Developing an integrated sustainable construction materials rating tool: a meta-synthesis of global assessment indicators and implementation determinants

Purpose This study aims to develop an integrated sustainable materials assessment and rating architecture for the construction industry through a structured synthesis of global assessment indicators and structural determinants influencing tool design and implementation. The architecture consolidates seven sustainability dimensions into a scored, weighted evaluation framework that construction professionals can apply at the early design, procurement and policy-assessment stages to compare material options on a common, transparent basis. It is presented as a conceptual precursor to an operational tool rather than a validated instrument. Design/methodology/approach A PRISMA-guided meta-synthesis was conducted on 49 peer-reviewed publications from 2015 to 2026, identified through structured Boolean searches in the Scopus and Web of Science databases. The study combined thematic aggregation with quantitative content mapping to identify indicator recurrence, dominance patterns and dimensional dispersion. Sub-indicators were extracted verbatim from each study, coded dichotomously for presence or absence and consolidated into seven domains (environmental, economic, social, technical, circular, structural and contextual) through a two-stage clustering procedure (in which preliminary thematic clusters were aggregated into overarching dimensions). Dominance percentages and median frequency values were calculated to examine dimensional balance and structural concentration. Findings Environmental indicators, particularly embodied environmental impact and resource efficiency, dominate existing assessment tools. The economic and social dimensions demonstrate moderate integration, while circularity, technical adaptability and contextual determinants remain under-embedded. Structural factors influencing governance and implementation are discussed in adoption studies, but rarely incorporated into rating logic. The results reveal a persistent dimensional imbalance and a separation between performance measurement and institutional reality. An integrated multidimensional rating architecture, not yet an operational or empirically validated tool, grounded in multi-attribute utility logic, is proposed to address these limitations. Research limitations/implications The findings of this study are limited due to the utilisation of only the Scopus and Web of Science databases. Grey literature and non-indexed industry reports were deliberately excluded to maintain methodological transparency, potentially omitting some practice-based tools. The proposed architecture has not been empirically or pilot-tested. Its performance, weighting logic and practical usability therefore remain to be validated through expert consultation or case application, and this is identified as a priority for future research. Practical implications Notwithstanding its limitations, the findings establish the need for the construction industry to adopt an innovative, research-based and holistically sustainable materials assessment and rating architecture. In practical terms, materials specifiers and design teams can use the seven-dimensional scoring sheet as a structured checklist when comparing construction materials at the early design stage. Procurement teams can use it to weight tenders beyond cost and carbon alone, and policymakers can use the framework to identify which dimensions (circularity, context, governance) require deliberate up-weighting when adapting international tools to local conditions. Originality/value This study advances research on sustainable materials assessment by quantitatively identifying structural dominance across sustainability dimensions and consolidating performance and contextual determinants into a unified rating architecture. The proposed framework strengthens dimensional balance and supports context-sensitive tool development in construction.