ABSTRACT

Turning the ship of tradition is as complex as changing the course of a river. Construction is encountering delays and inefficiencies, triggering a search for solutions like lean principles and digital tools. For instance, Middle East/North Africa (MENA) projects frequently rely on the traditional forms of contracts and notably adopt the design-build approach. This is primarily due to the risk-averse mindsets of employers. Although employers seek a swift construction process, they always want a context to transfer most of the risk to the contractor. Consequently, engineers/employer representatives find themselves prisoners to the employer’s interests. As a result, trust issues and uncertainties negatively affect construction progress by creating a broad platform of non-value-added steps. While the application of those innovative solutions is still understudied, it is believed that smart contracts would be similar to many of the innovative solutions that reshaped our lives. This paper explores the potential of integrating smart contracts into the payment process emphasized under the FIDIC Yellow Book sequence of payments. The framework of this study incorporates lean principles by eliminating bottlenecks, reducing manual work, cutting rework through automation, improving collaboration among multi-stakeholder structures with real-time tools, and boosting resource use for crucial project tasks. This study aims to create a context that streamlines and speeds up the process by automating calculations and verification, increasing transparency, and ensuring trust and security.

KEYWORDS

Lean principles, interim payments, smart contracts, blockchain, traditional contracts, and FIDIC

INTRODUCTION

One of the promising technologies is smart contracts. It can potentially address challenges evolving from the traditional form of contracts adopted in the construction industry. Its ability to create, verify, and audit contractual obligations between companies in real time eliminates the necessity for intermediaries’ authentication (Chen et al., 2023). By automating many of the manual tasks involved in construction projects and improving transparency and security, smart contracts can help to (1) increase productivity, (2) reduce waste, and (3) optimize construction processes. The construction industry relies heavily on contracts and is currently in great need of smart contract technology to revolutionize issues related to contractual disputes and payment challenges within the business (Ahmadisheykhsarmast et al.,). 

Although The International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) specified numerous clauses and subclauses trying to set the terms of payments, timeframes, obligations, roles, dispute resolution mechanisms, and contract administration procedures, it is still being criticized for being overly complex and bureaucratic. The main problem with FIDIC forms of contracts is that they are based on a traditional adversarial approach to contracting. Consequently, stakeholders who are part of any project will be working with no sense of collaboration, and therefore, the whole process will be inefficient. On the other hand, smart contracts offer a transformative approach. Smart contracts in construction will indeed help manage the projects, enhance efficiency, and improve collaboration among stakeholders. Smart contracts are believed to be a miracle with self-executing and automated characteristics. This revolutionary innovation will take construction and contracts to a new level with streamlined collaboration, transparency, and, most importantly, inheriting lean principles.

This study investigates how smart contracts can substitute the dominant traditional contracts adopted worldwide, particularly in the (MENA) region. Clients often opt to allocate the risks without thinking of the unforeseen ones that might be triggered by the adopted process mechanism itself (the contract). Smart contracts will be valuable in automating construction processes that traditionally rely on multi-interactions and contributions from project participants in making decisions (Elghaish et al., 2021). The research paper will try to explore the potential of smart contracts in eliminating waste. Time and cost or even waste within the non-value-added processes, could be optimized by simplifying the process while keeping it transparent and well-documented. This study is intended to examine the deficiencies of traditional contracts, pointing out bottlenecks that can delay the overall construction process.

LITERATURE REVIEW

For several decades, the construction industry has used contracts as fundamental tools to regulate the relationships and transactions between various parties involved in construction projects. A construction contract is a legally binding agreement between the parties involved in a construction project. Traditional or paper contracts result from negotiations among parties, drafting phases, and the contributions of lawyers. They are initiated to clearly articulate the obligations of each party involved (Ahmadisheykhsarmast et al., 2018). Despite the industry's extensive use of contracts, it is clear that it has been facing several issues, especially regarding the payment process (Wu., et al., 2021). Traditionally, the payments are made progressively based on the value of work done during a specific period or at the completion of an agreed milestone. (Wu et al, 2021). As identified by Wu et al. (2022), this process encompasses four stages: payment initiation, validation, finalization, and disbursement (Figure 1). Partial payments, non-payments, or payment delays are issues that significantly impact project timelines and overall project efficiency (Nanayakkara, 2021). This is due to inefficient workflows and laborious document processing, particularly concerning payment practices (Ameyaw., et al., 2023). The reliance on conventional payment methods and manual documentation contributes to delays and administrative burdens throughout the project lifecycle (Chen. et al., 2023). This digital gap contributes to delays, increased costs, and a lack of real-time collaboration among project stakeholders (Yu et al., 2023). Therefore, studies done by Wu et al. (2022) and Nanayakkara. (2021) highlights that digitalizing paper contracts through blockchain technology, known as smart contracts, is a crucial solution to address the mentioned problems. Smart contracts are self-enforcing digital contracts that monitor external inputs from trusted sources. These contracts automatically execute themselves when conditions are met and eliminate the reliance on third parties (Ameyaw et al., 2023). They use a digital currency that is secure through blockchain technology (Ameyaw et al., 2023). Blockchain is a decentralized and distributed ledger technology and database that enables safe and transparent record-keeping of transactions across a network of computers (Chen et al., 2023). It is the underlying technology behind cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, but its applications extend beyond digital currencies (Ameyaw et al., 2023).

1. Trialability is the degree to which a technological innovation can be experimented with on a limited basis before its adoption. Trialability is important since available technological innovations can be adopted quicker than less triable ones; the best way to do so is by setting a trial period for experimenting with smart contracts before practical implementation. The product of a trial period will promote collaboration and build trust and confidence among project participants (Ameyaw et al., 2023).
2. A relative advantage is the extent to which a technological innovation is recognized as being better than its predecessor. Blockchain-enabled smart contracts are observed as a technology that will enhance job performance and efficiently deliver construction projects on time (Ameyaw et al., 2023). 
3. Competitive advantage is the gain and benefit that technology provides an organization. Organizations that adopt smart contracts will give them an edge over their competitors in their industries by increasing their ability to outperform the competition and allowing them to earn higher profits. In this case, smart contracts compete with traditional contracts, which are considered time-consuming to prepare and susceptible to forgery and errors that lead to late payment or nonpayment problems. These problems are eliminated under a smart contract structure because smart contracts automate transactions and payments, resulting in time, cost-effectiveness, and reduced payment times; this will have a direct positive effect on the construction industry.
4. Compatibility refers to the degree to which an innovation aligns with existing values, past experiences, and needs. It comes in two forms; the first is cognitive/normative compatibility, which is how organizations perceive smart contracts in terms of being consistent and compatible with their existing value and belief systems. The second is practical compatibility, which refers to compatibility with the organization's job function and contract management needs.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopted a qualitative research methodology supported by a detailed literature review and a hypothetical case study derived from project experiences. Both were crucial for better understanding the theoretical and practical aspects of smart contract implementation. Smart contracts can express the procedures and execute the change and obligation execution procedures due to their logical explicitness and trustworthy features (Yu H. et al., 2023). Focusing on the payment process and considering the benefits of smart contracts would allow room to optimize it by (1) eliminating the stakeholders' interventions, (2) facilitating the validation process, and (3) automating the release of amounts. The literature review provided a thorough analysis, identifying the wastefulness linked to the payment process within traditional contracts. 

Furthermore, the research identified the potential benefits of adopting smart contracts in lean construction projects to optimize and streamline not only the payment process but the whole construction process vis-à-vis the contract. These processes are known to be mainly driven by the adopted contract, which deals with all activities as processes that must pass through multiple levels before being approved. On the other hand, the literature review considered the challenges and limitations when it comes to the implementation of smart contracts. Blockchain and smart contracts can boost collaboration in the construction industry and keep all participants informed of the project status (Elghaish et al., 2021). 

This study employed a systematic approach to collect data from the literature. Regarding the selected case study, the methodology involved (1) project selection, (2) assumption development, (3) hypothetical implementation, (4) impact analysis, and finally, (5) comprehensive results reporting. The case study served as an evident illustration, demonstrating the potential of smart contracts to enhance the efficiency of payment processes compared to hardships that are still happening under the traditional contract models. Data collection engaged a precise approach to ensure obedience to real-world challenges and opportunities. Additionally, assumptions and implementation were carefully made to adhere to the industry's best practices. A critical examination of the findings from both the literature review and the case study was involved in analyzing the data. Triangulation served to reinforce the reliability and validity of conclusions. 

Data analysis followed a comparative tactic for different sources to improve the overall credibility of this study. Grounded in personal experiences, the case study was presented as a symbolic representation rather than an absolute assessment of smart contract implementation in construction projects. The study’s methodology facilitates a comprehensive assessment of the potential impacts of implementing smart contracts into construction projects.

PROJECT SELECTION

The selected project, located in the holy city of Mecca, Saudi Arabia, is a witness to modern hospitality. Comprising seven five-star hotel towers and two podiums, it represents an ambitious vision brought to life through a design-build project delivery method.

The employer, seeking a streamlined approach, appointed a FIDIC engineer as their representative. This entity, vested with the authority outlined in the FIDIC Yellow Book, assumed the critical role of protecting the employer's interests throughout the project lifecycle. On the other hand, the employer contracted a separate main contractor to act as the design-builder. This entity assumed full responsibility for the design and construction phases, ensuring a unified vision translated into reality (Figure 2).

Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book was the cornerstone for payment management. The appointed FIDIC engineer held the crucial responsibility of issuing payment certificates. These certificates, thoroughly reviewed and verified, served as the sole authorization for the employer to release funds to the design-builder.

The appointed FIDIC engineer’s key responsibilities

1. Reviewing Design-builder's Applications for Payment: The FIDIC Engineer reviews the design-builder's applications for payment and ensures they comply with the contract requirements. This includes verifying the value of work completed and the amount of materials used versus the applicable rates and prices.
2. Issuing Interim Payment Certificates: Upon satisfactory review, the FIDIC Engineer issues Interim Payment Certificates, which authorize the employer to pay a portion of the contract sum to the design-builder. These certificates are typically issued at regular intervals throughout the project's lifecycle.
3. Evaluating Variations and Extra Works: If the contract includes variations or extra work, the FIDIC Engineer evaluates the design-builder's claims and assesses the corresponding adjustments to the payment schedule. This ensures that the design-builder is fairly compensated for any additional work or changes to the scope of work.
4. Issuing Final Payment Certificate: Upon completing the project and successfully passing the Take-Over Certificate, the FIDIC Engineer issues the Final Payment Certificate. This is to certify that the design-builder has fulfilled their obligations under the contract and authorize the final payment of the contract sum.
5. Ensuring Payment Schedule Compliance: The FIDIC Engineer monitors the payment schedule and ensures that the employer pays the design-builder according to the agreed-upon terms. They also address any delays or discrepancies in payment schedules.
6. Resolving Payment Disputes: If the design-builder disputes any aspect of the FIDIC Engineer's payment decisions, they can refer the matter to the Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) for resolution. The DAB's decision is binding and enforceable under the contract.

In summary, the FIDIC Engineer manages payments throughout the project lifecycle. The engineer also protects the employer's interests by verifying the design-builder's claims and managing the overall payment process. The project’s compensation basis (payments) was a lump sum. This is the basic compensation basis, where the design-builder agrees to complete the project for a fixed price. The lump sum payment method is typically used for projects with well-defined scope and minimal potential for changes. The payments are set to be made based on the FIDIC 1999 Yellow Book timeline (Figure 3).

Figure 3 visually depicts the ideal flow of a design-builder's payment certificate under FIDIC guidelines. In a nutshell, the timeline could be divided into three scenarios. The first is the ideal case; the second represents a reasonable action that the design-builder could take, while the third is considered to be the worst-case scenario.

Scenario 1

Ideally, the process concludes with the timely release of payment within 56 days after validation by the engineer and subsequent approval by the employer. However, the path can diverge into less desirable scenarios (2 & 3).

Scenario 2

Should the employer fail to release the payment within the stipulated timeframe, the design-builder can send a formal notice of suspension of work. This serves as a crucial step, notifying the employer of the potential consequences of their inaction. After 21 days of non-payment after this notice, the design-builder holds the right to suspend work, halting the project's progress until the situation is resolved.

Scenario 3 (What has happened in the studied case study)

In this worst-case scenario, the design-builder can send a notice of termination after 56 days if the certificate remains unissued or 42 days if the payment remains unreleased or evidence thereof is not provided. Fourteen days after issuing this notice, the design-builder can legally terminate the contract. Since the project's commencement, the promise of smooth execution has remained intangible. Contrary to concentrating on construction activities, the design-builder persistently stepped on the cliff of work suspension or, worse yet, complete contract termination. This unjustified circumstance derived exclusively from the intentional manipulation of Interim Payment Certificates (IPCs) by the FIDIC engineer, who appeared to be orchestrating these actions as a puppet master on behalf of the employer. The FIDIC engineer employed a strategy of systematic delays in validating submitted IPCs as their weapon of choice. This systematic financial destabilization set off a domino effect of consequences, severely draining the operational and financial well-being of the design-builder.  The initially agreed-upon cash flow schedule transformed into a mere formality, replaced by an irregular and undependable flow of funds. This financial depletion rendered the design-builder unable to fulfill fundamental obligations such as payroll, material procurement, and subcontractors’ payments, transforming the project into an insatiable sinkhole, depleting their resources, and hindering their capacity to sustain momentum. To counterbalance the induced delays, the design-builder was compelled to incur high-interest short-term loans, thereby compounding their financial hardships. This escalating debt, coupled with baseless claims of inadequate work performance by the employer, created a toxic environment. The discouraged workforce, confronted with unpaid salaries and persistent blame-shifting, began leaving the project. Skilled personnel departed, leaving the design-builder short-staffed and struggling to maintain quality control. The project became a financial crisis, depleting their resources and prohibiting them from pursuing new projects. Time lost on this project translated into sacrificed opportunities elsewhere. Beyond the immediate financial and operational outcomes, the design-builder encountered the forthcoming threat of liquidated damages—an imposed contractual penalty for project delays directly attributed to the manipulated payment schedule. In the most extreme scenario, persistent delays and non-payment could have resulted in contract termination, resulting in substantial financial losses and legal implications.

This case serves as a hurtful reminder of the profound impact of orchestrated payment manipulation on a design-builder. It emphasizes the necessity for equitable and transparent payment practices to ensure the success of any construction project. The design-builder, once a respected entity in the industry, is now faced with a crisis solely stemming from the weaponization of payment schedules. Interim payments are essential for contractors, regardless of the delivery method. Most contractors would not survive if the owner suddenly halted or delayed payments until project completion. Even what owners might see as minor deviations from the cash flow has significant impacts on contractors. (Aboutaleb., et al., 2017)

Despite the clear guidelines outlined in the FIDIC clauses regarding the engineer's role and responsibilities, the engineer, in this case, obviously disregarded their obligations and acted in favor of the client, prioritizing their interests over those of the design-builder (Figure 4). This incident highlights the limitations of traditional contract forms in enforcing impartial and transparent performance. To address these deficiencies, there is an urgent need for innovative solutions, such as smart contracts, that can automate and streamline the employer and the engineer's role, ensuring consistent adherence to contractual obligations and timely payment validation. Smart contracts, with their inherent transparency and immutability, can effectively eliminate the potential for manipulation and delays, encouraging trust and protecting the interests of all parties involved in the construction process.

ASSUMPTIONS DEVELOPMENT

The successful implementation of smart contracts to streamline the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book for design-and-build projects hinges on a series of carefully considered assumptions and modifications. These assumptions serve as foundational pillars upon which an efficient and compliant payment process can be made.

Key Assumptions

The study moved forward and generated assumptions on how to integrate smart contracts within a hybrid model that still follows the design and build approach but with a leaner process. It is mandatory to recognize the non-value-added processes and the bottlenecks limiting an efficient process, and finally, try to map a new model, canceling some of the existing steps and keeping the necessary ones. This is assumed to shorten the payment process time, make it more efficient, reduce waste, and, most importantly, keep it secure and transparent to gain future implementations' trust. This section outlines the fundamental assumptions that underpin the successful implementation of smart contracts for the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book. These assumptions address the readiness of parties to adopt smart contracts, the clarity of the project scope, the availability of a trustworthy blockchain infrastructure, and the stakeholders' awareness of the FIDIC Yellow Book.

• Willingness to Adopt Smart Contracts: The adoption of smart contracts across all parties involved, including the employer, design-builder, and any intermediaries (specifically the FIDIC Engineer), is crucial for the success of the initiative. This entails a commitment to utilizing smart contracts for payment management.
• Clear Scope of Work: A well-defined and detailed scope of work outlining project deliverables and acceptance criteria is essential for developing smart contracts that accurately track progress and validate payments. This clarity will facilitate the implementation of automated payment calculations and disbursements.
• Reliable Blockchain Infrastructure: Access to a secure and reliable blockchain network is paramount for deploying and executing smart contracts. This ensures continuous operation and protection against fraud or tampering, guaranteeing the integrity of payment data.
• Familiarity with the FIDIC Yellow Book: All parties involved should be familiar with the FIDIC Yellow Book and the payment process under Clause 14. This familiarity is crucial for aligning smart contracts with contractual obligations and effectively enforcing payment terms.

Strategies for a Lean and Automated Payment Process

This section presents strategies for leveraging smart contracts to streamline and automate the payment process, ensuring efficiency and transparency. These strategies include automated payment calculations and disbursements, automated notice of payment issuance, automated payment approval routing and tracking, and secure payment record storage.

1. Automated Payment Calculations and Disbursements: Smart contracts can autonomously calculate payment amounts based on completed work, adhering to the agreed-upon payment schedule. This automation eliminates manual calculations and expedites payment disbursements.
2. Automated Notice of Payment Issuance: Smart contracts can generate and distribute notices of payment to the employer and design-builder, streamlining communication and record-keeping. This automation reduces the risk of errors and delays in payment issuance and, most importantly, eliminates the interface with the FIDIC engineer, who is considered to be a non-value-added step once the automated process starts.
3. Automated Payment Approval Routing and Tracking: Smart contracts can route payments to the appropriate approvers, track approval status, and notify relevant parties. This automation enhances efficiency and transparency throughout the payment approval process. It will facilitate having a leaner path and consequently minimize wasted time and effort.
4. Secure Payment Record Storage: Smart contracts can securely store all payment records on the blockchain, ensuring tamper-proof data integrity and traceability. This secure storage safeguards payment information and maintains an audit trail. It is the backbone of smart contracts, trust is the key, and transparency would be the driver of trustful interaction and collaboration between the project’s stakeholders.

Preserving Clause 14 Processes

This section emphasizes the importance of preserving certain aspects of the existing payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book. This includes retaining traditional approvals to maintain oversight and control, incorporating dispute resolution mechanisms to address disagreements, complying with applicable laws and regulations to safeguard data privacy and financial transactions, and providing ongoing training and support to ensure the effective utilization of smart contracts.

1. Retain Traditional Verifications: Maintain the FIDIC engineer’s right to review and verify the completed work upon the submission of the design-builder’s payment application. This oversight ensures adherence to contractual terms and maintains a level of control within the payment process.
2. Incorporate Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Integrate dispute resolution mechanisms into smart contracts to address potential disagreements or discrepancies in payment calculations. These mechanisms facilitate the resolution of payment-related disputes in a fair and timely manner.
3. Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations: Ensure the implementation of smart contracts adheres to all relevant laws and regulations governing financial transactions and data privacy. This compliance protects all parties involved and maintains legal standing.
4. Ongoing Training and Support: Provide comprehensive training and support to all parties involved in the payment process to ensure a smooth transition and effective utilization of smart contracts. This training promotes a deeper understanding of smart contracts and their role in the payment process.

By carefully considering these assumptions and implementing the outlined strategies while preserving essential aspects of the existing process, the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book can be transformed into a modernized and efficient hybrid process that leverages the benefits of smart contracts while maintaining compliance and stakeholder trust.

HYPOTHETICAL IMPLEMENTATION

Based on those assumptions, the following implementations can be made to the sequence of progress payments depicted under FIDIC (Figure 3) to make it shorter and more efficient:

Cancel the following bottlenecks/non-value-added processes:

1.      Engineer's Review of Application for Payment: This step can be eliminated by using smart contracts to calculate and verify payment amounts automatically based on the completed work.

2.      Employer's Review of Application for Payment: This step can be retained or eliminated, depending on the Employer's preference and risk tolerance. If eliminated, the Employer can still review and approve payments as part of the dispute resolution process.

3.      Engineer's Issue of Payment Certificate: This step can be replaced with smart contracts that automatically issue payment certificates once the completed work has been verified and accepted.

4. Employer's Issue of Payment: This step can be automated by using smart contracts to initiate payments directly to the design-builder upon receipt of the Engineer's payment certificate.

Retain the following essential steps:

1. Design-builder’s Submission of Application for Payment: This step remains necessary to initiate the payment process.

2. Engineer's Verification of Completed Work: This step is essential to ensure that payments are only made for work that has been satisfactorily completed.

3. Dispute Resolution (DAB): This step remains necessary to resolve any disagreements or discrepancies in payment calculations.

Under the traditional FIDIC payment process, the design-builder submits an application for payment to the Engineer. The Engineer reviews the application and verifies the completed work. Once the Engineer is satisfied, they issue a payment certificate to the Employer. The Employer then reviews the payment certificate and, if satisfied, issues payment to the Design-builder.

Under the modified payment process (Figure 5), the design-builder still submits an application for payment to the Engineer to verify the completed works. However, the Engineer's review and issuance of a payment certificate are eliminated as they are considered non-value-added steps. Instead, smart contracts automatically calculate and verify the payment amount based on the completed work. Once the payment amount has been verified, smart contracts automatically initiate payment to the design-builder. To ensure trust and expedite the payment release, the employer and the FIDIC engineer are considered to be bottlenecks in authorizing and initiating the payments in the presence of the smart contracts’ innovative solution. The blockchain will swiftly validate the FIDIC engineer’s uploaded data and initiate the payments. Consequently, the design-builder’s cash flow will remain nourished, and the construction process will become leaner.

Benefits of the Modified Payment Process

The modified payment process offers several benefits, including:

• Lean payment process: Eliminating manual steps and paperwork can significantly accelerate the payment process.
• Reduced costs: Automating tasks can help reduce administrative costs for all parties involved.
• Improved transparency and trust: All payment records are stored securely on the blockchain, providing visibility and traceability for all stakeholders.
• Reduced risk of fraud: Smart contracts are tamper-proof, which can help to reduce the risk of fraud or errors in payment calculations.

Overall, the modified payment process can help to make the payment process lean, cost-effective, transparent, and secure.

IMPACT ANALYSIS

The proposed implementation of smart contracts to automate the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book has the potential to impact the construction industry and contract administration significantly. Automating tasks, increased efficiency, and reduced costs would benefit all stakeholders involved in the payment process.

Benefits to Design-builders

• Faster payments: Design-builders would receive payments faster, improving their cash flow and overall financial health.
• Reduced administrative burden: Design-builders would spend less time on paperwork and administrative tasks, allowing them to focus on their core business activities.
• Increased transparency: Design-builders would have greater visibility into the payment process, reducing the risk of disputes.

Benefits to Employers

• Improved efficiency: Employers would experience a more streamlined payment process, reducing administrative costs and improving overall project efficiency.
• Reduced risk of fraud: The tamper-proof nature of smart contracts would reduce the risk of fraud and errors in payment calculations.
• Enhanced project control: Employers would have greater control over the payment process, ensuring that payments are made for work that has been satisfactorily completed.

Benefits to Engineers

• Reduced workload: Engineers would spend less time reviewing and verifying payment applications, freeing up their time for other critical tasks.
• Improved accuracy: Smart contracts would reduce the risk of errors in payment calculations.
• Increased transparency: Engineers would have greater visibility into the payment process, improving communication and collaboration with other stakeholders.

Potential negative impacts of implementing smart contracts to streamline the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book

While the adoption of smart contracts holds the potential to revolutionize the construction industry and the related contracts field, it is crucial to acknowledge and address the potential negative impacts that may arise. Despite the automation and efficiency benefits, smart contracts introduce a layer of technological complexity that requires significant upfront investments in development and expertise, potentially posing a barrier for smaller companies or those with limited resources. Additionally, the complex nature of smart contracts demands a deep understanding of blockchain technology and programming, which could create challenges for stakeholders unfamiliar with these technologies. Furthermore, the potential for errors in smart contract code could lead to inaccurate payment calculations or even the loss of funds, emphasizing the need for demanding testing and implementation procedures. Automating tasks through smart contracts could lead to job displacement for individuals involved in manual payment processing tasks, necessitating reskilling and retraining initiatives. As smart contract technology is relatively new, the legal and regulatory implications are still evolving, creating uncertainty regarding the enforceability and ownership of digital assets. Additionally, cultural resistance to adopting smart contracts, particularly among those who prefer paper-based processes, could slow the adoption process. Lastly, the potential for misuse of smart contracts to manipulate the payment process or commit fraud highlights the importance of establishing clear governance frameworks and implementing robust monitoring mechanisms. Despite these potential disadvantages, the benefits of implementing smart contracts to streamline the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book will likely overshadow the risks. By carefully considering the potential negative impacts and taking steps to mitigate them, stakeholders can maximize the benefits of this innovative technology.

COMPREHENSIVE RESULTS REPORTING

Through a comprehensive examination of assumptions, hypothetical implementation scenarios, and potential impacts, this study has uncovered the transformative potential of smart contracts in streamlining the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book.

The findings highlight the critical role of key assumptions, such as the willingness of all parties to adopt smart contracts, the availability of a clear scope of work, and a robust blockchain infrastructure. These assumptions form the foundation for the successful implementation and optimization of smart contract technology.

The hypothetical implementation scenario was made to explore the practical application of smart contracts. It elucidates the potential automation of payment calculations, disbursements, and record-keeping. This automation has the potential to significantly accelerate the payment process, reduce administrative costs, and enhance transparency for all stakeholders. Furthermore, the study conducted a thorough impact analysis to assess the potential ramifications of adopting smart contracts. The analysis revealed several positive impacts, including increased efficiency, reduced costs, improved transparency, and reduced risk of fraud. These benefits are collected to revolutionize the construction industry by streamlining payment processes and fostering greater stakeholder trust. However, the study also acknowledges the potential challenges associated with smart contract implementation, such as the need for upfront investments in technology and expertise, the complexity of smart contract coding, and the potential for job displacement. These challenges underscore the importance of careful planning, stakeholder engagement, and ongoing training to ensure a smooth transition and maximize the benefits of smart contracts.

In conclusion, this study provides persuasive evidence that smart contracts hold immense potential to streamline the payment process under Clause 14 of the FIDIC Yellow Book, paving the way for a more efficient, cost-effective, and transparent construction industry. By carefully considering the assumptions, strategies, and potential impacts outlined in this study, stakeholders can effectively harness smart contracts' transformative power to revolutionize the construction industry's payment landscape.

REFERENCES

Ahmadisheykhsarmast, S., & Sonmez, R. (2018). Smart contracts in the construction industry. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/SalarAhmadisheykhsarmast/publication/329363162_Smart_Contracts_in_Construction_Industry/links/5c04c72c92851c63cab62f71/Smart-Contracts-in-ConstructionIndustry.pdf?origin=publication_detail

Ameyaw, E. E., Edwards, D. J., Kumar, B., Thurairajah, N., Owusu-Manu, D.-G., & Oppong, G. D. (2023). Critical factors influencing adoption of blockchain-enabled smart contracts in Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 149(3). https://doi.org/10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-12081

FIDIC (International Federation of Consulting Engineers). (1999). “Plant and design-build contract.” 1st Ed., Geneva.

Administering Employers’ Payment Obligations under National and International Design–Build Standard Forms of Contract by Abotaleb, Ibrahim S; El-adaway, Islam H Journal of legal affairs and dispute resolution in engineering and construction, 05/2017, Volume 9, Issue 2 https://doi-org.ezproxy.aub.edu.lb/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.00002

Chen, G., Li, H., Liu, M., Hsiang, S. M., & Jarvamardi, A. (2023). Knowing what is going on—a smart contract for Modular Construction. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 50(3), 210–223. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2021-0649

Chen, G., Liu, M., Li, H., Hsiang, S. M., & Jarvamard, A. (2023). Motivating reliable collaboration for modular construction: Shapley Value–based Smart Contract. Journal of Management in Engineering, 39(6). https://doi.org/10.1061/jmenea.meeng-5428

Elghaish, F., Hosseini, M. R., Matarneh, S. T., Talebi, S., Wu, S., Martek, I., & Ghodrati, N. (2021). Blockchain and the ‘internet of things' for the construction industry: research trends and opportunities. Automation in Construction, 132, 103942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103942

Hamledari, H., & Fischer, M. (2021). Role of blockchain-enabled smart contracts in automating construction progress payments. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)la.1943-4170.0000442

Mason, J. (2017a). Intelligent contracts and the construction industry. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)la.1943-4170.0000233

Nanayakkara, S., Perera, S., Senaratne, S., Weerasuriya, G. T., & Bandara, H. M. (2021). Blockchain and smart contracts: A solution for payment issues in construction supply chains. Informatics, 8(2), 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8020036  

Wu, H., Zhong, B., Li, H., Guo, J., & Wang, Y. (2021). On-site construction quality inspection using blockchain and smart contracts. Journal of Management in Engineering, 37(6). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000967

Wu, L., Lu, W., & Xu, J. (2022). Blockchain-based smart contract for smart payment in construction: A focus on the payment freezing and disbursement cycle. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 9(2), 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-021-0184-y  

Yu, H., Deng, X., & Zhang, N. (2023). To what extent can smart contracts replace traditional contracts in construction project? Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-04-2023-0379