Construction and Building Materials Impact Factor

Among Construction & Building Technology journals, Construction and Building Materials ranks in the top 7% by impact factor (JCR 2024). This ranking is based on our analysis of 20,449 journals in the Clarivate JCR 2024 database.

In construction and building technology, a 6.2 IF is strong. The field's citation rates are lower than biomedical or chemistry research, so the number should be read relative to the category. Being ranked 5/68 in Q1 means the journal is in the top tier for applied construction materials work.

The five-year JIF (6.8) running above the two-year (8.0) indicates that Construction and Building Materials papers continue to accumulate citations over time. This is typical of applied engineering research where findings get cited as they're adopted in practice and standards.

The growth from ~3.2 in 2017 to a peak of ~7.7 in 2021 reflects the expanding construction materials research field. The post-pandemic normalization brought the IF to 6.2, still roughly double its 2017 value.

In our pre-submission review work with manuscripts targeting Construction and Building Materials, three patterns generate the most consistent desk rejections.

Material property data measured under laboratory conditions without construction-relevant test protocols. Construction and Building Materials' scope specifies "manufacture, performance, and use of materials used in building and civil engineering construction." For papers on concrete, mortar, geopolymers, or composite materials, the journal's reviewers expect tests that reflect actual construction use conditions. Papers reporting compressive strength after 28-day curing in ideal laboratory conditions without addressing durability under field-relevant exposures (freeze-thaw cycling, sulfate attack, chloride penetration) face consistent requests for additional testing. The minimum expected test program for a new concrete admixture or supplementary cementitious material includes workability, compressive strength development, and at least one durability indicator relevant to the targeted application.

Sustainable or waste-based material paper without durability data. Construction and Building Materials receives a high volume of papers on supplementary cementitious materials from industrial waste (fly ash, slag, rice husk ash, recycled aggregate). Papers that optimize mix proportions for compressive strength at 28 days without addressing long-term durability are regularly flagged. The journal's editorial standards require that claims about "sustainable alternatives" to conventional materials be supported by durability data that confirms the material performs adequately over the design life. A waste-based binder with 20% lower strength than Portland cement at 28 days may still be publishable if it shows equivalent or better durability performance over 90 days, but the durability data must be present.

Structural or finite element analysis paper without experimental materials validation. Construction and Building Materials focuses on materials science, not structural engineering. Papers that are primarily finite element analyses of structural elements (beams, columns, slabs) where the material properties are inputs from the literature rather than experimentally measured, are regularly redirected to structural engineering journals like Engineering Structures or the Journal of Structural Engineering. The journal expects that material behavior characterization is the primary experimental contribution. Computational modeling is valued when it explains the mechanism behind experimental observations, not when it substitutes for materials testing.

A CBM submission readiness check can assess whether the test program covers the durability and construction-relevant performance dimensions required by Construction and Building Materials.

Submit if:

• the paper presents applied construction materials research with engineering relevance
• the work demonstrates performance of materials in realistic construction contexts
• durability, sustainability, or structural performance data is central to the contribution
• the scope covers any construction material (not limited to concrete)

Think twice if:

• the paper is fundamental materials science without construction application (consider materials science journals)
• the work is primarily structural analysis without materials contribution (Engineering Structures may fit better)
• Cement and Concrete Research is a more natural home for fundamental cement work
• the paper is primarily about sustainability framing with thin materials data (Journal of Cleaner Production may fit)

A CBM submission readiness check can help assess whether the construction materials framing meets the journal's editorial expectations.

This page should help the searcher answer a practical shortlist question: is the paper truly about materials for construction, or is it a broader materials paper that happens to mention concrete, mortar, steel, timber, or recycled aggregates? Construction and Building Materials rewards the first category much more consistently than the second.

That is why the impact factor matters only when paired with field logic. A 6.2 JIF in construction and building technology signals a strong, respected applied-engineering journal. It does not mean every strong materials paper belongs here. The built-environment consequence has to be visible, not implied.

Authors use this journal when they need readers who care about service-life realism, mechanical performance in construction contexts, durability under practical exposures, or how a material behaves once it stops being a laboratory curiosity and starts becoming an engineering choice. That audience is narrower than generic materials science, but much more decision-relevant for civil and construction researchers.

• It helps when the manuscript makes a clear construction-materials decision easier, not just a generic materials claim.
• It helps when durability, structural consequence, sustainability under realistic use, or code-adjacent relevance is central to the paper.
• It misleads when the best part of the manuscript is materials novelty without enough built-environment context.
• It misleads when authors use the Q1 label to avoid deciding whether a more fundamental materials journal is the real fit.

• Construction and Building Materials submission process
• Construction and Building Materials review time
• Is Construction and Building Materials a good journal?

One reason this journal stays central is that many construction-materials papers do not belong cleanly inside only one material silo. A manuscript may involve concrete durability, recycled aggregates, fiber reinforcement, service-life modeling, and sustainability tradeoffs at the same time. Construction and Building Materials is attractive precisely because it can hold those hybrid applied stories together for readers who care about construction performance first and material taxonomy second.

That matters for the searcher because the ranking question is rarely abstract. Authors are trying to decide whether they need a deeper cement-science audience, a broader materials-science audience, or a civil-engineering audience that understands what real adoption in the built environment requires. This journal is strongest in that third lane.

That audience fit is often more valuable than a slightly higher metric in a journal that does not speak construction fluently.

The impact factor for Construction and Building Materials measures average citations per paper over 2 years. It does not measure the quality of any individual paper, the prestige within a specific subfield, or whether the journal is the right fit for your work. A high IF does not guarantee your paper will be cited, and a lower IF does not mean the journal lacks influence in its specialty.

Impact factors also do not account for field-specific citation patterns. Journals in clinical medicine accumulate citations faster than journals in mathematics or ecology. Comparing IFs across fields is misleading.

Before choosing this journal based on IF alone, a CBM submission readiness check assesses whether your manuscript fits the journal's actual editorial scope.