Suprun, E; Sahin, O; Anthony Stewart, R and Panuwatwanich, K (2022) Examining transition pathways to construction innovation in Russia: A system dynamics approach. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(4), pp. 556-578. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The construction industry has often been criticized for its lack of innovation and commitment to R&D. Using a systems approach, this study examined a number of construction innovation system scenarios and policy interventions within the context of four future plausible Russian construction industry transition pathways (i.e. business as usual, market forces, conservative development and innovation power). An integrated participatory systems modelling approach was employed to develop the system dynamics model incorporating the main actors of the construction innovation process, namely, industry, government and university. Construction innovation diffused more rapidly and seeded more innovators than imitators for the innovation power transition pathway, whereby increasing government R&D support was coupled with extensive reductions in barriers. The market forces and state-led conservative development transition pathways showed similar levels of innovation outcomes within the modelling horizon, but predominately yielded innovation imitators. The extensive scenario analysis findings culminated in the formulation of policy recommendations for enhancing innovativeness in the Russian construction industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction innovation; participatory modelling; scenario analysis; system dynamics; transition pathways |
| Index terms: | construction industry, modelling, transition pathway, scenario analysis, commitment, construction innovation, system dynamics |
| Subjects: | analytical methods, psychology, computing systems, business, policy studies, industry analysis, building construction |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Governance, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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