimize project delays and cost overruns by enhancing predictive analytics and decision-making (Atazadeh et al., 2019). Automation tools, including robotic arms and autonomous vehicles, improve safety and efficiency on job sites (Qing-sheng et al., 2019; Rong et al., 2023). When integrated with BIM and IoT, these tools create adaptive systems that improve over time (Zhang et al., 2023; Natephra & Motamedi, 2019).

3.3 Digital Tools for Safety and Productivity. Innovative technologies like AR and VR provide immersive training that improves worker safety (Borkowski et al., 2024). Drones assist in inspections and topographic surveys, increasing accuracy while reducing risk (Jiang, 2024). IoT sensors enable real-time monitoring, enhancing collaboration and efficiency on site (Xing, 2024; Yang et al., 2021).

3.4 BIM and Digital Twins for Lifecycle Management 

Digital twins and BIM technologies offer comprehensive views of project development and operations. These tools enhance collaboration by centralizing construction data (Lee & Lee, 2021; Alshammari et al., 2021). They also enable stakeholders to simulate and resolve issues before they affect timelines, ensuring regulatory compliance and project continuity (Chai, 2023; Iqbal et al., 2023; Yanda et al., 2019).

3.5 Digitally-Enabled Infrastructure Lifecycle

Digital tools support every phase of infrastructure development, from planning to maintenance. AI, BIM, IoT, and AR/VR improve efficiency and sustainability (Chen et al., 2023). Shift aligns construction with climate goals and future-proofs infrastructure against evolving demands.

Digital twins, in particular, offer long-term savings by creating dynamic replicas of infrastructure assets that simulate real-world conditions. These models enable predictive maintenance, reduce downtime, and extend asset lifecycles, lowering operational costs and optimizing long-term investment returns.

However, the transformation has significant implications for the workforce. As automation and AI replace many manual or repetitive tasks, concerns around job displacement are growing. The industry must invest in upskilling and retraining programs to ensure equitable transitions for displaced workers and preserve human expertise in complex or adaptive decision-making.

To better understand the paradigm shift, the table below contrasts traditional and innovative construction models:

Traditional Construction	Smart Construction (Construction 4.0)
Manual scheduling and supervision	AI-powered planning and predictive analytics
Static blueprints and 2D drawings	BIM and digital twins for real-time modelling, on-site
e labor-intensive tasks	Automation, robotics, and off-site prefabrication
Reactive maintenance	IoT-enabled predictive and remote maintenance
Limited data use	Real-time data integration for performance monitoring
Disconnected project phases	Integrated digital lifecycle management

 

3.6 AI-Powered Planning and Predictive Maintenance 

AI enhances project planning by providing simulations for cost, weather, and quality assessments (Venu, 2025; Manu, 2024). Predictive maintenance tools forecast equipment failures, enabling timely interventions that extend asset life and reduce costs (Dunn, 2025; Heggond, 2025; Borisova et al., 2025). These tools mark a shift toward proactive, data-driven infrastructure management.

3.7 Digital Twins for Smart City Management 

Cities like Singapore and Helsinki use digital twins for real-time infrastructure monitoring and performance forecasting (Mésároš et al., 2024; Alhasan & Alawadhi, 2024; Mustapha et al., 2024). These virtual models support coordinated decision-making and promote resource efficiency, urban resilience, and transparent stakeholder engagement (Jiao, 2020; A.S. Shaikh, 2025).

3.8 Robotics and IoT for Site Efficiency 

Robots handle high-risk tasks like heavy lifting, reducing injuries and improving site safety (Zhang et al., 2024; Alketbi et al., 2024). IoT sensors collect environmental and equipment data, enabling real-time adjustments and streamlined workflows (Jelodar, 2025; Regina et al., 2022; Dzerun & Ovdiienko, 2024).

3.9 AR/VR for Stakeholder Engagement 

AR and VR enhance project communication by enabling stakeholders to visualize and interact with digital models (Victor, 2023; Guo, 2025). AR overlays improve onsite accuracy, while VR allows remote walkthroughs and inclusive decision-making, building consensus and improving project outcomes (Vinasari & N, 2022).

3.10 Infrastructure Resilience by Design 

Infrastructure must withstand climate and conflict-related disruptions. Resilient design prioritizes adaptability through tools like RELi and Envision, which measure performance under stress (Tanasić & Hajdin, 2024; Argyroudis, 2022; Badolo, 2024). Climate adaptation codes in coastal areas now mandate features such as elevated corridors and floodable parks (Hoang et al., 2023).

3.11 Modular and Strategic Infrastructure Design 

Modular utility units provide essential services post-disaster, aiding rapid recovery (Řehák et al., 2022). Infrastructure corridors must consider geopolitical risks, particularly in transnational energy and logistics sectors (Medland et al., 2024). Strategic placement ensures continuity during disruptions.

3.12 Climate Risk and Geopolitical Foresight 

GIS and climate risk models help cities plan for natural disasters and political unrest (Miške et al., 2024). Conflict-aware design secures essential services like water and energy during crises (Lewis et al., 2023). Insurers are beginning to favour infrastructure with resilience ratings, incentivizing risk-informed planning (Phillips & Hay, 2019).

3.13 Future of Infrastructure Resilience 

Building resilient infrastructure demands tools that measure long-term adaptability and operational efficiency (Shoaei et al., 2024; Lantini, 2025). A holistic perspective that integrates climate foresight and socioeconomic factors is vital. Such infrastructure not only withstands shocks but also supports sustainable urban growth.

"Above-ground advances must be matched by below-ground strategy—subsurface infrastructure is essential for managing density, efficiency, and climate resilience in urban areas."

 

4. The Hidden Network – Subsurface Infrastructure for Urban Growth

Underground Solutions and Smart Utility Management 

As cities grow denser, efficient management of subsurface infrastructure becomes essential. Underground systems such as tunnels, subways, drainage, and utility corridors alleviate surface congestion while supporting critical services (Tann et al., 2018). Technological advances in utility monitoring and underground mapping now allow cities to optimize these networks, enhancing operational resilience and enabling more sustainable urban growth.

4.1 The Value of Below-Ground Infrastructure 

Subsurface infrastructure supports critical urban functions, including transport, utilities, and waste management. In dense cities, underground networks optimize land use and reduce surface-level crowding (Taka, 2025). Poorly maintained systems can lead to operational failures and high costs, underscoring the importance of proactive oversight (Luo & Lai, 2020). Effective subsurface planning also bolsters climate resilience and disaster risk mitigation (Sartirana et al., 2020).

4.2 Smart Planning and Utility Coordination Innovative utility management uses IoT and data-driven systems to identify issues before they disrupt service (Ferguson, 2025). Tools such as ground-penetrating radar (GPR) enhance the assessment of underground utilities (Luo & Lai, 2020). Advanced geospatial technologies help cities build accurate utility inventories, allowing for efficient planning and maintenance. Cross-sector collaboration is key to aligning surface and subsurface infrastructure goals (Foster & Gogu, 2022).

4.2a Governance and Coordination Barriers in Subsurface Planning

While innovative tools are transforming underground utility management, governance challenges often impede effective implementation. The lack of coordination between multiple utility providers, such as electricity, water, gas, and telecom, can result in duplicated efforts, delayed repairs, and costly excavations. Jurisdictional overlaps and fragmented regulations often lead to disputes over excavation rights, data-sharing reluctance, or unclear responsibilities in maintenance and planning. Without harmonized governance frameworks and shared utility databases, the potential of subsurface infrastructure remains underutilized. Interagency agreements, centralized permitting systems, and urban infrastructure charters are critical to enabling integrated subsurface development in dense cities.

4.3 Adaptive Infrastructure for Resilient Cities 

Resilience in infrastructure requires integrating subsurface systems with urban planning. Green infrastructure and permeable pavements improve stormwater management and reduce flood risks (Adebiyi et al., 2023). Urban groundwater planning must accompany infrastructure development to ensure secure and sustainable water supplies (Carpenter, 2022; Kumar et al., 2023). Cities like Milan use innovative grid models to manage water infrastructure adaptively (Sartirana et al., 2022).

4.4 The Future of Urban Infrastructure Management 

Urban growth depends on the effective management of subsurface infrastructure. IoT technologies enable real-time utility monitoring and efficient underground mapping (Neely & Upadhya, 2018). These networks reduce congestion and support adaptive systems, enhancing city resilience (Cripps et al., 2021). Integrating innovative planning with smart infrastructure tools ensures urban systems remain sustainable and livable amid growing complexity.

4.5 Strategic Use of Subsurface Networks in Urban Development 

Subsurface infrastructure supports sustainable growth by consolidating services such as water, power, telecom, and sewage in multi-utility tunnels (Bergman et al., 2022). reduces surface disruption and supports green space development (Tann et al., 2018; Visser et al., 2020). Cities like Tokyo and Paris expand underground transit to reduce congestion and mitigate heat island effects (Previati & Crosta, 2021).Figure 1. Cross-section of a Multi-Utility Tunnel System
A spatial diagram illustrating how urban services, such as sewage, fibre optics, gas, and electrical conduits, can be integrated with a consolidated underground corridor, reducing the need for repeated surface excavation.

 

4.6 Digital Twins and Smart Utility Monitoring 

Digital twin technology enables virtual modelling of underground assets, simulating system performance under varied conditions (Tann et al., 2018). These tools aid maintenance and reduce costly failures through anticipatory planning (Hooimeijer & Campenhout, 2018). Paired with IoT sensors, digital twins enable real-time data collection for leak detection, pressure monitoring, and predictive repairs (Al‐Ruzouq et al., 2018).

4.7 Climate-Responsive Underground Infrastructure Innovative drainage systems adjust in real time to weather patterns, optimizing stormwater control and preventing floods (Hooimeijer & Maring, 2018). These systems are especially valuable in cities experiencing rapid climate shifts. Combining digital twins with climate-responsive infrastructure creates systems that can dynamically adapt, improving overall urban resilience and reducing long-term operational costs.

4.8 Enhancing Resilience with Subsurface Solutions 

Integrating green and grey infrastructure enhances stormwater management and supports climate adaptation goals (Brom et al., 2023; Ferdilianto et al., 2023). Flood retention systems within underground networks help mitigate risks from heavy rainfall and sea-level rise (Leiteritz et al., 2022). Planning underground systems alongside surface infrastructure supports public health, safety, and livability.

4.9 Toward a Multidimensional Urban Strategy 

Multidimensional strategies that combine surface-level needs with subsurface planning are crucial for climate-resilient cities (Duri & Luke, 2022). Investments in underground infrastructure improve service delivery and environmental performance. As cities evolve, integrated and forward-thinking approaches will become essential in managing urban complexity.

4.10 Building Tomorrow's Cities with Subsurface Innovation 

Subsurface infrastructure is a strategic solution for urban resilience. Developing smart tunnels, drainage systems, and digital tools positions cities to grow sustainably (OLAOSEGBA et al., 2022). These networks underpin critical services while freeing up surface space for public use. Future-ready cities will rely on underground innovation to balance urban expansion with sustainability and quality of life.

No matter how advanced or hidden the infrastructure, its actual value lies in how it serves people—livable, inclusive cities require designs that prioritize humans, not vehicles."

5. Cities for All – Designing Infrastructure Around People, Not Just Cars

People-First and Inclusive Infrastructure  

Modern infrastructure must prioritize livability and inclusivity by focusing on community needs rather than just vehicular traffic. The shift involves integrating walkability, accessibility, gender-sensitive design, and equitable mobility into urban planning. Understanding the social dynamics of public spaces leads to improved economic opportunities and stronger social cohesion, laying the groundwork for cities that serve all residents effectively and equitably.

Despite the growing emphasis on people-centred design, vast disparities remain across global cities. In many rapidly urbanizing regions, particularly in the Global South, informal settlements often lack basic infrastructure such as paved sidewalks, adequate lighting, or reliable public transit. In Nairobi, for example, large portions of the urban poor walk long distances on unsafe roads, while in parts of Manila, public transport routes exclude low-income neighbourhoods altogether. These examples highlight the need for inclusive planning that reaches all social strata, not just formal, regulated urban zones.

5.1 Livability and Human-Centered Design 

Infrastructure designed for livability enhances urban life by supporting pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users (Ibanga & Idehen, 2020). Walkable environments with accessible amenities and attractive public spaces foster community engagement and improve well-being (Modi et al., 2021; Badolo, 2024; Hailemariam & Alfredsen, 2023). Inclusive infrastructure also boosts economic mobility by improvAccesscess for marginalized populations and ensuring safe environments for women and vulnerable groups (Ahmad et al., 2024; Ajjur & Al‐Ghamdi, 2022; Snel et al., 2020).

5.2 Integrated Mobility and Participatory Planning 

Integrated transport systems enhance connectivity by linking walking, cycling, and public transit (Januriyadi et al., 2018). Cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen promote cycling through cohesive infrastructure and supportive policies (Lee et al., 2021). Participatory planning strengthens infrastructure by involving communities in the design process, resulting in projects tailored to local needs (Durocher et al., 2019; Wasko et al., 2021). Collaboration with civic groups fosters inclusive and adaptive urban design.

5.3 Metrics for Social Equity and Smart Mobility 

Urban infrastructure must reflect livability and equity through clear metrics. These include accessibility, air quality, and noise levels, which indicate overall quality of life (Hudson et al., 2021). Innovative mobility technologies, such as real-time transit apps, support inclusive and efficient urban travel (Ramachandran et al., 2019; Ariffin, 2025). Planning that integrates these metrics allows cities to adjust strategies based on community needs and dynamic urban conditions (2024).

5.4 Complete Streets and Walkable Urban Design 

Complete Streets prioritize diverse transport modes with wider sidewalks, bike lanes, and safer crossings (Ibanga & Idehen, 2020; Modi et al., 2021). Cities like Bogotá and Boston demonstrate the benefits of prioritizing human mobility and public space enhancements (Ahmad et al., 2024; Pratt, 2022). Walkable environments promote social interaction, reduce emissions, and support local economies through increased foot traffic and accessible urban layouts (Januriyadi et al., 2018).

In addition to traditional livability indicators, cities should consider developing Equity in Infrastructure Dashboards—tools that visualize real-time data on accessibility gaps, infrastructure investment by neighbourhood, gender safety ratings, and transit affordability. Such dashboards, disaggregated by income, gender, age, and ability, would allow city planners and citizens to track progress toward infrastructure justice, hold decision-makers accountable, and allocate resources to historically underserved areas.

5.5 Inclusive and Gender-Sensitive Urban Planning 

Inclusive urban design incorporates gender-sensitive principles to meet diverse community needs (Khalatbari, 2024). Features like accessible transit, well-lit streets, and safe public spaces increase security for women and vulnerable populations (Chung & Grichting, 2024). Participatory tools such as public workshops and budgeting help communities shape infrastructure aligned with their priorities, resulting in more sustainable and equitable urban development (Puig‐Ribera et al., 2022; Echendu, 2023).

5.6 Smart Mobility Hubs for Seamless Transport 

Smart mobility hubs integrate buses, trains, bikes, and e-scooters, making travel seamless and efficient (Liasidou & Stylianou, 2024). These hubs reduce reliance on private cars and promote environmentally responsible transport (Ziervogel, 2019). Real-time data enables city officials to adjust services and plan expansions based on demand (Adji et al., 2023). Smart mobility supports equitaAccesscess while enhancing convenience and reducing urban congestion.

5.7 Community Engagement and Digital Participation 

Digital tools and participatory budgeting empower communities to influence infrastructure decisions (Jones, 2019). Residents allocate funds and provide feedback through online platforms, guiding planners toward responsive, inclusive policies (Cortinovis & Geneletti, 2018). These practices frame infrastructure as a shared public good, reinforcing trust and accountability between governments and citizens (Ferreira et al., 2024). Active engagement ensures that cities reflect the voices of diverse populations.

5.8 Toward Equitable Urban Futures 

Creating people-first infrastructure requires rethinking priorities to centre on human needs. Emphasizing walkability, integrated transport, digital inclusion, and equity metrics ensures that infrastructure supports vibrant, inclusive communities (Mochizuki et al., 2018). As cities face rising complexity, inclusive planning helps meet future challenges while fostering social resilience, economic opportunity, and a higher quality of life for all residents.

"The lessons from mobility, inclusion, and underground innovation come together in a new model—future-proof infrastructure built on five interdependent pillars."

 

  

 

6 Building Future-proof Cities Through Inclusive and Sustainable Infrastructure

6.1 Reimagining Urban Planning 

Designing infrastructure around people rather than cars requires a fundamental rethinking of urban planning. Prioritizing walkability, integrating public transport, and incorporating gender-sensitive designs help create livable cities that meet diverse needs (Khalatbari, 2024; Onwujekwe et al., 2021; Wang & Kim, 2021). These strategies enhance accessibility and inclusivity, contributing to healthier, more equitable urban environments.

6.2 Advancing People-First Infrastructure 

People-first urban infrastructure fosters social equity and improves the quality of life. By addressing long-standing disparities through inclusive design, cities become more resilient and supportive of all residents. With growing populations and environmental pressures, inclusive planning is essential for sustainable urban futures built on the principles of equity, livability, and shared ownership.

6.3 Rethinking Infrastructure Success 

The "Future-proof Foundations" initiative calls for a shift in infrastructure thinking. Traditional metrics must evolve beyond construction output to include carbon accountability, digital transparency, resilience, and human-centred approaches. Infrastructure is now viewed not just as physical assets but as living systems that serve ecological, social, and economic functions.

6.4 Five Pillars of Future Infrastructure

6.4.1 Decarbonization Infrastructure must align with global climate goals. Using low-carbon materials, adopting energy-efficient designs, and applying sustainable procurement strategies are vital steps toward net-zero targets (Waldman et al., 2020; Sun et al., 2024).

6.4.2 Digital Innovation 

Emerging technologies—such as AI, digital twins, and IoT—enhance infrastructure efficiency and adaptability. These tools reduce operational costs and support proactive management through predictive analytics (Orooje & Latifi, 2021; Dunn, 2025; Hooimeijer & Campenhout, 2018).

6.4.3 Resilience Planning 

Infrastructure must withstand climate and societal shocks. Risk-based, adaptive designs allow cities to remain functional amid disruptions, making resilience an essential criterion for future development (Argyroudis, 2022; Badolo, 2024; Ferdilianto et al., 2023).

6.4.4 Subsurface Management 

Urban growth demands more innovative below-ground infrastructure. Multi-utility tunnels and underground networks reduce surface congestion, optimize land use, and improve urban efficiency (Bergman et al., 2022; Qubaa & AL-Sayegh, 2023).

6.4.5 Inclusive Design 

Infrastructure must reflect community diversity. Inclusive, participatory planning ensures that public spaces serve all groups equitably, fostering collaboration and social cohesion (Ibanga & Idehen, 2020; Lee et al., 2021).

6.5 Aligning Innovation with Equity and Ecology 

Infrastructure must enhance the quality of life while supporting ecological and social sustainability. Participatory processes encourage civic engagement, while equitable investment ensures that all populations benefit. Greener solutions—such as parks, walkways, and clean transport—help mitigate urbanization's impacts (Puig‐Ribera et al., 2022; Ferreira et al., 2024; Rajović & Bulatović, 2017; Chapman & Larsson, 2019).

6.6 Conclusion: Toward a Just and Sustainable Urban Future 

People-centered, resilient infrastructure offers a robust response to modern urban challenges. Aligning design with innovation, justice, and ecological foresight enables stakeholders to shape cities that genuinely serve their populations. Sustainable urban development requires more than technical solutions—it demands inclusive visions rooted in humanity and shared progress.

 

✍️ "With the foundation laid, the following summary distils the series into key insights and guiding principles for action."

 

Conclusion & Policy Pathways: Building Forward with Purpose

As infrastructure systems evolve to meet 21st-century demands, the series underscores a unified message: the transformation must be bold, inclusive, and guided by long-term resilience. Integrating decarbonization, digital innovation, subsurface optimization, and inclusive design is no longer optional—it is foundational.

🧭 Call to Action: What Should Happen Next

For Governments:

• Implement policies that mainstream gender equity and cultural inclusion across infrastructure planning and execution.
• Support community-led infrastructure through participatory budgeting and co-design mechanisms.
• Address governance fragmentation with interagency coordination frameworks and dedicated infrastructure task forces.

For Investors:

• Prioritize funding models that reward inclusive, sustainable, and climate-resilient infrastructure.
• Support financing access for underserved regions and projects with strong social equity metrics.

For Communities:

• Engage in infrastructure co-design processes that reflect lived experience and localized needs.
• Advocate for recognition and integration of Indigenous and traditional knowledge systems in resilience planning.

---

🌐 Cross-Cutting Imperatives

·        Integrate gender equity consistently into planning, budgeting, and implementation—do not treat it as an afterthought.

·        Champion community-led infrastructure is the standard approach and is no exception.

·        Identify and address financing and policy barriers early, including governance silos, inadequate funding, and restrictive regulations, through targeted reforms.

·       Elevate cultural and Indigenous knowledge as a strategic asset to guide the development of resilient and sustainable infrastructure systems.

R  References

A. Ramachandran, K. Palanivelu, B. V. Mudgal, Anushiya Jeganathan, S Guganesh, Abinaya Balu, E. Arunbabu (2019). Climate change impact on fluvial flooding in the Indian sub-basin: A case study on the Adyar sub-basin. *Plos One*, 14(5), e0216461. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216461

A.S. Shaikh (2025). Overcoming the Practical Gap in Planning and Execution Phases of Residential Building Construction Using Cost-Effective AI Tools in Rural Areas. *Unknown Journal*, 3(3), 457-460. https://doi.org/10.47392/irjaem.2025.0072

Abdalrahman R. Qubaa, Aiman T. AL-Sayegh (2023). Study urban expansion in Mosul city using remote sensing data. *World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews*, 19(1), 1279-1288. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2023.19.1.1436

Abdullah Mohammad Abdelhamid Alhasan, Ebrahim Khaled Ebrahim Alawadhi (2024). Evaluating the Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Managing Construction Engineering Projects. *مجلة العلوم الهندسية و تكنولوجيا المعلومات*, 3(8), 28-38. https://doi.org/10.26389/ajsrp.k090724

Adaku Jane Echendu (2023). Urban planners’' perspectives of public participation in planning in Nigeria. *Sn Social Sciences*, 3(2), . https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00604-4

Adam Perring, Kieu Pham, Stephen Snow, Laurie Buys (2014). Investigation into the effect of infrastructure on fly‐in fly‐, fly-out mining workers. *Australian Journal of Rural Health*, 22(6), 323-327. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajr.12117

Adrian Ioana, Diana Cristina Labes, Nicolae Constantin, Augustin Semenescu, Roxana Marina Solea, Dumitru Deonise, Alexandra Istrate (2024). Strategies for Carbon Neutrality: Innovations in Construction Material Production and Usage. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202406.1352.v1

Adrianto Oktavianus, Iris Mahani (2018). A Global Review of Public-Private Partnerships Trends and Challenges for Social Infrastructure. *Matec Web of Conferences*, 147, 6001. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201814706001

Aksel Ersoy (2017). Smart cities as a mechanism towards a broader understanding of infrastructure interdependencies. *Regional Studies Regional Science*, 4(1), 26-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2017.1281154

Alberto Antonio López-Toro, Eva M. Sánchez‐Teba, María Dolores Benítez-Márquez, Mercedes Rodrı́guez-Fernández (2021). Influence of ESGC Indicators on Financial Performance of Listed Pharmaceutical Companies. *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health*, 18(9), 4556. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094556

Alberto Previati, Giovanni B. Crosta (2021). Characterization of the subsurface urban heat island and its sources in the Milan city area, Italy. *Hydrogeology Journal*, 29(7), 2487-2500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-021-02387-z

Alex Opoku (2019). Sustainable development, adaptation and maintenance of infrastructure. *International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation*, 37(1), 2025-05-02 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijbpa-02-2019-074

Ali Shoaei, Vitor Sousa, Carlos Oliveira Cruz (2024). Literature review on the evaluation of resilience in infrastructure projects. *Journal of Infrastructure Policy and Development*, 8(15), 9984. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd9984

Amit Kumar, Kumar Neeraj Jha, Geetam Tiwari (2023). Utility Industry as a Complex Adaptive System: A Strategic Analysis. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.11159/iccste23.174

Andrzej Szymon Borkowski, Jakub Brożyna, Julia Lesiuk (2024). Implementation of the telemetric integration of the BIM-RFID in the context of access control. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.14293/pr2199.000824.v1

Ang Yang, Mingzhe Han, Qingcheng Zeng, Yuhui Sun (2021). Adopting Building Information Modeling (BIM) for the Development of Smart Buildings: A Review of Enabling Applications and Challenges. *Advances in Civil Engineering*, 2021(1), . https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8811476

Ann Susan Thomas, Ambili Jayachandran, Ajithakumari Vijayappan Nair Biju (2024). Strategic mapping of the environmental social governance landscape in finance – A bibliometric exploration through concepts and themes. *Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management*, 31(5), 4428-4453. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2805

Anna Puig‐Ribera, Marta Rofin, Judit Bort‐Roig, Eva Aumatell, Albert Juncà i Pujol, Marc de San Pedro, Francesc García Cuyàs, Cati Chamorro, Lorena Perona-Ribes, Josep Torrentó, Guillem Jabardo-Camprubí, Fabiana Palmero, Marina Geli (2022). Integrating Health Into the Urban Master Plan of Vic, Barcelona: A Comprehensive Approach. *Urban Planning*, 7(4), . https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i4.5492

Antonio Aldykiewicz, Joe Hagerman, Diana Hun, Melissa Voss Lapsa, Mikael Salonvaara, D.A. Silva (2022). Sustainable Low-Carbon Building Materials Workshop Report. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.2172/1870210

Armita Khalatbari (2024). Gender Disparities in Urban Design: A Review of the Impact of Urban Design on Shaping Women's Social Challenges. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.1525.v1

Ashley Schram, Sharon Friel, Toby Freeman, M. Fisher, Fran Baum, Patrick Harris (2018). Digital Infrastructure as a Determinant of Health Equity: An Australian Case Study of the Implementation of the National Broadband Network. *Australian Journal of Public Administration*, 77(4), 829-842. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12323

Babra Duri, Rose Luke (2022). URBAN TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES IN THE CITY OF TSHWANE, SOUTH AFRICA: AN OBSERVATION AUDIT. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.2495/umt220071

Bahir Abdul Ghani - (2025). Harnessing AI for Smarter Construction: From Cost Estimation to Sustainability. *Unknown Journal*, 16(1), . https://doi.org/10.71097/ijsat.v16.i1.2701

Behnam Atazadeh, Hamed Olfat, Behzad Rismanchi, Davood Shojaei, Abbas Rajabifard (2019). Utilizing a Building Information Modelling Environment to Communicate the Legal Ownership of Internet of Things-Generated Data in Multi-Owned Buildings. *Electronics*, 8(11), 1258. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111258

Bernard Anim Manu (2024). Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for optimized project management and risk mitigation in the construction industry. *World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews*, 24(3), 2924-2940. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.24.3.4026

Bowen Qin, Tianyu Wang, Winka Dubbeldam, Justin Korhammer, Cong Huang, Dengguo Wu, Hongming Jiang (2023). An Integrated Application of Building Information Modeling, Computer-Aided Manufacturing, Machine Learning, and the Internet of Things – A Hybrid Stadium as a Case Study. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.caadria.2023.1.119

Bridget Pratt (2022). Equitable Urban Planning for Climate Change. *Journal of Planning Literature*, 38(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122221138125

Brook Waldman, Monica Huang, Kathrina Simonen (2020). Embodied carbon in construction materials: a framework for quantifying data quality in EPDs. *Buildings and Cities*, 1(1), 625-636. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.31

Carlos M. Chang, Gianine Tejada Salinas, Teresa Salinas Gamero, Stella Schroeder, Mario A. Vélez Canchanya, Syeda Lamiya Mahnaz (2023). An Infrastructure Management Humanistic Approach for Smart Cities Development, Evolution, and Sustainability. *Infrastructures*, 8(9), 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures8090127

Catherine Cripps, Michael Kehinde, Melinda M. Lewis, Marieta Garcia‐Bajo, B. Panteleit, Katherina Seiter (2021). Application Theme 4 – Regulatory Support. *Unknown Journal*, , 501-517. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119163091.ch21

Chia-En Yang, Yang-Ting Shen, Shih-Hao Liao (2021). SyncBIM: The Decision-Making BIM-Based Cloud Platform with Real-time Facial Recognition and Data Visualization. *Advances in Science Technology and Engineering Systems Journal*, 6(5), 16-22. https://doi.org/10.25046/aj060503

Chiara Cortinovis, Davide Geneletti (2018). Mapping and assessing ecosystem services to support urban planning: A case study on brownfield regeneration in Trento, Italy. *One Ecosystem*, 3, . https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e25477

Chris Carpenter (2022). Subsurface Characterization, Monitoring Play Role in Development of Gas-Storage Facilities. *Journal of Petroleum Technology*, 74(4), 55-57. https://doi.org/10.2118/0422-0055-jpt

Christopher John Medland, Jonathan Chenoweth, M. Mulheron (2024). Infrastructure climate change resilience: a review of resilience assessment frameworks. *Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering Sustainability*, 2014-01-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.1680/jensu.23.00105

Conrad Wasko, Seth Westra, Rory Nathan, Harriet G. Orr, Gabriele Villarini, Roberto Villalobos Herrera, Hayley J. Fowler (2021). Incorporating climate change in flood estimation guidance. *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences*, 379(2195), 20190548. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2019.0548

Daniela Rivas-Aybar, Michele John, Wahidul K. Biswas (2023). Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of a Novel Hemp-Based Building Material. *Materials*, 16(22), 7208. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16227208

Danny Huang (2021). Environmental, social and governance factors and assessing firm value: valuation, signalling and stakeholder perspectives. *Accounting and Finance*, 62(S1), 1983-2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12849

David Chapman, Agneta Larsson (2019). Toward an Integrated Model for Soft-Mobility. *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health*, 16(19), 3669. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193669

David Řehák, Simona Slivková, Heidi Janeckova, Dominika Stuberova, Martin Hromada (2022). Strengthening Resilience in the Energy Critical Infrastructure: Methodological Overview. *Energies*, 15(14), 5276. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15145276

Davide Sartirana, Chiara Zanotti, Marco Rotiroti, M De Amicis, Mariachiara Caschetto, Agnese Redaelli, Letizia Fumagalli, Tullia Bonomi (2022). Quantifying Groundwater Infiltrations into Subway Lines and Underground Car Parks Using MODFLOW-USG. *Water*, 14(24), 4130. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14244130

Davide Sartirana, Marco Rotiroti, Tullia Bonomi, M De Amicis, Veronica Nava, Letizia Fumagalli, Chiara Zanotti (2022). Data-driven decision management of urban underground infrastructure through groundwater-level time-series cluster analysis: the case of Milan (Italy). *Hydrogeology Journal*, 30(4), 1157-1177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-022-02494-5

Davide Sartirana, Marco Rotiroti, Chiara Zanotti, Tullia Bonomi, Letizia Fumagalli, M De Amicis (2020). A 3D Geodatabase for Urban Underground Infrastructures: Implementation and Application to Groundwater Management in Milan Metropolitan Area. *Isprs International Journal of Geo-Information*, 9(10), 609. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9100609

Dongmin Lee, Sang Hyun Lee (2021). Digital Twin for Supply Chain Coordination in Modular Construction. *Applied Sciences*, 11(13), 5909. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11135909

Elena Escrig‐Olmedo, María Ángeles Fernández Izquierdo, Idoya Ferrero‐Ferrero, Juana María Rivera‐Lirio, María Jesús Muñoz Torres (2019). Rating the Raters: Evaluating how ESG Rating Agencies Integrate Sustainability Principles. *Sustainability*, 11(3), 915. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030915

Fabrizio Cumo, Federica Giustini, Elisa Pennacchia, Carlo Romeo (2022). The “D2P” Approach: Digitalisation, Production and Performance in the Standardised Sustainable Deep Renovation of Buildings. *Energies*, 15(18), 6689. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15186689

Fahad Iqbal, Shiraz Ahmed, Fayiz Amin, Siddra Qayyum, Fahim Ullah (2023). Integrating BIM†and IoT and Autonomous Mobile Robots for Construction Site Layout Printing. *Buildings*, 13(9), 2212. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13092212

Fei Wang, Huihui Du, Zhong Zheng, Dong Xu, Ying Wang, Ning Li, Wen Ni, Chao Ren (2024). The Impact of Fly Ash on the Properties of Cementitious Materials Based on Slag-Steel Slag-Gypsum Solid Waste. *Materials*, 17(19), 4696. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17194696

Filip Bergman, Stefan Anderberg, Joakim Krook, Niclas Svensson (2022). A Critical Review of the Sustainability of Multi-Utility Tunnels for Colocation of Subsurface Infrastructure. *Frontiers in Sustainable Cities*, 4, . https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2022.847819

Fillah Babul Fathatul Jannah, Dian Hidayati (2022). IMPLEMENTATION OF CHILD-FRIENDLY SCHOOL POLICIES TOWARDS BUILDING THE CHARACTER OF STUDENTS IN SD BANTUL DISTRICT. *International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science*, 5(5), 105-109. https://doi.org/10.54922/ijehss.2022.0443

Fransje Hooimeijer, Ignace van Campenhout (2018). Distributed Agency Between 2D and 3D Representation of the Subsurface. *International Journal of 3-D Information Modeling*, 7(2), 35-56. https://doi.org/10.4018/ij3dim.2018040102

Fransje Hooimeijer, Linda Maring (2018). The significance of the subsurface in urban renewal. *Journal of Urbanism International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability*, 11(3), 303-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2017.1422532

Gefri Yanda, Mawardi Amin, Tjiptogoro Dinarjo Soehari (2019). Investment, Returns, and Risk of Building Information Modeling (BIM) Implementation in Indonesia’s Construction Project. *International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology*, 9(1), 5159-5166. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.a1806.109119

Gengbin Zhang, Jianxiang Xie, Jiaqi Wu, Chen Chang, Zhichao Fu, Jiajun Ou (2024). Role and challenge of artificial intelligence in power grid construction management. *Unknown Journal*, , 130. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3054949

Gina Ziervogel (2019). Building transformative capacity for adaptation planning and implementation that works for the urban poor: Insights from South Africa. *Ambio*, 48(5), 494-506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1141-9

Goran Rajović, Jelisavka Bulatović (2017). SOME ASPECTS OF RURAL-URBAN INTERDEPENDENCE: ECONOMIC-GEOGRAPHICAL VIEW. *Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences*, 61(1), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.18551/rjoas.2017-01.03

Grant Ferguson (2025). Balancing Geothermal Potential and Subsurface Challenges. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-14599

Hans Lööf, Maziar Sahamkhadam, Andreas Stephan (2023). Incorporating ESG into Optimal Stock Portfolios for the Global Timber & Forestry Industry. *Journal of Forest Economics*, 38(2), 133-157. https://doi.org/10.1561/112.00000560

Helen Hoang, Othniel Williams, Annette L. Stumpf (2023). Pattern language for a more resilient future. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/47700

Heming Wang, Yao Wang, Cong Fan, Xinzhe Wang, Yao Wei, Zhihe Zhang, Jiashi Wang, Fengmei Ma, Qiang Yue (2020). Material Consumption and Carbon Emissions Associated with the Infrastructure Construction of 34 Cities in Northeast China. *Complexity*, 2020, 2020-01-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4364912

Herawati Zetha Rahman, Azaria Andreas, Dian Perwitasari, Jade Sjafrecia Petroceany (2019). Developing a typology for social infrastructure (Case study: Roadside station infrastructure). *Matec Web of Conferences*, 276, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201927602020

Huan Gao, Xinke Wang, Kang Wu, Yarong Zheng, Qize Wang, Wei Shi, He Meng (2023). A Review of Building Carbon Emission Accounting and Prediction Models. *Buildings*, 13(7), 1617. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13071617

I.M. Chethana S. Illankoon, Sadith Chinthaka Vithanage, Nethmin Malshani Pilanawithana (2023). Embodied Carbon in Australian Residential Houses: A Preliminary Study. *Buildings*, 13(10), 2559. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13102559

Isnawa Adji, I Nyoman Sumaryadi, Djohermansyah Djohan, Hyronimus Rowa (2023). Collaborative Governance in the Management of Transportation Modes in DKI Jakarta Province. *Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Administrasi Publik*, 13(2), 747. https://doi.org/10.26858/jiap.v13i2.56440

J Ferreira, Tatiana Tucunduva Philippi Cortese, Tan YiÄŸitcanlar (2024). Urban Planning for Disaster Risk Reduction: A Systematic Review of Essential Requirements. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5328043/v1

J Neely, Vasuki Upadhya (2018). Guest Editorial: Higher Capability, Lower Costs With Cloud Subsurface Data Management. *Journal of Petroleum Technology*, 70(7), 14-15. https://doi.org/10.2118/0718-0014-jpt

James Olaonipekun Toyin, Modupe Cecilia Mewomo (2022). An investigation of barriers to the application of building information modelling in Nigeria. *Journal of Engineering Design and Technology*, 21(2), 442-468. https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-10-2021-0594

Jason Slade, Andy Inch, Lee Crookes (2021). Building infrastructures for inclusive regeneration. *Land Use Policy*, 109, 105606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105606

Jennie Phillips, Alexander H Hay (2019). Building resilience in virtual digital response networks: a case study. *Infrastructure Asset Management*, 6(2), 68-85. https://doi.org/10.1680/jinam.17.00001

Jeremiah A. Adebiyi, Jim Anspach, Roy Sturgill (2023). Return on Investment of Implementing Subsurface Utility Engineering on Transportation Projects: A Review and Analysis of Previous Cost–Benefit Studies. *Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board*, 2678(7), 1043-1054. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981231211890

Jian Jiao (2020) Applications on the prospects of artificial intelligence in the mart grid. *Iop Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science*, 510(2), 22012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/510/2/022012

Jiannan Guo (2025). Automated Document Generation for Power Infrastructure: An AI-Powered System Using Large Language Models. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.3233/atde241355

Jin-Young Lee, Ho-Jun Son, Dongwook Kim, Jae-Hee Ryu, Tae‐Woong Kim (2021). Evaluating the Hydrologic Risk of n-Year Floods According to RCP Scenarios. *Water*, 13(13), 1805. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131805

Jingguo Rong, Lizhong Qi, Hongbo Wu, Ming Zhang, Xiancun Hu (2023). Framework for Evaluating the BIM Application Performance: A Case Study of a Grid Information Modeling System. *Sustainability*, 15(15), 11658. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511658

Jingjing Sun, Xin Guan, S. C. Yuan, Yalin Guo, Yongtao Tan, Ya-Juan Gao (2024). Public health perspectives on green efficiency through smart cities, artificial intelligence for healthcare, and low-carbon building materials. *Frontiers in Public Health*, 12, . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1440049

Jinquan Xing (2024). Enhancing large-span structure design and maintenance through the synergy of CAD, BIM, and IoT-AI technologies. *Applied and Computational Engineering*, 57(1), 241-246. https://doi.org/10.54254/2755-2721/57/20241340

Jiuyue Wang, Soobong Kim (2021). Research on urban park planning countermeasures from the perspective of inclusive cities. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.47472/r5rx8e9g

Julieta Eka Yudo Putri, M. Mirza Abdillah Pratama, Undayani Cita Sari (2023). Embodied carbon analysis on a multi-story building using a flat slab and a conventional slab system. *E3s Web of Conferences*, 445, 1037. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202344501037

Jun Xie, Yoshitaka Tanaka, Alexander Ryota Keeley, Hidemichi Fujii, Shunsuke Managi (2023). Do investors incorporate financial materiality? Remapping the environmental information in corporate sustainability reporting. *Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management*, 30(6), 2924-2952. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2524

Junko Mochizuki, Thomas Schinko, Stefan Hochrainer‐Stigler (2018). Mainstreaming of climate extreme risk into fiscal and budgetary planning: application of stochastic debt and disaster fund analysis in Austria. *Regional Environmental Change*, 18(7), 2161-2172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1300-3

Karin A. W. Snel, Patrick Witte, Thomas Hartmann, Stan Geertman (2020). The shifting position of homeowners in flood resilience: From recipients to key‐stakeholders. *Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water*, 7(4), . https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1451

Kaznah Alshammari, Thomas Beach, Yacine Rezgui (2021). Cybersecurity for digital twins in the built environment: current research and future directions. *Journal of Information Technology in Construction*, 26, 159-173. https://doi.org/10.36680/j.itcon.2021.010

Kristin C. Lewis, Jonathan Badgley, Dan F. B. Flynn, Olivia Gillham, Alexander Oberg, Gretchen E. Reese, Scott Smith, Kevin Zhang (2023). Resilience and Disaster Recovery Tool Suite for Evaluating Resilient Infrastructure Return on Investment with a Robust Decision-Making Metamodeling Approach. *Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board*, 2678(3), 493-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981231180205

Leonardo Sierra, Eugenio Pellicer, Víctor Yepes (2017). Method for estimating the social sustainability of infrastructure projects. *Environmental Impact Assessment Review*, 65, 41-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.02.004

Lilin Wu, Minxi Wang, Jingyu Cheng, Xin Li (2022). Embodied carbon emission of building materials in Southwest China: Analysis based on Tapio decoupling and LMDI decomposition. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1776035/v1

Livia Lantini (2025). Ground Penetrating Radar and Community Engagement for Enhancing Resilience in Green Infrastructure . *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-18888

Loretta von der Tann, Nicole Metje, Han Admiraal, Brian Collins (2018). The hidden role of the subsurface for cities. *Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Civil Engineering*, 171(6), 31-37. https://doi.org/10.1680/jcien.17.00028

Loretta von der Tann, Nicole Metje, Han Admiraal, Brian Collins (2018). The hidden role of the subsurface for cities. *Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Civil Engineering*, 171(6), 31-37. https://doi.org/10.1680/jcien.17.00028

Luciana Teixeira Batista, José Ricardo Queiroz Franco, Ricardo Hall Fakury, Marcelo Franco Porto, Lucas Vinicius Ribeiro Alves, Gabriel Santos Kohlmann (2023). <i>BIM-IoT-FM</i> integration: strategy for implementation of sustainable water management in buildings. *Smart and Sustainable Built Environment*. https://doi.org/10.1108/sasbe-11-2022-0250

M. Venu (2025). Home Builder AI for Intelligent Construction Planning with Cost Estimates, Weather Forecasting and Quality Analysis. *International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology*, 13(2), 174-184. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2025.66822

Maciej Stawicki, GintarÄ— VaznonienÄ— (2020). ASSESSMENT OF RURAL SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES IN LITHUANIA AND POLAND IN THE CONTEXT OF GREEN ECONOMY. *Rural Development 2019*, 2019(1), 478-485. https://doi.org/10.15544/rd.2019.072

Maija Taka (2025). Briefing: Groundwater and the subsurface. *Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Civil Engineering*, 2025-05-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.1680/jcien.24.00512

Maksym Dzerun, I. Ovdiienko (2024). DEVELOPMENT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MODEL IN THE FIELD OF ATOMIC ENERGY AS A TOOL OF SUPPORT IN DECISION-MAKING. *Power Engineering Economics Technique Ecology*, (3), . https://doi.org/10.20535/1813-5420.3.2024.314596

Manuel Martin-Utrillas, Francisco Juan-Garcia, Julian Canto-Perello, Jorge Curiel‐Esparza (2014). Optimal infrastructure selection to boost the regional sustainable economy. *International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology*, , 2025-09-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2014.954023

Mariam Abdalla Alketbi, Fikri Dweiri, Doraid Dalalah (2024). The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Aviation Construction Projects in the United Arab Emirates: Insights from Construction Professionals. *Applied Sciences*, 15(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010110

Martin Durocher, Donald H. Burn, Fahim Ashkar (2019). Comparison of Estimation Methods for a Nonstationary Index‐Flood Model in Flood Frequency Analysis Using Peaks Over Threshold. *Water Resources Research*, 55(11), 9398-9416. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019wr025305

Massimo Bricocoli, Benedetta Marani, Stefania Sabatinelli (2022). The Spaces of Social Services as Social Infrastructure: Insights From a Policy-Innovation Project in Milan. *Urban Planning*, 7(4), . https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i4.5720

Massimo Regona, Tan YiÄŸitcanlar, Bo Xia, Rita Yi Man Li (2022). Opportunities and Adoption Challenges of AI in the Construction Industry: A PRISMA Review. *Journal of Open Innovation Technology Market and Complexity*, 8(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010045

Mathieu Badolo (2024). Modeling and planning interdependent critical urban infrastructures' resilience to extreme events: the Badolo Cires model. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.22541/au.171148942.23175536/v1

Matías Herrera Dappe, Vivien Foster, Aldo Musacchio, Teresa Ter‐Minassian, Burak Turkgulu (2023). Off the Books: Understanding and Mitigating the Fiscal Risks of Infrastructure. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1937-7

Małgorzata Lekan, Heather A. Rogers (2020). Digitally enabled diverse economies: exploring socially inclAccessaccess to the circular economy in the city. *Urban Geography*, 41(6), 898-901. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2020.1796097

Md Asrul Nasid Masrom, Chukwuka Christian Ohueri, Ajlaa Najihah Azman, Melissa Chan (2024). Guidelines for Facilitating Stakeholders' Roles in Community Engagement in Green Social Infrastructure Development. *International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering Technology*, 15(1), . https://doi.org/10.30880/ijscet.2024.15.01.001

Melissa Chan, Md Asrul Nasid Masrom, Suleiman Said Yasin (2022). Selection of Low-Carbon Building Materials in Construction Projects: ConstructionProfessionals’'™ Perspectives. *Buildings*, 12(4), 486. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12040486

Michal Miške, Boris Kollár, Zdeněk Dvořák, Jozef Ristvej (2024). Vulnerability of the Infrastructure: Risk Management and Implementation of the Information System. International Scientific Conference of Environmental and Climate Technology, 100. https://doi.org/10.7250/conect.2024.072

Mina Sadat Orooje, Mohammad Mehdi Latifi (2021). A Review of Embedding Artificial Intelligence in Internet of Things and Building Information Modelling for Healthcare Facility Maintenance Management. *Energy and Environment Research*, 11(2), 31. https://doi.org/10.5539/eer.v11n2p31

Mostafa Babaeian Jelodar (2025). Generative AI, Large Language Models, and ChatGPT in Construction Education, Training, and Practice. *Buildings*, 15(6), 933. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15060933

Nikola Tanasić, Rade Hajdin (2024). Resilience-based decision making for transportation infrastructure. *IABSE Congress Report*, 24, 498-506. https://doi.org/10.2749/sanjose.2024.0498

Nolan Dunn (2025). The Impact of AI in the Construction Industry. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.14293/p2199-8442.1.sop-.pehzko.v1

Nurul Fajar Januriyadi, So Kazama, Idham Riyando Moe, Shuichi KURE (2018). Evaluation of future flood risk in Asian megacities: a case study of Jakarta. *Hydrological Research Letters*, 12(3), 14-22. https://doi.org/10.3178/hrl.12.14

Nwosu Obinnaya Chikezie Victor (2023). Revolutionizing Construction: The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Productivity. *International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning*, 3(2), 57-73. https://doi.org/10.51483/ijaiml.3.2.2023.57-73

Nwosu Obinnaya Chikezie Victor (2023). The Application of Artificial Intelligence for Construction Project Planning. *Unknown Journal*, 1(2), 67-95. https://doi.org/10.18178/jaai.2023.1.2.67-95

O. Drobotiuk (2019). Chinese Megacities: Economic Growth and Development. *Chinese Studies*, 2019(2), 13-28. https://doi.org/10.15407/chinesest2019.02.013

Obinna Onwujekwe, Chinyere Mbachu, Chukwuedozie K. Ajaero, Benjamin Uzochukwu, Prince Agwu, Juliana C. Onuh, Charles T. Orjiakor, Aloysius Odii, Tolib Mirzoev (2021). Analysis of equity and social inclusiveness of national urban development policies and strategies through the lenses of health and nutrition. *International Journal for Equity in Health*, 20(1), . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01439-w

Obot Akpan Ibanga, Osaretin Friday Idehen (2020). GIS-Based Climate Change-Induced Flood Risk Mapping in Uhunmwonde Local Government Area, Edo State, Nigeria. *International Journal of Environment and Climate Change*, 2023-08-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2020/v10i930225

Onesmus Mbaabu Mutiiria, Qingjiang Ju, Koffi Dumor (2020). Infrastructure and inclusive growth in sub-Saharan Africa: An empirical analysis. *Progress in Development Studies*, 20(3), 187-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464993420927507

Parthkumar Modi, Jonathan A. Czuba, Zachary M. Easton (2021). Coupling a land surface model with a hydrodynamic model for regional flood risk assessment due to climate change: Application to the Susquehanna River near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. *Journal of Flood Risk Management*, 15(1), . https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12763

Paul Hudson, Philip Bubeck, Annegret H. Thieken (2021). A comparison of flood-protective decision-making between German households and businesses. *Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change*, 27(1), . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-021-09982-1

Paul Jones (2019). The Case for Inclusion of International Planning Studios in Contemporary Urban Planning Pedagogy. *Sustainability*, 11(15), 4174. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154174

Peta Brom, Kristine Engemann, Ida Breed, Maya Pasgaard, Titilope Onaolapo, Jens‐Christian Svenning (2023). A Decision Support Tool for Green Infrastructure Planning in the Face of Rapid Urbanization. *Land*, 12(2), 415. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12020415

Peter Mésároš, Jana Smetanková, Annamária Behúnová, Katarína Krajníková (2024). The Potential of Using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Analyse the Impact of the Construction Industry on the Carbon Footprint. *Mobile Networks and Applications*, 29(3), 1038-1052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11036-024-02368-y

Philip W. Visser, Henk Kooi, Victor Bense, Emiel Boerma (2020). Impacts of progressive urban expansion on subsurface temperatures in the city of Amsterdam (The Netherlands). *Hydrogeology Journal*, 28(5), 1755-1772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-020-02150-w

Pinxuan He, Kun Hu, Siyuan Nie, Zheng Tao, Jiangshan Zhu (2023). Stock Selection and Portfolio Performance Based on ESG Scores. *Academic Journal of Business & Management*, 5(11), . https://doi.org/10.25236/ajbm.2023.051102

Qiankun Wang, Ke Zhu, Peiwen Guo, Jiaji Zhang, Zhihua Xiong, Haodong Wu (2024). Analysis of the Development Trends and Key Challenges of Zero Carbon Buildings in Tropical Islands. *Advances in Economics and Management Research*, 9(1), 132. https://doi.org/10.56028/aemr.9.1.132.2024

Qiuqiong Peng (2023). ESG Information Disclosure of Listed Companies Based on Entropy Weight Algorithm Under the Background of Double Carbon. *International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach*, 16(3), 2013-01-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijitsa.326756

R. Krishankumar, Arunodaya Raj Mishra, Fausto Cavallaro, Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, Jurgita Antuchevičienė, K. S. Ravichandran (2022). A New Approach to the Viable Ranking of Zero-Carbon Construction Materials with Generalized Fuzzy Information. *Sustainability*, 14(13), 7691. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137691

Rafi Ferdilianto, Bariq Akmal Malik, Christopher David Evans, Fira Najwah BSA, Nadira Refiana (2023). Smart Cities and Tourism: A Paradiplomatic Approach Between Jakarta and Galicia. *Journal of Paradiplomacy and City Networks*, 2(2), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.18196/jpcn.v2i2.37

Rami Al‐Ruzouq, Abdallah Shanableh, Z. Boharoon, Mohamad Ali Khalil (2018). CALIBRATED MULTI-TEMPORAL EDGE IMAGES FOR CITY INFRASTRUCTURE GROWTH ASSESSMENT AND PREDICTION. *The International Archives of the Photogrammetry Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences*, XLII-3/W4, 37-44. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-xlii-3-w4-37-2018

Raphael Leiteritz, Kyle Frankel Davis, Miriam Schulte, Dirk Pflüger (2022). A Deep Learning Approach for Thermal Plume Prediction of Groundwater Heat Pumps. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2203.14961

Ria Rizkia Alvi, Ria Novianti, Betty Yulia Wulansari, Aulia Vikriani (2023). Inclusive Education for Early-Age Blind Children. *SHS Web of Conferences*, 173, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202317302002

Richard Yeaw Chong Seow (2023). Determinants of environmental, social, and governance disclosure: A systematic literature review. *Business Strategy and the Environment*, 33(3), 2314-2330. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3604

Roberto Naboni, Salvatore Dario Marino (2021). Wedged Kerfing. Design and Fabrication Experiments in Programmed Wood Bending. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.5151/sigradi2021-85

Ruben Yu-an Chung, Anna Grichting (2024). Gender-inclusive urban planning: European frameworks as a potential methodology for Arabian Gulf urban parks. *International Journal of Architectural Research Archnet-Ijar*, 18(3), 519-540. https://doi.org/10.1108/arch-09-2023-0260

Rui Zhang, Lu Li, Libo Cui, Tao Liu, Bangchao Zhang, Shunsheng Wang, Yuting Zhao, Wenyi Hu, Chengchao Liao, Kang Song (2024). Strategy and Methods for Carbon Emission Mitigation during Construction of Rail Transit. *Acs Omega*, 9(32), 34175-34184. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.4c04064

S. Thomas Ng (2015). Reducing the embodied carbon of construction projects through a carbon emission encompassed tender. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.2495/esus150341

Salah Basem Ajjur, Sami G. Al‐Ghamdi (2022). Exploring urban growthâ€, climate changeâ€, and flood risk nexus in fast-growing cities. *Scientific Reports*, 12(1), . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16475-x

Satyabrata Aich, Ayusha Thakur, Deepanjan Nanda, Sushanta Tripathy, Hee‐Cheol Kim (2021). Factors Affecting ESG towards Impact on Investment: A Structural Approach. *Sustainability*, 13(19), 10868. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910868

Scott J. Niblock (2024). ESG and the performance of energy and utility portfolios: evidence from Australia. *Studies in Economics and Finance*, 41(3), 502-521. https://doi.org/10.1108/sef-06-2023-0366

Seble Fissha Hailemariam, Knut Alfredsen (2023). Quantitative Flood Risk Assessment in Drammenselva River, Norway. *Water*, 15(5), 920. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15050920

Shakeel Ahmad, Haifeng Jia, Anam Ashraf, Dingkun Yin, Zhenxia Chen, Rasheed Ahmed, Muhammad Israr (2024). A Novel GIS-SWMM-ABM Approach for Flood Risk Assessment in Data-Scarce Urban Drainage Systems. *Water*, 16(11), 1464. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16111464

Shreeshail Heggond (2025). Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for Smart Construction: Enhancing Real-Time Monitoring and Decision Making. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.70593/978-93-49307-33-9

Sizheng Liu (2023). Summary of Reasons:on Low-Carbon Development of the Construction Industry under the "Dual Carbon" Goal. *Frontiers in Sustainable Development*, 3(5), 24-28. https://doi.org/10.54691/fsd.v3i5.5010

Solıhu O. OLAOSEGBA, Adedayo Olujobi Alagbe, Michael Oketunde Okegbola, Bukola Badeji – Ajisafe (2022). Spatial Expansion and Population Growth Analysis of Ogbomos Metropolis to Forestall Overwhelming Available Infrastructures. *International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics*, 9(2), 2017-09-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.30897/ijegeo.804755

Sotirios Argyroudis (2022). Resilience metrics for transport networks: a review and practical examples for bridges. *Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Bridge Engineering*, 175(3), 179-192. https://doi.org/10.1680/jbren.21.00075

Sotiroula Liasidou, Christiana Stylianou (2024). Coexistence of Tourism in Urban Planning: Active Living, Social Sustainability, and Inclusivity. *Sustainability*, 16(8), 3435. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083435

Stephen Foster, Constantin Radu Gogu (2022). Groundwater Assessment and Management for sustainable water-supply and coordinated subsurface drainage. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.2166/9781789063110

T. P. Ogun (2010). Infrastructure and Poverty Reduction: Implications for Urban Development in Nigeria. *Urban Forum*, 21(3), 249-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-010-9091-8

Tasneem Haider Khan - (2024). Flood Risks Analysis in Upton Upon Severn: Assessing the Baseline Conditions and Future Scenarios for 100 and 1000-year Flood Events with a 2050 Climate Change Perspective.. *International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research*, 6(5), . https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i05.28367

Tatiana Borisova, Yulia Molchanova, Evgenia Ermakova (2025). The future of green building: The role of VR and artificial intelligence in improving BIM efficiency. *E3s Web of Conferences*, 614, 5004. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202561405004

Tess Xianghuan Luo, Wallace Wai‐Lok Lai (2020). Subsurface Diagnosis With Time-Lapse GPR Slices and Change Detection Algorithms. *Ieee Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing*, 13, 935-940. https://doi.org/10.1109/jstars.2020.2975659

Timothy W. Luke (2022). Investment and Rapid Climate Change as Biopolitics: Foucault and Governance of the Self and Others through ESG. *Sustainability*, 14(22), 14974. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142214974

Valentina Villa, Berardo Naticchia, Giulia Bruno, Khurshid Aliev, Paolo Piantanida, Dario Antonelli (2021). IoT Open-Source Architecture for the Maintenance of Building Facilities. *Applied Sciences*, 11(12), 5374. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11125374

Vicente Blanca Giménez, Jennifer Dayan Nuñez Avila (2022). Timber Buildings: A Sustainable Construction Alternative. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.4995/vibrarch2022.2022.15307

Vilma Atkočiūnienė, Alvydas Aleksandravičius, Gunta Grīnberga-Zālīte (2021). The Strengthening of Territorial Cohesion Through the Development of Rural Social Infrastructure. *Regional Formation and Development Studies*, 16(2), 2015-05-01 00:00:00. https://doi.org/10.15181/rfds.v15i2.1080

Vinasari Vinasari, Ronny Dorrotun N (2022). Study of Perception of The Use of BIM Technology (Building Information Modeling) In Urban Infrastructure Projects In Surabaya. *Adri International Journal of Civil Engineering*, 5(2), 23-30. https://doi.org/10.29138/aijce.v5i2.6

Wan Noorul Hafilah Wan Ariffin (2025). Overtopping risk of high-hazard eembankment damsunder climate change conditions. *Plos One*, 20(2), e0311181. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0311181

Wenling Liu, Kui Jing (2023). ESG portfolio for TDFs with time‐varying higher moments and cardinality constraint. *International Transactions in Operational Research*, 31(6), 4270-4295. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.13364

Wenque Liu, Ming Shan, Sheng Zhang, Xianbo Zhao, Zhao Zhai (2022). Resilience in Infrastructure Systems: A Comprehensive Review. *Buildings*, 12(6), 759. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12060759

Wenyan Wu, Michael Leonard (2019). Impact of ENSO on the dependence between extreme rainfall and storm surge. *Environmental Research Letters*, 14(12), 124043. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab59c2

Wenying Zhang, Yuwei Liu, Shaole Yu, Yujian Zhang, Lianping Yang, Ligang Qi (2023). The Application Research of BIM Technology in the Construction Process of Yancheng Nanyang Airport. *Buildings*, 13(11), 2846. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13112846

Worawan Natephra, Ali Motamedi (2019). Live Data Visualization of IoT Sensors Using Augmented Reality (AR) and BIM. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.22260/isarc2019/0084

Wu Zhao (2024). Research Trend in the Development of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG). *Advances in Economics Management and Political Sciences*, 122(1), 183-194. https://doi.org/10.54254/2754-1169/2024.17815

Xiaodong Hu, Ximing Zhang, Lei Dong, Hujun Li, Zheng He, Huihua Chen (2022). Carbon Emission Factors Identification and Measurement Model Construction for Railway Construction Projects. *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health*, 19(18), 11379. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811379

Xie Qing-sheng, Xiaoping Zhou, Jia Wang, Xinao Gao, Xi Chen, Chun Liu (2019). Matching Real-World Facilities to Building Information Modeling Data Using Natural Language ProcessingAccesse Access*, 7, 119465-119475. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2937219

Yali Chen, Xiaozi Wang, Zhen Liu, Jia Cui, Mohamed Osmani, Peter Demian (2023). Exploring Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Internet of Things (IoT) Integration for Sustainable Building. *Buildings*, 13(2), 288. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13020288

Yitong Chai (2023). Analysis and prospect of green building engineering based on BIM technology. *Applied and Computational Engineering*, 25(1), 74-82. https://doi.org/10.54254/2755-2721/25/20230739

Yuhua Zhang, Xiaojing Li, Chun Man Chan, Yifan Li, Ka Wai Fan, Dai Ji, Da Shi (2023). Carbon reduction performance and economic analysis in building construction - a pilot trial of low-carbon construction in the O•PARK2 construction phase. *Hkie Transactions*, 30(2), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.33430/v30n2thie-2022-0066

Yuxuan Jiang (2024). Research On the Application of Intelligent Management Technology in Construction Engineering. *Highlights in Science Engineering and Technology*, 106, 616-622. https://doi.org/10.54097/t17rdx47

Yuzhao Liu, Shaojun Hong, Fan Jiang (2023). Application of BIM+IoT technology in the design, operation, and maintenance stages of smart buildings. *Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering*, 23(6), 3255-3270. https://doi.org/10.3233/jcm-226910

Zahra Moussavi Nadoushani, Ali Akbarnezhad (2015). Comparative Analysis of Embodied Carbon Associated with Alternative Structural Systems. *Unknown Journal*, , . https://doi.org/10.22260/isarc2015/0115

Zakari Mustapha, Benjamin Boahene Akomah, Ofosu Emmanuel Kwaku, Morena William Nkomo, Wellington Didi Thwala (2024). Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for Transformative Impact in the Ghanaian Construction Sector. *Journal of Applied Science and Technology Trends*, 5(2), 72-80. https://doi.org/10.38094/jastt52209

Zongyang Zhang, Xinyao Lin, Yuqi Chen (2023). Comprehensive Evaluation of Carbon Emissions from Residential Buildings Based on the TOPSIS Method. *Environment Resource and Ecology Journal*, 7(5), . https://doi.org/10.23977/erej.2023.070510

R