Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 13 results ...

Briscoe, G (2006) How useful and reliable are construction statistics?. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 220–9.

Clarke, L (2006) Valuing labour. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 246–56.

Crawford, P and Vogl, B (2006) Measuring productivity in the construction industry. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 208–19.

Ekeskär, A, Rudberg, M, Institutionen för teknik och, n, Linköpings, u, Kommunikations- och, t and Tekniska, f (2016) Third-party logistics in construction: The case of a large hospital project. Construction Management and Economics, 34(03), 174-91.

Franz, B W and Leicht, R M (2016) An alternative classification of project delivery methods used in the United States building construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 34(03), 160-73.

Hu, X and Liu, C (2016) Profitability performance assessment in the Australian construction industry: A global relational two-stage DEA method. Construction Management and Economics, 34(03), 147-59.

Ive, G (2006) Re-examining the costs and value ratios of owning and occupying buildings. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 230-45.

Khan, K I A, Flanagan, R and Lu, S-L (2016) Managing information complexity using system dynamics on construction projects. Construction Management and Economics, 34(03), 192-204.

Kohler, N (2006) A European perspective on the Pearce report: policy and research. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 287–94.

Macmillan, S (2006) Added value of good design. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 257–71.

Pearce, D (2006) Is the construction sector sustainable?: definitions and reflections. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 201–7.

Tombesi, P (2006) Good thinking and poor value: on the socialization of knowledge in construction. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 272–86.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Change management; construction value; industrial ecology; innovation; innovation leadership; patronage; productivity; public knowledge; public policy; research strategy; social investment; technological progress; technology transfer
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0961-3218
  • URL: http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk/link.asp?id=p8874827l2848k5k
  • Abstract:
    Chapter 7 of the Pearce Report (2003) elaborates succinctly on the role that technical progress should fulfil within a construction sector committed to the sustainable generation of social and economic value. Caught between technological macro-analysis and policy-steering objectives, and possibly overwhelmed by the difficulty of treating the subject within the limited scope of the report and time available, the chapter offers a few aggregate industrial data and some commendable, albeit generic, recommendations about innovation. Yet, as part of work conceived under the aegis of a strategic and development initiative, the chapter underplays the opportunity of highlighting two issues that have and should condition the policy debate on construction innovation in the future. The first issue is concerned with the project-based nature of the sector and its consequent ability to spur or thwart change. The second involves the definition or indication of practical institutional strategies that can trigger the changes foreseen or promoted within such a context. Based on this critique, a rationale is developed in the present paper for the strategic creation of technical progress by drawing attention to two specific elements: (1) the cost–benefit equation in the generation of new knowledge, and (2) the possible qualitative distribution of research investment opportunities in the industry. It is shown that although construction-related innovation and project-based innovation are naturally connected, a critical difference exists between the two. For the latter to develop and have an impact on the industry, both political support and wilful patronage are required.

Turner, R K (2006) Sustainability auditing and assessment challenges. Building Research & Information, 34(03), 197–200.