Nwadike, A N and Wilkinson, S (2022) Why amending building codes? An investigation of the benefits of regular building code amendment in New Zealand. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 40(1), pp. 76-100. ISSN 23984708
Abstract
Purpose: The New Zealand building code has played a vital role in reducing the impact of disasters in the built environment. Following the nature of earthquake occurrences, the associated impacts such as building collapse and the increase in technological innovation in the building sector, the New Zealand building code has been frequently amended. The building code amendment ensures that buildings and other related infrastructures can withstand the impact of ground shaking without substantial damages to buildings. The purpose of this paper is to identify and explore the benefits of building code amendments in New Zealand. Design/methodology/approach: Document analysis and closed-ended questionnaire were adopted as data collection instruments for this study. The relevant stakeholders comprise structural engineer, geotechnical engineer, architect, building services consulting engineer, licensed building practitioner, project manager, building contractor, local authority, academic/researcher and quantity surveyor. Findings: A significant proportion of the survey participants that agreed to the importance of building code amendments in New Zealand justify the benefits of the amendments. The study serves as a useful guide to policy regulators and researchers who are exploring other aspects of regular building code amendments in New Zealand. The findings from this study suggest that amending the New Zealand building code needs a proactive approach to promote local technology, enhance low-cost construction materials, training of code users and reducing bureaucracy in design approval and construction inspection. The study concludes that improving on the 28 factors identified in this study would contribute intensively to disaster risk reduction in the built environment and an increase in compliance level in New Zealand. Originality/value: This paper originality comes from its practical approach towards identifying the benefits of building code amendments
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | amendment; benefits; building code; earthquake; New Zealand; resilience |
| Index terms: | building code, disaster risk reduction, methodology, structural engineer, questionnaire, consulting engineer, local authority, survey, damages, compliance, approval, geotechnical engineer, building practitioner, earthquake, construction material, architect, built environment, technological innovation, investigation, document analysis, regulator, inspection, building service, quantity surveying, New Zealand, project manager, building contractor |
| Subjects: | data science, innovation and technology management, building materials, practitioner, dispute resolution, engineering systems, data collection methods, contractual role, profession, environmental hazards, quality assurance, infrastructure and transport systems, regulatory law, sociology, Geography, health safety and environment, research methods |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Quality Management, Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here