Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 16 results ...

Abdirad, H and Dossick, C S (2019) Normative and descriptive models for COBie implementation: discrepancies and limitations. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1820–36.

Almarri, K, Alzahrani, S and Boussabaine, H (2019) An evaluation of the impact of risk cost on risk allocation in public private partnership projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1696–711.

Anson, M, Ying, K T and Siu, M F (2019) Analytical models towards explaining the difficulty in efficiently matching site concrete supply resources with placing crew needs. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1672–95.

Antwi-Afari, M F, Li, H, Wong, J K, Oladinrin, O T, Ge, J X, Seo, J and Wong, A Y L (2019) Sensing and warning-based technology applications to improve occupational health and safety in the construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1534–52.

Au-Yong, C P, Chua, S J L, Ali, A S and Tucker, M (2019) Optimising maintenance cost by prioritising maintenance of facilities services in residential buildings. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1593–607.

Charkhakan, M H and Heravi, G (2019) Evaluating the preventability of conflicts arising from change occurrence in construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1777–800.

Gao, J, Ren, H, Ma, X, Cai, W and Shi, Q (2019) A total energy efficiency evaluation framework based on embodied energy for the construction industry and the spatio-temporal evolution analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1652–71.

He, Q, Wang, T, Chan, A P, Li, H and Chen, Y (2019) Identifying the gaps in project success research. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1553–73.

Hilali, A, Charoenngam, C and Barman, A (2019) Barriers in contractual scope management of international development projects in Afghanistan. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1574–92.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Barriers; International construction; Afghanistan; Project management; Construction; International practice; Scope management; International development projects;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0969-9988
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-09-2017-0197
  • Abstract:
    For construction and management, the existing codes of practice of international organizations such as US Army Corps of Engineers, the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, the United Nations Office for Project Services, etc., often prove ineffective when applied in post-war countries like Afghanistan. Domestic contractors faced maximum challenges in contractual scope management, which was implemented by such organizations based on their existing codes of practice. The purpose of this paper is to understand these barriers in scope management as faced by the domestic contractors of Afghanistan. Design/methodology/approach The research employs a mixed methodology to cater to its objectives. Face-to-face structured interviews of 14 industry experts and extensive literature review were conducted to identify unique barriers pertaining to Afghanistan construction industry. Further, quantitative assessment of these barriers through the statistical tools of “mean score ranking,” “Kendall’s test” and “independent sample t-test” was carried out to understand the severity of the barriers. Findings In total, 39 unique barriers were identified under the groups of “scope formulation,” “scope completeness,” “scope pricing,” “scope implementation” and “scope change control.” The consequential impacts of these barriers and their existence at different stages of the project were illustrated. The most severe barriers were identified as the “inadequacy of site investigation reports” and the “unavailability of resources in local markets.” Originality/value The understanding of the challenges faced by local stakeholders, as highlighted by this study, can be utilized by these international organizations in their strategy and planning to ensure successful projects while also propagating the adoption of sustainable construction practices.

Hopkin, T, Lu, S, Sexton, M and Rogers, P (2019) Learning from defects in the UK housing sector using action research. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1608–24.

Jin, R, Zou, Y, Gidado, K, Ashton, P and Painting, N (2019) Scientometric analysis of BIM-based research in construction engineering and management. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1750–76.

Liang, R and Chong, H (2019) A hybrid group decision model for green supplier selection: a case study of megaprojects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1712–34.

Murillo, K P, Rocha, E and Rodrigues, M F (2019) Construction sectors efficiency analysis on seven European countries. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1801–19.

Park, E, Kwon, S J and Han, J (2019) Antecedents of the adoption of building information modeling technology in Korea. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1735–49.

Rajagopalan, G (2019) Durability of alumina silicate concrete based on slag/fly ash blends against corrosion. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1641–51.

Silverio-Fernandez, M A, Renukappa, S and Suresh, S (2019) Evaluating critical success factors for implementing smart devices in the construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(08), 1625–40.