In my humble opinion, that all rests on whether or not the will exists to find an innovative solution to meet the government's needs. For example, if the government shows its intention to reduce the environmental footprint of its methods of transportation, there will be an enthusiastic reaction in equipping the fleet of public vehicles with electric ones. However, in the case of wood construction, the intention expressed is not to use better construction to adapt government-owned buildings to the toughest standards. Instead, they say that they want to consider wood in order to help the forestry industry.
In that case, the message being sent loud and clear is that it will be complex and expensive. In the entire chain leading to the completion of a project, we see a very serious lack of interest. As soon as they can, people say that the option is being put to one side, that the matter is settled, that the political movers and shakers are satisfied and that, in response to the demand, the intention, that they had expressed, they have been shown that wood has to be set aside, or that using it is more complicated. They can then move on to something else and work in the same way as they always have.
There really is a resistance to innovation in general. The other key factor is motivation. In terms of using wood, that is what causes it to be ignored as an option.