Even as global trade remains unpredictable and supply chains tighten, U.S. life sciences construction continues to push forward. Companies such as Amgen, Eli Lilly, Fujifilm Diosynth Biotechnologies, and Genentech are pressing ahead with major biomanufacturing projects, relying on earlier decision-making and more collaborative execution strategies to stay on schedule.
.avif)
While some reports from real estate groups like CBRE and Cushman & Wakefield suggest a slowdown, project teams say the reality is different. “What our group observes isn’t a slowdown in construction activity, but rather a change in how owners execute strategies to keep things moving,” write David Scott and Joshua John, life sciences preconstruction leaders at DPR Construction.
In today’s high-pressure environment—where lead times for electrical gear or process equipment can stretch months—waiting too long can derail entire schedules. More owners are aligning with subcontractors earlier, fast-tracking procurement packages, and engaging delivery partners before design is complete.
This approach is especially crucial for facilities producing active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), bulk biologics, and fill–finish for GLP-1 therapies, where demand is rising despite high costs. Customers are entering single-source contracts, negotiating open-book deals, and even locking in suppliers long before construction documents are finalized.
Tariffs are not the only factor affecting execution. Pricing instability, unpredictable lead times, and labor shortages continue to challenge project delivery. Skilled trades—especially in mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and instrumentation—are in short supply as semiconductor and advanced manufacturing projects compete for the same workforce.
To navigate these risks, Scott and John highlight the importance of tools like their Market Conditions Dashboard, alongside data from AGC and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which track materials, labor availability, and supply pressures.
The old design–bid–build model is giving way to flexible, integrated approaches. “Owners are moving away from traditional delivery models,” the authors note, pointing to phased procurement, open collaboration, and shared risk–reward contracts that keep projects aligned even as conditions shift.
For example, teams are sequencing work around commissioning, qualification, and validation (CQV) milestones—ensuring utility work, cleanroom design, and system turnover schedules are aligned. Prefabrication also plays a role, with offsite fabrication of cleanroom panels, multi-trade racks, and process skids reducing rework and enabling faster installation.
On one recent project, delayed permanent-power equipment threatened commissioning. The team mitigated the risk by installing temporary power systems, an adjustment made possible because the risk was flagged early.
Other owners are widening their supplier networks, qualifying new vendors to hedge against long lead times or price spikes. While this takes more effort upfront, it provides much-needed flexibility as projects progress.
Despite progress, some pitfalls persist:
Life sciences facilities are under intense pressure to deliver early so that patients gain faster access to new treatments. Delays rarely stem from one issue—they accumulate through slow decisions, rigid planning, or limited adaptability.
“What keeps projects on track is a team that knows when to move and when to hold,” Scott and John write. “The goal isn’t to control every variable, but rather to make steady progress, even amid ambiguity.”
As biopharma capacity needs grow, early risk identification, collaborative contracting, and flexibility will continue to shape the future of U.S. life sciences construction.
Originally reported by David Scott, Joshua John in Bio Process International.
.webp)
