Whole life thinking, interoperability of information, and consistent information and data requirements are key areas for the single construction regulator, says nima

Nima’s response to a UK Government consultation on future regulation of the construction sector has stressed the need for more consistent digital standards and greater interoperability of information and data across the lifecycle of built assets. It stressed principles contained in the Information Management Initiative (IMI) – including the need to upskill people in information management – and urged adoption of further principles contained in the Interoperability Code of Practice for Technology Providers.

Nima was responding to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s consultation document on The Single Construction Regulator. The consultation follows recommendations made in Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 2 report, intended to reduce fragmentation in how the sector is regulated and to drive culture change in the industry.

Acting as a convening body that can help government and the regulator bridge policy, standards, practice, education, and implementation, nima feels it is well placed to help align standards, market guidance, competence development and industry adoption around practical information management expectations.

Extracts from nima’s response

In its full response (PDF), nima confined itself to commenting primarily on matters relating to data and information management. It identified the need for change:

“Common industry challenges include inconsistent data structures, repeated manual entry, poor interoperability between systems, uncertainty about required formats, and weak alignment between regulatory requests and how information is generated and managed in projects and asset operations.”

• Recognise the whole life purpose of information and data
• Upskill people in information management (see also February 2026 news)
• Take a common, consistent and data-centric approach
• Establish clear data and information governance principles

Providing more detailed commentary on implementing the IMI principles, nima also highlighted the five underpinning principles of Delivering valuable data: An interoperability code of practice for technologies in the built and managed environment, published by nima’s think tank, the GIIG, in 2023 (news). The Code stressed the need for:

• longevity – enabling long-term findability, access, reuse and exploitation, and continued value, of information
• security – maintaining security, confidentiality and privacy protections, while allowing sharing of non-sensitive information for the public good
• information value – enhancing the value of information created, managed and shared by technology-using professionals
• information ownership – ensuring enduring ownership and control by asset owner-operators of valuable data about the assets they own, and
• competition – promoting fair competition between technology providers.

Information management principles and the regulator

Nima feels the principles in the IMI and the Interoperability Code of Practice should be embedded in the construction regulator’s digital operating model guidance, procurement expectations, and interface requirements.

Regardless of the software platform used to create it, regulated information must remain usable, portable, auditable, and intelligible over time. This is critical not only for competition and market fairness, but for regulatory resilience, enforcement, future investigations and long-term asset stewardship.

A single construction regulator will only be effective if it can rely on structured, assured, accessible and interoperable information across the whole building lifecycle. Without that, the regulator risks inheriting fragmented submissions, inconsistent terminology, duplicated reporting, weak audit trails, and poor transfer of knowledge between design, construction, occupation, refurbishment, and enforcement. To state matters plainly, information failure becomes regulatory failure.

Consistent information and data requirements

The consultation is timely insofar as it can build on recent progress. The ‘golden thread’ principles — accurate, accessible, up-to-date and understandable information — demonstrate alignment with existing regulatory expectations. However, the industry is currently dealing with fragmentation between regulatory requirements, client requirements, asset management systems and supply chain tools.

Developers, asset owners, and clients need clarity on what information is required, when, in what format, to what standard and for what purpose. They also need confidence that information produced at gateway, handover and occupation/operational stages can be reused rather than recreated. A single regulator should therefore drive consistency in data requirements. Dutyholders should not be forced to respond to multiple overlapping or contradictory requests.

Good IM practice adoption and proportionality

The regulator will need to bring industry with it. Many organisations are still at a relatively early stage in digital maturity, and many SMEs will be wary of a model that appears to create additional compliance burdens.

The regulator should promote a phased, principles-based and outcomes-led approach, supported by common standards, guidance, exemplars, and education. The emphasis should be on better information, better structure, better governance, and better interoperability, rather than more bureaucracy.

The most effective tools are those that support structured information, version control, auditability, secure sharing, open exchange, traceability of decisions and integration across disciplines and lifecycle stages without referencing specific vendors.

Automation and AI

Automation has real potential in completeness checks, consistency validation, classification, and identification of missing or conflicting information. Automation of compliance checking is already implemented in several European countries and cities. Automation can use rules (symbolic AI) or large language models (LLMs; neural AI).  However, such automation must not displace accountable human judgment, particularly in safety-critical contexts. Any use of automation should be transparent, auditable, and explainable, with clear lines of accountability.

Nima also cited its February 2026 position paper on AI – Artificial Intelligence (AI) considerations for Information Managers in the built environment (news) – which highlighted the need for trusted, quality data as a basis for reliable decision-making.

Read the full nima response (PDF).