Forecasting infidelity: Why current methods for predicting costs miss the mark

Swei, O (2020) Forecasting infidelity: Why current methods for predicting costs miss the mark. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(2): 04019100, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

High-fidelity forecasts of construction cost indexes and material prices are critical for the successful delivery of infrastructure work projects. Unfortunately, existing models tend to underperform because they either (1) ignore relevant explanatory factors or (2) incorrectly specify system feedback and structure. Through a case study with bitumen, a construction material of prime concern for transportation agencies, this paper presents a novel multivariate cost forecasting approach that overcomes these two gaps. Specifically, based on several diagnostic tests, an autoregressive distributed lag and equivalent error-correction model is specified that correctly captures the feedback structure between bitumen and energy commodities. The study then characterizes the relative merits of the approach by introducing robust deterministic and probabilistic out-of-sample forecast measures. The proposed forecasting approach greatly outperforms conventional methods: 6-month-ahead price projections are at least 25% better across the available deterministic and probabilistic metrics. For state planning agencies, this improved forecasting model will allow decision makers to better predict capital budgeting requirements and resource-planning risks. Furthermore, the proposed performance measures will better equip the construction research community to evaluate future forecasting models.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction; costs; endogeneity; error-correction model; forecasting; multivariate; time series; univariate
Index terms: case study, forecasting, endogeneity, cost forecasting, transportation agency, capital budgeting, bitumen, construction material, time series, performance measure, construction cost index, agency
Subjects: data collection methods, building materials, cost indicators, prediction and forecasting, data science, economics, performance measurement, sociology, transportation engineering, budgeting, financial analysis
Topics: Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Quality Management, Design Practice
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