OK, this is just my opinion, but I am inclined to think:
It depends upon whose point of view you are most concerned about satisfying:
From the builder's point of view:
a modular approach is faster and potentially more profitable in the short term; but
From the customer's point of view:
it is likely that there would be an inferior "cost / benefit ratio" (i.e. larger) in choosing the modular approach.
However, it depends largely upon the location upon which the buildings are being erected.
Traditional building techniques tend to be better in well developed, and stable, western economies: that is where the greatest benefits can be obtained in using a well-understood, reliable and efficiently maintained, traditional structure.
However, the modular building approach is likely to be the best all-round, rapid, solution (for both builders and customers) in less developed economies, especially in the case of disaster management, as might be required at the moment in places like:
• the hurricane ravaged Philippines; or
• areas ill-equipped to deal with a rapid influx of refugees,
as is the case with Syrian refugees in Lebanon.
Both have there different value . It all depends on your requirement . Modular building is really a good technique that is used for construction in now days because of it's some benefit . Time & Coast . These both things making modular building popular . This kind of building we can get in less time than traditional.