Costs and benefits of MBE rules in construction

Koehn, E and Espaillat, C A (1984) Costs and benefits of MBE rules in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 110(2), pp. 235-247. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The findings of a study designed to investigate the costs and benefits of Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) regulations in the construction industry are presented. The data indicate that large contractors have less difficulty than smaller organizations in meeting MBE requirements. In addition, it is shown that the regulations both benefit and enlarge the number of minority contractors. According to the study, however, MBE procedures have not increased the number of qualified minority contractors. The data also indicate that MBE regulations have increased the cost of construction projects. The amount allocated, although significant when compared to percentage profit, is not substantial. For example, the unweighted values, in terms of construction dollar volume, range from 3.41% for the Engineering News-Record (ENR) 400 organizations to 3.33% for the Associated General Contractors of Indiana, AGC (Indiana). The weighted values range from 2.04% for the ENR 400 contractors, to 3.74% for the AGC (Indiana). The great majority of firms surveyed indicate that MBE rules and regulations should be modified. Better agency procurement efforts and comprehensive programs to train minority contractors are mentioned as a necessity.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: construction industry, minority, agency, regulation, construction project, program, profit, general contractor
Subjects: economic analysis, practitioner, sociology, industry analysis, political science, software systems, production management
Topics: Digital Applications, Ethics, Roles and Professions, Governance, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

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