MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285796890 · doi:10.3390/su14148808

Green Building Contractors 2025: Analyzing and Forecasting Green Building Contractors’ Market Trends in the US

2022· article· en· W4285796890 on OpenAlexaff
Hala Sanboskani, Mounir El Asmar, Elie Azar

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueCarbon footprintMarket shareGreen buildingPopulationBusinessMarketingTransport engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental economicsIndustrial organizationFinanceEconomicsArchitectural engineeringGreenhouse gas

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With population growth, the demand for building construction is continuously increasing. This comes at the price of the built environment where the building sector is contributing to large energy consumption and carbon footprint releases. To encourage sustainable construction, contractors need to see the market benefit of “going green”. Previous studies of green building contractors (GBCs) mainly relied on qualitative discussions and lacked studying the market performance which drives contractors’ decisions the most. This paper collects GBC revenue data from the Engineering News-Record magazine for the top 100 GBCs over a 13-year period and performs trend analysis to assess the market performance of GBCs and time series analysis to forecast future revenues. In addition, k-means clustering technique was used to divide the firms into subsets of similar behavior to understand growth trends for different firm sizes. The results show a continuous increase in green building revenues (GBRs), where commercial office buildings contribute the most to it. Furthermore, the firm ranks responsible for most of the growth are identified; mainly the top 9. Predictions show the expected steady increase in GBR in the upcoming years which is anticipated to reach 83 billion USD in 2025. The findings inform contractors considering executing green buildings by understanding the market trends and forecasted revenues. Moreover, contractors who are already in the green building business can use this information to increase their revenues in their respective market subset.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207