Appraising the application of cryptocurrency technologies in the Nigerian built environment: stakeholders’ perspective

Abstract

Purpose

Twenty-first century digitalisation birthed new methods of payment systems like the emergence of cryptocurrencies. Cryptocurrency technologies have been identified as drivers for crypto-smart contracts and procurements. Studies regarding the application of cryptocurrency technologies in the Nigerian built environment industry are uncommon. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the relevance of cryptocurrency technologies to the sector, examine the perceived barriers that may hinder cryptocurrency technologies implementation and propose measures to promote the applications.

Design/methodology/approach

The research conducted a virtual interview across Abuja and Lagos cities to appraise stakeholders’ perceptions. The interviewees were requested to proffer answers to the research questions. The study conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with knowledgeable stakeholders. The data were analysed, and findings were reported in themes.

Findings

Enhanced the era of smart contracts, increased liquidity for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and new openings to raise more funds for capital-intensive construction projects emerged as the advantages where cryptocurrency technologies can benefit the sector if allowed to operate. Cryptocurrency technology applications are not without some anticipated hindrances. Risk of loss of investment/price instability, lack of intrinsic value, money laundering, attracting speculators, criminal activities/security issues, lack of clarity and awareness and lack of skills emerged as the frequently anticipated barriers that may hinder cryptocurrency technologies applications.

Research limitations/implications

The study is limited to cryptocurrency technology applications in Nigeria’s built environment, and a qualitative method has been adopted.

Originality/value

Besides uncovering barriers hindering cryptocurrency technology usage via an unexplored mechanism, the study is one of the few studies to proffer measures to improve cryptocurrency technology usage in the built environment.

Citation

Ebekozien, A., Aigbavboa, C., Thwala, W.D., Samsurijan, M.S., Ahmed, M.A.H., Aliu, J. and Adekunle, S.A. (2024), "Appraising the application of cryptocurrency technologies in the Nigerian built environment: stakeholders’ perspective", International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 93-112. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-04-2024-0070

1. Introduction

Global digitalisation is not restricted to the engineering, architectural and construction facilities (built environment sector) but includes the modern financial environment. Manzoor et al. (2021) and Aliu et al. (2024) affirmed that the built environment sector is shifting from conventional heavy labour-intensive construction operations to digitalisation via the fourth industrial revolution (4IR) technologies. The 4IR is an output of improved industrial revolutions and enhances the emergence of new intelligent products and services (Ebekozien and Aigbavboa, 2021; Ebekozien et al., 2022). Olorunfemi et al. (2021) asserted that 4IR is a fusion of digital usage, clouding the lines between the physical and digital spheres. It is positioned on blockchain technology, robotics, artificial intelligence, Internet of things and cryptocurrencies (Ebekozien and Aigbavboa, 2021). This paper focuses on cryptocurrency technologies. Rouhani and Abedin (2020) identified cryptocurrency technology as one of the emerging decentralised electronic currency systems that could change the financial exchange and the economic environment. Technology such as Bitcoin was created in 2008 by Satoshi Nakamoto (Nakamoto, 2008).

Ron and Shamir (2013) described cryptocurrency technology as an information technology novelty based on upgrading cryptographic protocols and peer-to-peer networks. The peculiarity of their properties made it impossible for them to be managed by the government or bank. Cryptocurrency technologies are gaining many users (Matta et al., 2015; Novak, 2020). Its main function is to facilitate goods and services transactions. Hence, the research was motivated to investigate the relevance of cryptocurrency technologies to the sector and how prepared the stakeholders are for this new financial innovation. Weber (2014) stated that the use of cryptocurrencies gained more acceptance in reaction to the disappointments of government and apex banks in the 2008 crash. Vigna and Casey (2016) claimed that decentralising money and the blockchain with cryptocurrency technologies could lead the globe into an innovative system. It may push the conventional system of economic transactions into the digital era (Fry and Cheah, 2016; Peng et al., 2018). Rouhani and Abedin (2020) opined that e-Gold, eCash and Flooz were previous efforts of virtual transactions before Bitcoin emerged as a digital currency.

The evidence of practice application of cryptocurrency technologies in the built environment sector is real despite several academic and non-academic literature highlighting the benefits of disruptive technologies to address some inadequacies of the conventional monetary systems. Some inadequacies include business failures in payments withheld or refused to be paid. Ogel and Ogel (2021) affirmed that digital technologies bring new payment methods. Cryptocurrencies are virtual and digital currencies that could be utilised in an electronic environment as a new payment method and investment tool. The built environment sector cannot be exempted. Adekunle et al. (2023) affirmed that cryptocurrency platforms can advance financial transactions within the built environment sector. The platform is decentralised with the support of blockchain technology. In South Africa, stakeholders in the construction industry agreed that cryptocurrency platforms such as polkadot, solano, ethereum and avalanche can serve as a medium of financial transaction in the industry. Also, Ibrahim et al. (2022a, b) opined that the cryptocurrency blockchain is suitable for the construction industry because of its complex contractual relationships and transactions between parties. It is a highly secure automated management system. The platform enhances the automation of processing. Kaur et al. (2023) emphasised the relevance of digital currency, such as high investment returns and low transaction costs if embraced by stakeholders in the industry. A few scholars, such as Perera et al. (2020), Akinradewo et al. (2021), and Ebekozien et al. (2022) in the built environment sector focused on blockchain. Also, apart from Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez (2018) Boonpheng et al. (2020), and Cyrus (2023), who focused on related cryptocurrency, but not via a qualitative and da developing economies like Nigeria. Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez (2018) identified fluctuation risks in cryptocurrency values as a major concern that needs to be addressed for effective and wider acceptance of the technology. Boonpheng et al. (2020) focused on the benefits of cryptocurrency technology in the construction industry. Cyrus (2023) suggested the need for stakeholders to comprehend and expect implementation issues such as compliance and regulatory obligations, privacy concerns, fork management and governance, money laundering, financial fraud, contractual issues, jurisdictional issues and tax implications. These are possible impediments to using cryptocurrencies in developing countries, especially in the Nigerian built environment sector.

Schneider (2021) and Ebekozien et al. (2022) avowed that Nigeria is one of the fastest-growing economies with a large African population, and infrastructural provision via the built environment industry is germane to improving the economy. Studies are scarce regarding the relevance and anticipated hindrances of cryptocurrency technologies implementation in Nigeria’s built environment. Previous studies should have addressed the concept of cryptocurrency technologies in the built environment sector in developing countries. This research intends to fill the theoretical gap. In the 21st century, cryptocurrency technologies are gaining popularity among the world’s financial giants and multinational corporations, influencing countries such as the USA (Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez, 2018). It may influence the outcome of services and goods in the Nigerian built environment, hence the need for the study. This research investigated the relevance of cryptocurrency technologies to the sector, examined the perceived barriers that may hinder cryptocurrency technologies implementation and proffered measures to promote the applications. The research seeks to proffer answers to the following main research questions:

• (1)

  What is the relevance of cryptocurrency technology in the built environment industry?

• (2)

  What anticipated barriers may hinder cryptocurrency technology implementation in the Nigerian built environment?

• (3)

  How can cryptocurrency technology usage be promoted in the built environment industry?

To provide answers to the study’s research questions, relevant literature were reviewed, and a qualitative research design was employed for the data collected from participants. The research is divided into seven sections. The first section focuses on the introduction, including the three main research questions. The second section presents relevant literature. This includes the background and relevance of cryptocurrency technologies, barriers facing cryptocurrency technologies applications, and the approach to promoting cryptocurrency technologies usage in the built environment. Next, the researchers will collect data from 25 interviewees via virtual interviews in Abuja and Lagos, Nigeria. The next is the analysed results via thematic and discussion with related reviewed literature. The study’s implication is the fifth section. The limitations and areas for future study follow. Lastly, the concluding section.

2. Literature review

2.1 Background and relevance of cryptocurrency technologies

The built environment sector cannot be in isolation in financial transactions. Kim et al. (2020) avowed that the sector is an industry with potential for digital technology usage. It is because of the high volume of transactions, including financial, among various sub-sectors within the industry. Many built environment stakeholders are worried that there have been few cases of cryptocurrency technology applications within the industry, especially in developing countries, despite the benefits. Thus, it is one of the study’s motivations to appraise the level of preparedness and possible hindrances to implementing cryptocurrency technology in the built environment industry. Baygin et al. (2019) opined that combining smart city systems and digital technology might enhance extraordinary opportunities for a productive output in the sector.

The advancement in digitalisation influenced the monetary system. To enhance electronic monetary system, the digital currency was generated and implemented (Nakamoto, 2008; Rouhani and Abedin, 2020). Nakamoto (2008) identified weaknesses of electronic payment and the high costs of arbitrating disagreements in the mentioned mechanism. To overcome the issues, Nakamoto (2008) asserted that cryptographic proof would allow “any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party.” In January 2009, the first block was mined in the Bitcoin network (The Nation, 2023). This marks the beginning of the era of global decentralised finance. Blau (2018) vowed that cryptographic proof would provide fraud protection to the users. Thus, the main purpose of a digital currency was to develop the existing electronic payment system by letting users exchange electronic coin utilising digital signatures, which perform as proof of ownership. Geuder et al. (2019) described cryptocurrencies as digital assets that do not have intrinsic value. This may have contributed to why cryptocurrencies cannot be used as legal tender in many countries, including Nigeria. Kinateder and Choudhury (2022) avowed that private payment services and many institutional investors utilise cryptocurrency technology. Some scholars (Fry, 2018; Geuder et al., 2019; Bouri et al., 2019; Kinateder and Choudhury, 2022) are worried about misusing cryptocurrencies, such as money laundering. This is debatable. Bouri et al. (2019) affirmed that its invention in the financial market as digital payment showed several financial bubbles. Examples of digital payment tokens are Bitcoin, Dash, Ripple, Zcash, Litecoin, Ethereum, Binance Coin, Monero and Cardano (Rouhani and Abedin, 2020; Guarda, 2022). The most popular cryptocurrencies are Bitcoin, Ethereum, Binance Coin and Ripple (The Nation, 2023).

Bitcoin is the world’s most well-known cryptocurrency and has generated concerns among stakeholders in the financial industry, especially the central banks and regulators in various countries (Rouhani and Abedin, 2020). It is an emerging cryptocurrency that has gained eminence and is a hybrid of commodity money. They are developed via mining and kept in a digital wallet for storage. Bitcoin used a shared ledger data technology (blockchain) and is joined with secure encryption (Rouhani and Abedin, 2020). The price of cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, has been volatile. It attracts speculators because of its volatility. Price stability does not differentiate cryptocurrencies from conventional fiat currencies (Kinateder and Choudhury, 2022). The common issue is how to regulate cryptocurrencies. Some global scholars, such as Nouriel Roubini asserted that 99% of cryptocurrencies are worth zero. In the view of Christine Lagarde (President of the European Central Bank), central banks and financial organisations should protect users (Guarda, 2022). The doors for innovations such as cryptocurrency technology should be shut completely.

Based on the background and its evolution, the relevance of cryptocurrency technologies to the industry cannot be overstated. Besides the relevance, cryptocurrency Bitcoin has raised global financial concerns for stakeholders, especially governments. Uniform international laws to regulate Bitcoin are absent despite its use for buying goods and services. Many developed countries like the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Spain, Austria, Japan, Germany and Canada allow using Bitcoin (Bajpai, 2024). However, several countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and China, and recently Nigeria, have made it illegal to use Bitcoin. In the United States, Chen (2022) reported that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued guidance on Bitcoin in 2013 and acknowledged it as a convertible currency with an equivalent value in real currency. In the UK, the Financial Services and Markets Act was updated in 2023 to guide regulating digital assets (Financial Services and Markets Act, 2023). It also granted the government the right to designate cryptoasset operations and regulate them, including in the UK’s construction industry. Countries that make Bitcoin illegal do so for many reasons. This includes volatility, concerns over destabilisation and use to support illicit activities like drug trafficking, money laundering and terrorism (Bajpai, 2024).

Guarda (2022) asserted that the globe is on the verge of a new financial and economic driven by digital mechanisms. It may lead to increasingly disruptive innovations. The outcome may assist in innovating and moving from centralised mechanisms to decentralised financial systems via technology. The blockchain-driven technologies, such as cryptocurrency, have assisted in scaling and shaping the economic and financial world. Digitalisation payment may enhance the metrics to attain the UN’s SDGs by 2030 (Guarda, 2022). Boonpheng et al. (2020) identified a speedy reduction in processing and management of projects, cost and time reduction for construction project management, and mistakes mitigated in projects as benefits of cryptocurrency technologies usage in construction projects and, by extension, the built environment sector. Ozili (2022) identified increased liquidity for SME, new openings to raise funds for capital-intensive projects, enhanced the era of smart contracts and encouraged peer-to-peer trade amid economic agents in various countries as the benefits of cryptocurrency technologies. Cryptocurrency technology applications, especially in developing countries, may face some hindrances. Identifying them and proffering measures to promote their usage in the Nigerian built environment sector is one of the study’s motivations.

2.2 Hindrances facing cryptocurrency technologies usage in the built environment

Digitalisation, including cryptocurrency technologies and other drivers, faces many encumbrances, especially in developing countries like Nigeria. Lack of infrastructure, inadequate human resources, ineffective policies and legal backup, lax political will, poor awareness, stakeholder involvement and inadequate financial assistance from the government were anticipated hindrances facing digitalisation (Asogwa, 2013; Samsor, 2020). Kinateder and Choudhury (2022) found that cryptocurrency prices are volatile and more attract speculators than conventional fiat currency assets. They discovered that digital assets could be used for money laundering and fraud. Besides these issues, the technology requires a lot of energy because of the server farms. The focus of the 21st century is to reduce carbon dioxide and climate change impact (Kinateder and Choudhury, 2022), but the technology is not friendly to them. Ogel and Ogel (2021) discovered a statistically significant and negative association between perceived financial, time, and psychological risk and attitudes toward using cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. However, the attitudes toward and intention to use Bitcoin were statistically significant. Ozili (2022) found low interest in using cryptocurrency technology and decentralised finance (DeFi) applications in services in African countries. Cyrus (2023) identified issues that may hinder cryptocurrency technology implementation. This includes contractual issues, tax implication issues, privacy concerns, data theft, jurisdictional issues and financial fraud. Others are accounting and financial reporting, intellectual property rights, fork management and governance, money laundering, and compliance and regulatory obligations.

Regarding perceived hindrances to Industry 4.0 in the built environment, Demirkesen and Tezel (2021) discovered unclear usage advantages, high implementation costs and resistance to change as the major barriers. Penmetsa and Bruque-Camara (2021) grouped the encumbrances into six groups. This includes people-related (culture, awareness, adoption, poverty, digital illiteracy, and training and education), technology-related (innovation ecosystem, system integration, IT standards, digital infrastructure, and security and cyber insecurity). Others are institutional-related (organisational structure, goals, vision, government support, political willingness and leadership, funds and mission). ICT systems, bribery and corruption, cyber security risks, accountability, policy regulation and standards ate policy-related. Also, economic-related are funding, economic value, high cost, inadequate hardware, software maintenance and misuse of public money. Lastly are the sustainability-related encumbrances. This includes access to technology, power supply, education, digital literacy and lack of education.

In developing countries such as Nigeria, Labaran and Hamma-Adama (2021) and Ebekozien et al. (2022) identified barriers to digitalisation. They discovered that technological awareness among stakeholders and regulatory agencies is poor, not regarding cryptocurrency technology. Aladenusi (2017) found that cyber criminals use cryptocurrency technologies to perpetuate their scamming antics. Stakeholders are concerned about the increasing number of fraud-related issues traced to cryptocurrency technologies. Aladenusi (2017) affirmed that in Nigeria, the interest in cryptocurrency trading continues to have wider acceptability among Nigerian citizens but not regarding the built environment sector. Addressing these perceived anticipated encumbrances cannot be over-emphasised. The government regulatory agencies and cryptocurrency trading organisations should collaborate with relevant professionals with stakes in the sector, strengthening the cyber-security architecture for cryptocurrency investments.

2.3 Initiatives to promote cryptocurrency technologies usage in the built environment

The built environment industry is not exempted from the challenges being faced major sectors with incorporating digitalisation (Ebekozien et al., 2022). Cryptocurrency technology comes from digitalisation with germane potential (Aladenusi, 2017). Penmetsa and Bruque-Camara (2021) avowed that digitalisation should be underway for developing countries to mitigate some of the anticipated implementation barriers. They found that apart from government support policies to develop ICT and digital technologies, regulations and standards, people support, and skills availability and institutions are germanes for the growth of digitalisation in developing countries. Aladenusi (2017) suggested that besides organisations linking their processes to their cyber infrastructure and adopting new technologies such as IoT, cloud computing, etc., comprehensive cyber security and awareness would be critical to an organisations ability to protect its assets, reputation, intellectual property, staffers and clients. A lack of IoT device knowledge may expose the users to compromises that might enhance avoidable fraud. Organisations should consider Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) regarding security and additional control that should be in position as they migrate their infrastructure and software to the Cloud (Aladenusi, 2017). This is germane. The recommendations are worth investigating because whether these measures have been considered for possible implementation in the future is uncertain concerning measures to promote cryptocurrency technologies applications in Nigeria’s built environment industry.

3. Research method

The research employed a qualitative approach. The study is entrenched in interpretivism (Chandra and Shang, 2019; Ebekozien, 2020a, b). Interpretivism acknowledges subjectivity as a social variable (Ebekozien et al., 2025). Also, the researchers addressed the study from a phenomenological-driven perspective (Neale, 2018). To achieve this, the researchers ensured participants knew about cryptocurrency technologies and the Nigerian-built environment. Besides Participants P2, P4, P6, P15, P17 and P19, who are top-ranked scholars with basic cryptocurrency knowledge and believe that Nigeria’s construction industry is ripe to embrace digital currency, P7 to P11 and P20 P23 are ICT experts and have been involved in cryptocurrency transactions in the past. Also, P9, P11, P20, and P23 opine that the country’s ICT infrastructure is adequate, and the construction industry stakeholders should leverage on it to embrace digital transactions. The study adopted purposeful elite sampling. The sampling technique is a concept employed to describe a situation where participants are chosen based on being well-known and well-informed in the matter (Marshall and Rossman, 2014). It is an approach utilised for responsive selection (Acar, 2016; Ebekozien et al., 2022), such as the cryptocurrency technologies in the built environment. The data collated were from the construction consulting firms, construction contracting firms, Internet and communication technology (ICT) specialists and academicians in construction consultancy, as presented in Table 1 from Abuja and Lagos, Nigeria. The two locations are Nigeria’s top commercial and construction hubs (Ibrahim et al., 2022a, b; Ebekozien et al., 2022). The virtual interviews via Team and Whatsapp video calls lasted between 30 and 60 min per meeting. Concerning ethical matters, the participants were informed about the study’s aim and agreed to participate (Jaafar et al., 2021).

The study manually conducted an inter-rater reliability test and achieved 75% to strengthen the reliability. This aligns with Burns (2014), who affirmed that where two researchers are involved in the data collection and coding, an inter-rater test is advised. It assists in establishing the agreement of the same data generated by different raters, using the same parameters. Also, the researchers’ research design, data collection and post-data analysis were guided, as illustrated in Table 2. The study conducted 25 semi-structured virtual interviews in Abuja and Lagos. The interview took place from September 2022 to November 2022. The researchers concluded that saturation was achieved when no new ideas from the interviewees. It was in line with Braun and Clarke (2019), who opined that saturation is achieved when there is no evidence of more new insight. The study employed interviewees knowledgeable about the sector and cryptocurrency technology to achieve data reliability. The semi-structured interviews aimed to reconstruct “what” happened and “why” (Silverman, 2021) concerning the sector and the usage of cryptocurrency technology. To proffer answers to the issues of “what” and “how,” the researchers asked questions about cryptocurrency relevance within the sector, anticipated implementation barriers and measures to improve cryptocurrency technology applications. The study emphasises how cryptocurrency technology could be utilised as a role model to other sectors. The cover letter and interview questions are presented in Appendix. The researchers collected 25 documents and quoted the most relevant in the findings and discussion sub-sections. This aligns with Gorbacheva and Sovacool (2015), who affirmed that quotations of catching text are the beauty of a qualitative study. The study’s collected data were coded, analysed and presented the themes.

The study employed thematic analysis to develop the codes. The data from the participants were analysed manually. For this study, the investigators were the coders who described the interviewees’ views regarding the phenomenon and read the 25 documents several times, in line with Jaafar et al. (2021), Ebekozien et al. (2022), and Ibrahim et al. (2022a, b). They adopted the same mechanism for their studies. The study adopted two coding phases. The sub-themes generated from the open coding (first phase) were utilised to re-read the transcript and discover the study’s constructs. This process is known as the second phase (Saldana, 2021). Triangulation, researcher reflexivity and member checking were employed as the validity techniques (Creswell and Creswell, 2018; Ebekozien et al., 2023, 2024). The research employed narrative, themeing and invivo methods (Saldana, 2021). Ninety-four codes were developed. They were re-grouped into nine sub-themes. Three themes emerged from the nine categories. The main aim guided these themes.

4. Results and discussion

Despite the relevance of digitalisation and 4IR technologies, studies (Akaba et al., 2020; Hamma-adama and Ahmad, 2021; Ebekozien et al., 2022) show low digitalisation applications in the built environment sector. The current technological advancement birthed blockchain and cryptocurrency technology, which are receiving increasingly progressive acceptance from leading countries. The relevance of cryptocurrency technologies in the built environment sector and the hindrances anticipated during implementation still need to be better understood. In many developing countries, a case study of Nigeria is one area yet to gain sufficient scholarly attention. Cryptocurrency technology relevance in the sector cannot be over-emphasised because the cryptographic nature of the underlying mechanism, which allows cryptocurrency decentralisation, is the key technological attribute distinguishing them from other digital currencies. Thus, findings and discussion are presented in subsequent sub-sections.

4.1 Theme one: relevance of cryptocurrency technology in the built environment industry

This sub-section offers the participants a platform to identify the benefits of cryptocurrency technology applications in the Nigerian built environment sector. Results reveal that cryptocurrency technology’s cryptographic nature allows cryptocurrency technologies to be decentralised. This is the key technological attribute that distinguishes them from other digital currencies. Nineteen advantages emerged as the relevance of cryptocurrency technology in the built environment. This includes accessibility, appropriate financial technology, an improved society, financial and economic models, government and institutions ID smart contract solutions, smart contract certification, user autonomy, smart contract open API collaboration, mobile payments, reward gamification, low transaction fees for international payments and elimination of banking fees. Others are payment and fees, ID and data self-sovereignty, peer-to-peer focus and solutions, personal development tracking technology, digital ID trust, profile track record, compliance for accreditation, and discretion and security. Participant P9 says, “… cryptocurrency business as a viable lifetime investment opportunity from which huge profits could be made from the comfort of one’s home with a laptop system ….” The birthed technological financial transaction is increasingly developing and embraced by many stakeholders as a transaction medium (Participants P1, P4, P11, P17, P24 and P25). Participants P4 and P24 identify cryptocurrency technology as a platform where electronic payment systems could impact personal privacy. The mechanism allows a ‘blind signatures cryptosystem’, to conceal the identity of the payees and payers. This is pertinent for efficiency and better service delivery to the industry’s clients/employers and other stakeholders. Participant P23 says, “ …. the relevance cannot be over-stated. A regulated platform resembles a regular currency exchange (a place for buying and selling digital coins). The platform allows for safe storage, conversion, and cash out to personal wallets. These services are not available in conventional financial transaction platforms …. It will enhance financial transaction within and outside the built environment sector if embraced ……”

Findings agree that money was invented when the world was not digitally transformed. Thus, the influence of the Internet in the financial markets and society is observing a steady transition from the value in physical assets to the value generated by digital assets (majority). Participant P19 says, “… … I am an academic specialising in digital transformation and a researcher whose key expertise is in the financial industry emphasising the blockchain, digital transformation, and fintech …. The technology offers multiple solutions to improve financial and economic models. Globally, cryptocurrencies are key in achieving SDGs 2030 but need strict regulations to mitigate users’ risk ….” This innovative financial tool was developed last decade to enhance financial technology (Guarda, 2022). With the increasing growth of bitcoin, one of the cryptocurrencies, there is a fundamental rethinking of value regarding assets and tokenisation (P2, P5, P6, P12, P16, P21, P23 and P24). Findings agree that it will increase liquidity for SMEs, create new openings to raise funds for capital-intensive construction projects and enhance the era of smart contracts as a benefit to the built environment.

Also, findings show that virtual currencies, such as Bitcoin, have transformed how assets, services, and goods are exchanged. They are experiencing an increasing financial market from the medium of exchange benefits to the storage of valuable benefits. Cryptocurrency technology offers novel benefits to the economy, investors, and consumers in the built environment sector as a financial transaction medium. For example, Bitcoin may be useful in risk management (Participants P1, P6, P8, P10, P15, P19, P23, and P25). Participant P10 says, “ …. Stakeholders should prepare the built environment sector to embrace cryptocurrency technologies because the world is moving towards Web 3.0, and the sector cannot afford to be left behind. Though Web 2.0 is total decentralisation, Web 3.0 is blockchain and cryptocurrency technology-based. It implies that virtual space transaction is the way forward in the future, and all stakeholders should be ready for this ongoing digital advancement and transformation … ….” Findings reveal that the technology is leveraged for illicit purposes such as money laundering and other fraud-related issues. This concerns many stakeholders, including the apex financial regulator (Central Bank of Nigeria, 2021). The apex bank advised Nigerians to desist from its use because it is largely speculative, anonymous and untraceable. Thus, it could enhance terrorism, money laundering and other criminal activities such as tax evasion and purchasing small arms and light weapons (P12, P14, P20 and P23). These barriers may hinder cryptocurrency technologies implementation in the Nigerian built environment if given the ‘green light’ after further consultations with relevant stakeholders and global partners regarding strict laws and regulations. Thus, this paper investigates perceived barriers hindering the implementation of cryptocurrency applications in the Nigerian built environment sector in the next sub-section.

4.2 Theme two: perceived barriers affecting cryptocurrency technologies usage

This sub-section offers the interviewees a platform to identify the anticipated barriers that may affect cryptocurrency technology applications in the sector. Findings show that despite the benefits of the technology to the built environment and economy by extension, many perceived concerns may hinder the implementation of cryptocurrency applications in the Nigerian built environment sector. Findings show that cryptocurrencies are not legal tender in many countries. Twelve issues emerged as barriers that may hinder the implementation of cryptocurrency applications in the Nigerian built environment sector. This includes.

• (1)

  No intrinsic value (Not a legal tender)

• (2)

  Price instability (risk of loss of investments)

• (3)

  Money laundering

• (4)

  Attracting speculators

• (5)

  Criminal activities/security issues (terrorism financing, purchase of small arms, light weapons, and hard and illegal drugs)

• (6)

  Legal and regulatory uncertainties/authorisation issues

• (7)

  Lack of skills to mitigate virus

• (8)

  Tax evasion

• (9)

  Lack of clarity and awareness

• (10)

  Social acceptance

• (11)

  Vague supportive data security and protection

• (12)

  High energy consumption

From the 12 emerging barriers, no intrinsic value, price instability (risk of loss of investments), money laundering, attracting speculators, criminal activities/security issues, lack of clarity and awareness, and lack of skills were frequent among the interviewees as the perceived barriers that may hinder cryptocurrency technologies applications in the Nigerian built environment sector. Findings agree that cryptocurrency technologies may pose users risks and prevent regulators from fitting the new digitalisation approach into the conventional legal framework. Participant P23 says, “… there are issues such as unstable/volatile pricing, financial fraud, other criminal activities via the transaction, and legal to technical issues that may confront smooth implementation of the usage in the sector ….” Findings agree with the Central Bank of Nigeria (2021) and Kinateder and Choudhury (2022). The Central Bank of Nigeria (2021) reported that apart from Nigeria, many other countries such as Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Nepal, China, Canada, Egypt, Taiwan, Iran, Indonesia, Algeria, Bolivia, Kyrgyzstan, Jordan, Ecuador, Bangladesh and Cambodia placed restrictions on financial institutions facilitating cryptocurrency transactions because of the risks transacting in cryptocurrencies portend-risk of loss of investments, money laundering and other criminal activities. Kinateder and Choudhury (2022) found that most countries do not accept cryptocurrencies as legal tender because the price is very volatile, attracts speculators and does not offer a final promised payment.

Regarding criminal activities via cryptocurrency transactions, high energy consumption and price volatility, findings agree with Aladenusi (2017) and The Nation (2023), and they found that cryptocurrency prices are more volatile than conventional fiat currency assets. Also, they discovered that digital assets could be used for money laundering and other fraud. The Nation (2023) affirmed that investors could gain quickly and lose everything quickly because of its increased volatility. This concerns many global stakeholders and might have contributed to why policymakers call for further regulation of cryptocurrencies. Aladenusi (2017) affirmed that since Bitcoin is nameless, it makes it a probable instrument for cyber-criminals and money launderers. Participants P2, P5, P9, P13, P22 and P25 corroborate reports of illegal Bitcoin exchanges and stolen, especially among the youths. Participant P9 says, “ …. the future of bitcoin in Nigeria is uncertain, except there is a strong policy to regulate the unregulated currency … … This may tell time ….” Besides these issues, the technology requires a lot of energy because of the server farms. The focus of the 21st century is to reduce carbon dioxide and climate change impact (Kinateder and Choudhury, 2022), but the technology is not friendly to them. Developing countries with poor power generation, like Nigeria, need to double their efforts to key into cryptocurrency technologies.

Majority of the participants agree that besides the benefits associated with cryptocurrency technologies, there are several high cyber-attacks and criminal activities. They leverage the non-regulated platform to enhance their mission. Participant P20 says, “…. cryptocurrency technologies are not left out in cyber-attacks by cyber criminals or fraudsters who are sometimes operators at every phase of the cryptocurrency ecosystem. This is a critical hindrance. The common cyber-attacks on cryptocurrency exchanges flood them with fraudulent requests, making them unusable. To swing the value of cryptocurrencies, cyber fraudsters adopted a new antic known as the Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks. Also, the user’s computer could be compromised to steal and add to their mining botnets ….” Findings agree with Aladenusi (2017) and found that cyber criminals use cryptocurrency technologies to perpetuate their scamming antics. The following sub-section proffered measures to promote cryptocurrency technologies usage in the built environment industry.

4.3 Theme three: measures to promote cryptocurrency technologies

This sub-section offers a platform for the participants to proffer proactive measures to promote cryptocurrency technologies in the Nigerian built environment sector. These measures will promote implementation when the apex bank reviews its cryptocurrency restrictions in Nigeria. Eleven measures emerged to promote cryptocurrency applications in the Nigerian built environment sector. This includes.

• (1)

  Cyber intelligence as a service

• (2)

  Explore the services of Cloud Service Providers

• (3)

  Practice basic cyber security practices

• (4)

  Patronise regulated platforms

• (5)

  Apex bank regulations

• (6)

  Awareness campaign of the benefits

• (7)

  Inclusive stakeholders’ engagement

• (8)

  Removal of goods and services tax to encourage wider acceptance

• (9)

  Cryptocurrency-friendly environment through policies

• (10)

  Cyber-security strategy and awareness

• (11)

  Reskilling and upskilling financial institution staffers

From the 11 emerging measures, cyber intelligence as a service, exploring the services of Cloud Service Providers, practicing basic cyber security practices, patronise regulated platforms, apex bank regulations, and reskilling and upskilling of financial institutions staffers were frequent among the interviewees as the perceived measures to promote cryptocurrency technologies applications in the Nigerian built environment sector. Findings agree that financial institutions and government regulatory agencies, including the Central Bank of Nigeria, should proactively disrupt future cyberattacks by using threat intelligence techniques (cyber intelligence as a service). Participant P11 says, “…. a 24x7 intelligence information gathering and monitoring process will be required via proactive disrupt future cyberattacks to mitigate Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack ….” Findings agree that Cloud computing could be encouraged, but organisations should consider possible services from Cloud Service Providers as they migrate their infrastructures and platforms to the Cloud (Participants P15, P19 and P22). Regarding ransomware as a threat to digitalisation, findings show that to mitigate ransomware, organisations and financial institutions should be encouraged to follow some basic cyber security practices via the ability to spread across networks before detection and built-in advanced anti-virus evading structures (Participants P2, P7, P16, P20 and P22). Participant P22 says, “…. ransomware is known as ‘cyber-kidnapping.’ The cyber threat allows data to be kidnapped, and ransom is expected to be paid for the kidnapped data to be made available ….”

Findings agree that users or intending users should be encouraged to patronise regulated platforms to enhance regulations and monitoring. Participant P9 says, “…. regulated platforms ensure robust security for their users against hackers, and clients could access their customer representative if there is an issue. Besides these benefits, centralised platforms regularly undergo audits to check compliance with all the laws and requirements ….” Findings agree with The Nation (2023) and found that apart from the regulated platforms subjecting themselves to regular audits, they ensure their clients install a two-factor authentication to protect their accounts. Participant P15 says, “ …. the country’s financial apex bank regulation is a must for a wider acceptance to create mass adoption of cryptocurrencies to all sectors, the built environment sector inclusive. The regulation should be all-inclusive, with stakeholders engaged in formulating a ‘win-win’ approach with the technology …. This is currently missing in Nigeria ….” The complex interplay of factors might have affected the slow mass adoption of cryptocurrencies in Nigeria, but the built environment needs to be prepared (P2, P6, P13, P19 and P24). This is germane because cryptocurrencies have become part of the global economy, finance and business. Greater regulation for the crypto space is required, and the outcome might drive greater adoption (PP7, P8, P9 and P23). Findings agree with Guarda (2022) and reported that in the USA, it is compulsory to report bitcoin transactions of all kinds, irrespective of the value, to the Internal Revenue Service. Also, the users are to keep a record of all financial transactions using bitcoins as a medium of exchange.

Also, for cryptocurrencies to become a viable reserve currency, strict regulations are required from the stakeholders, with the apex bank giving the lead. Majority suggests awareness campaigns regarding understanding digitised assets, its value and benefits. Participant P1 says, “ …. Besides the campaign, it requires political and financial mechanisms alignment to engage key stakeholders. The financial strategy includes currency market price discovery and price stability ….” Participants P3, P12, P16 and P24 recommend the removal of goods and services tax (GST) for cryptocurrency transactions when it becomes a legal means of financial transactions or medium of exchange in Nigeria. It may encourage wider acceptance and financial transactions via cryptocurrencies. Findings agree with Guarda (2022) and reported that in Singapore, the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) issued an e-tax draft guide for the treatment of what it calls the “Digital Payment Tokens.” The draft seeks to excuse any entity dealing with digital assets from GST liabilities. Singapore is advanced in blockchain and cryptocurrency regulation.

Regarding leveraging on the non-regulated platforms, findings recommend a cryptocurrency-friendly environment through policies that enhance blockchain technology. Participant P10 opines that policy development that enhances blockchain would develop a crypto-economic platform. Findings agree with Novak (2020) and found that blockchain technology policies would enhance crypto-friendly environment development. Also, cyber security strategy and awareness should be given urgent attention to building confidence and wider acceptance regarding usage. This should be all-inclusive and monitored by the apex bank to ensure enforcement. Participant P11 says, “ …. this is one way to mitigate cyber fraud associated with cryptocurrency technology. Though the acceptance in Nigeria is not legal, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) should be proactive to ensure that financial institutions operate a sound and effective cyber security framework ….” Findings agree with Aladenusi (2017), and it reported that CBN requested banks and its Allies to submit their cyber security framework to be accessed for maturity and compliance. Cyber Security Strategy is the way apart from cryptocurrency fraud because digitalisation has come and will continue to improve to enhance businesses and transactions (Participants P3, P17 and P19). Findings slightly disagree with Oludare et al. (2024), who found eNaira Central Bank Digital Currency as a suitable response to the invasion of cryptocurrency innovation into the financial sector of the world economy. The decision is debatable. As the apex bank, legislating the authorisation of cryptocurrency with necessary strict regulations to boost economies should be the way to go instead of an outright ban.

Mitigating viruses and other criminal activities within the cyber cycle requires a daily upgrade. Findings suggest reskilling and upskilling of financial institutions staffers in sensitive positions regarding gaining knowledge in maintaining the environment and improving security checks on the Internet of Things (IoT) devices within the organisations and its users. The outcome would mitigate compromising IoT devices. Participant P20 says, “… IoT connects all physical devices such as Android wears, Apple Watches, Smart TVs, etc., and could be compromised to hack the control system of financial transaction history ….” Findings agree with Aladenusi (2017) and suggest that to mitigate the rate of IoT compromises, besides the financial institutions gaining comprehensive knowledge of IoT devices, individuals must use security measures to update device firmware and change security passwords.

5. The study’s implications

This research is among the first studies that theoretically investigated the relevance of cryptocurrency technologies to the industry, examined the perceived barriers that may hinder cryptocurrency technologies implementation and proffered measures to promote the applications. The research extended the knowledge of cryptocurrency technologies to the built environment sector via a qualitative research design. Besides filling the methodological gap by engaging participants directly from the field, within and outside Nigeria’s context, this study fills a pertinent gap in the body of knowledge. Findings will promote implementation when the apex bank reviews its cryptocurrency restrictions in Nigeria. Regarding the relevance and the growing global interest in cryptocurrency technologies, such as Bitcoin, Ripple, Cardano and Ethereum, findings show that Nigeria cannot be in isolation but would need to strengthen the implementation via strict policy regulations to protect the users. In addition, this study intends to assist cryptocurrency technology vendors and intended users in identifying perceived hindrances to implementing the technology and proffer measures to promote its uses in the industry from the stakeholders’ perspectives. Other countries may employ the suggested measures without restriction regarding cryptocurrencies as legal tender in financial transactions in their built environment sectors.

As part of this study’s implications, the policies to inspire cryptocurrency applications in the sector have far-reaching advantages for stakeholders and society. Thus, the Nigerian Government should reconsider the outright ban on digital currency (Bitcoin) and develop regulatory control to strengthen its adoption of eNaira as a viable alternative to cryptocurrency in its bid to ensure financial inclusivity for all Nigerians. Besides the economic benefits, such as increased liquidity for SMEs, new openings to raise funds for capital-intensive construction projects and the enhanced era of smart contracts, it assists in innovating and moving from centralised mechanisms to decentralised financial systems via technology. The research intends to stir up policymakers regarding anticipated cryptocurrency technologies applications in Nigeria. The study’s output aims to strengthen and provide an insight into the devices of the cryptocurrency and to stir the built environment stakeholders, especially the government and contracting firms, to create an enabling platform to promote implementing cryptocurrency technologies once the regulatory agencies revise their ban decision as a legal tender entity in Nigeria.

6. Limitations and areas for future study

As part of this study’s limitations, most engaged participants had basic cryptocurrency knowledge. Of the 25 participants, 8 have been involved in cryptocurrency transactions. The researchers were guided, as illustrated in Table 2, to mitigate the limitations regarding the research reliability. The study covered Abuja and Lagos in Nigeria, with a good representation of the key participants knowledgeable in cryptocurrency technology and the built environment. The study engaged virtual interviews in the data collection. In total, 25 interviewees responded to the invitation and were engaged with saturation evidence at the 22nd interviewee. The sample size 25 is independent of the findings because of the widely reviewed literature. Therefore, future research is needed to validate the findings. Also, there is a need to develop a proposed framework on how implementers/policymakers will introduce cryptocurrency technologies into the built environment sector once the regulatory agencies okay it as a legal tender entity in Nigeria. The responsibilities of stakeholders are germane in a future study.

7. Conclusion

There have been scanty studies on cryptocurrency technologies in the built environment, none regarding Nigeria’s context. Hence, studies on the implementation’s perceived hindrances were silent in the review. The study shows that despite the benefits of these technologies, acceptability as a means of legal tender in many countries, Nigeria included, still needs to be solved. Also, the study explored the anticipated barriers that may hinder cryptocurrency technologies implementation and suggested measures to promote its applications in the sector through a qualitative research design from the participants’ perspective. The current study is exploratory. This research should be considered an early appraisal because it is not yet accepted as legal tender in Nigeria. Therefore, future studies will conduct further analyses on possible research problems confronting cryptocurrency technologies and the built environment in other developing countries. Suggested measures from this study would promote cryptocurrency technology applications in the built environment and guide construction practitioners, researchers and policymakers when it becomes a legal tender.

Table 1

Summary of interviewees’ description

ID	Participant	Location	Years of experience	Rank/Firm
P1	Quantity Surveyor	Lagos	34 years	Principal Partner/QS consultancy firm
P2	Quantity Surveyor/Academician		23 years	Senior Quantity Surveyor/QS firm
P3	Architect		28 years	Director/Architectural consultancy firm
P4	Architect/Academician		22 years	Senior Architect/Consultancy firm
P5	Engineer		26 years	Operational Director/Engineering consultancy firm
P6	Engineer/Academician		20 years	Senior Engineer 1/Consultancy firm
P7	ICT expert		26 years	MD, IT Consultant
P8	ICT expert		20 years	Trainee PM/Consultancy firm
P9	ICT expert in construction software		21 years	Senior Consultant
P10	ICT expert in construction software		19 years	Software Manager
P11	ICT expert in construction software		23 years	Operation Manager
P12	Contractor		30 years	Director/Medium contracting firm
P13	Contractor		25 years	CEO/small contracting firm
P14	Quantity Surveyor	Abuja	30 years	Senior Partner/QS consultancy firm
P15	Quantity Surveyor/Academician		26 years	Senior Quantity Surveyor/QS firm
P16	Architect		25 years	Senior Director/Architectural consultancy firm
P17	Architect/Academician		19 years	Senior Architect/Consultancy firm
P18	Engineer		25 years	Director/Engineering consultancy firm
P19	Engineer/Academician		20 years	Senior Engineer/Consultancy firm
P20	ICT expert		22 years	Partner, IT Consultant
P21	ICT expert		24 years	MD, IT firm
P22	ICT expert in construction software		20 years	Director, ICT firm
P23	ICT expert in construction software		21 years	Software Director
P24	Contractor		37 years	Director/Medium contracting firm
P25	Contractor		25 years	CEO/small contracting firm

Source(s): Authors work

Table 2

Study’s quality evaluation strategies

Method	Assessment strategies	The phase of research
Reliability	Interviewers’ well-guided (consistent)	Data collection
Validity	The adoption of a recognised method (semi-structured virtual interviews)	Data collection
Generalisability	Recognition of limitation due to sample size potential interviewer bias	Data analysis
Transferability	Compare the study’s implications against reviewed literature	Post data analysis
Credibility	Theme approach to establish a pattern from the data	Data analysis
Dependability	Developing semi-structured interview guidelines (Appendix)	Research design

Source(s): Modified from Wearing (2013, p. 98) and Yin (2014, p. 34)

Appendix Virtual interview questions

Dear Participant,

Request for Virtual Interview

Twenty-first-century digitalisation birthed new methods of payment systems like the emergence of cryptocurrencies. Cryptocurrency technologies have been identified as drivers for crypto-smart contracts and procurements. They may enhance crypto-economic development and innovation in the built environment industry. Studies regarding the application of cryptocurrency technologies in the Nigerian built environment industry are uncommon. Therefore, this research is titled: Appraising the Application of Cryptocurrency Technologies in the Nigerian Built Environment: Stakeholders Perspective. Specifically, the researchers will achieve this research through the following research questions.

• (1)

  What is the relevance of cryptocurrency technology in the built environment industry?

• (2)

  What anticipated barriers may hinder cryptocurrency technology implementation in the Nigerian built environment?

• (3)

  How can cryptocurrency technology usage be promoted in the built environment industry?

Note the interview questions are going to be within the stated objectives. Responses you provide will be collated and analysed with other engaged participants’ responses. It will make up the value and contribution to achieving the success of this research. The researchers will treat the information provided with confidentiality.

Thanks for the anticipated participation.

Regards.

Yours faithfully,

(Researchers)

Basic questions for the participants

• 1.

  For record purposes, what is the name of your organisation?

• 2.

  What is your position in the organisation?

• 3.

  How long have you been working?

• 4.

  Are you knowledgeable about the cryptocurrency technology associated with the built environment?

• 5.

  If yes to question 4, in general terms, from your perception, how can you describe cryptocurrency technology’s relevance to Nigeria’s built environment?

• 6.

  As a stakeholder in the construction sector, what anticipated barriers may hinder cryptocurrency technology implementation in the Nigerian built environment?

• 7.

  What role can the key stakeholders play in mitigating these anticipated encumbrances facing the proposed implementation of cryptocurrency technology in the Nigerian built environment?

• 8.

  What are the feasible measures to improve the applications of cryptocurrency technology in the Nigerian built environment?