Dou, Y; Hou, W; Yan, X; Jin, X and Li, P (2026) Optimizing policy mixes for promoting prefabricated construction in developing countries: An fsqca approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 33(1), pp. 810-831. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – Prefabricated construction (PC) is increasingly recognized for its sustainability and is being vigorously promoted worldwide. However, its adoption in developing countries remains suboptimal, with existing studies predominantly focusing on policy frameworks or the impact of a single policy instrument. This study addresses this research gap by optimizing the path of PC promotion from the perspective of policy mixes. Design/methodology/approach – The study employs fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) in conjunction with necessary condition analysis, to explore effective policy configurations for PC promotion. A comprehensive collection of 171 PC-related policies issued by the Chinese government was analyzed using text mining to identify antecedent conditions of configuration. Data were further obtained through a questionnaire survey involving 263 valid responses, with fsQCA used to derive the optimal policy configurations. Findings – The analysis identified six distinct combination paths for effective policy configurations. Land supply and governmental procurement were found to be core conditions, while fiscal and taxation financial measures emerged as marginal conditions prevalent across all paths. These findings suggest that land supply policies are particularly suitable for regions with limited land resources, such as Shanghai, while government procurement is more effective in regions like Xinjiang, where PC awareness is still developing. Practical implications – In practice, the conclusions enable policymakers to clearly understand policy instruments, thereby finding differentiated pathways for promoting PC with comparable effects. The proposed recommendations help advance PC development effectively while reducing financial burden and minimizing resource waste. This provides important guidance for PC development across different regions or stages, helps address regional imbalances in PC development, and ultimately contributes to the broader goal of sustainable urban development. Originality/value – This study significantly enriches the research on PC policy combinations by utilizing more comprehensive and robust data, thereby enhancing the universal applicability of the findings. The results provide valuable references for policymakers in different regions, helping to address regional imbalances in PC development and facilitating the construction industry's transition towards greater intelligence and sustainability.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | fsqca; policy configuration; prefabricated construction; sustainability; text mining |
| Index terms: | mining, policy mix, construction industry, land, taxation, promotion, sustainable urban development, government procurement, methodology, configuration, questionnaire, policy instrument, developing country, Shanghai, qualitative comparative analysis, survey |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, real estate economics, sustainability and resilience, management, policy economics, geotechnical engineering, procurement strategy, industry analysis, systems engineering, policy studies, research methods, Geography, development economics |
| Topics: | International Construction, Human Resources, Urban Studies, Governance, Research Practice, Procurement, Regulations & Compliance, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context |
| 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