Beyond technical capability: how institutional resistance shapes generative AI exposure in civil and environmental engineering occupations

Yuxuan Chai

Digital Transformation and Society, 2026, 1-23

Abstract: PurposeThis article introduces the Integrated Sociotechnical Exposure Framework (ISEF) to assess generative AI exposure in civil and environmental engineering by separating technical AI suitability (TA) from institutional resistance (IR). The contribution is an operational measurement framework, not a claim that institutional constraint is a new concept.Design/methodology/approachThe framework is applied to 674 O*NET tasks across 28 occupations. Task-variable pairs are scored by three large language models under a fixed rubric and then aggregated to occupation level. Exposure is modelled with a multiplicative form, and sensitivity checks compare additive, min-rule, and geometric alternatives. A small external practitioner survey is used as a calibration check rather than as task-level validation.FindingsA large group of occupations score well on technical AI suitability but stay heavily constrained by liability, compliance, and sign-off requirements. The cleaned practitioner survey points in the same direction: across 15 task vignettes, higher perceived institutional constraint is strongly associated with lower adjusted AI exposure.Research limitations/implicationsThe scoring still leans on LLMs, and the practitioner sample is small. Because no same-task expert panel is available in the present revision, the results should be read as a transparent first-stage index. The nine-response practitioner exercise is preliminary calibration, not validation of the occupation-level index or its constructed adjusted-score analogue. The natural next step is a larger same-task expert panel paired with adoption-linked field evidence.Practical implicationsFor engineering organisations, adoption strategy is better anchored in accountable workflows, auditability, and professional review processes than in model capability on its own.Originality/valueThe paper pulls governance constraints into the exposure measure itself, and uses that lens to explain why technical-only indices tend to overstate near-term generative AI uptake in regulated engineering work. Its measurement logic is potentially transferable to other regulated professions, but any such application requires domain-specific specification and calibration of the institutional-resistance construct.

Keywords: Generative AI; Institutional resistance; Civil engineering; Occupational exposure; Sociotechnical systems; Professional regulation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/dts/article/doi/10.1108/DT ... ty-how-institutional (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/dts/article-pdf/doi/10.110 ... s-01-2026-0039en.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:dtspps:dts-01-2026-0039

DOI: 10.1108/DTS-01-2026-0039

Access Statistics for this article

Digital Transformation and Society is currently edited by Professor Robin Qiu

More articles in Digital Transformation and Society from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().