Bazen, E (2014) Effect of the Building Act 2011 on compliance costs in Western Australia. Construction Economics and Building, 14(2), pp. 41-56. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
The Building Act 2011 commenced in Western Australia on 2 April 2012. It introduced private certification for design and construction compliance, and reduced fees and timeframes for local governments to issue permits. This research project assessed the effect of the Act on the time and cost of building approvals in WA, using an internet-based, self-completion survey to obtain feedback from people on their experience of the new building approvals process. This research compared the cost of approval for 16 building projects under the new and old approvals processes. The research concluded that the new approvals process appears to be cost-neutral for the building industry as a whole. However, the cost of approval for the 11 building projects studied valued up to $1 million, particularly alterations to existing buildings, is an average of 4.0 times greater under the new approvals process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | self-certification; contract management; contract administration; legislation; Australia |
| Index terms: | survey, Australia, internet, certification, self-certification, contract management, design and construction, contract administration, approval, legislation, local government, compliance, building industry |
| Subjects: | quality assurance, administrative law, administrative processes, contractual arrangements, legal systems, industry analysis, computing systems, contract management, Geography, health safety and environment, data collection methods, contractual role |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Procurement, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Quality Management, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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