Hlatshwayo, T; Emuze, F and Smallwood, J (2024) Enabling regulatory coherence in the Eswatini construction industry. In: Thomson, C (ed.) Proceedings of 40th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2024, London South Bank University, UK.
Abstract
Despite contributing to economic growth, the construction industry is challenging to regulate. Ineffective regulation compromises the economic sustainability of the industry. Therefore, this phenomenological study explored the barriers and enablers of regulatory coherence in the Eswatini construction industry. Forty-five (45) participants holding various construction industry positions were selected through purposive sampling for the qualitative strand of the study. The textual data were collected through semi-structured interviews using open-ended questions and analysed thematically. The findings revealed that overregulation, discrepancies in the framework, corruption, and ineffective leadership in the CIC hindered regulatory coherence in Eswatini Construction (barriers). The results indicate that stakeholder engagement, legislative harmonisation, transparency, and accountability enable the coherence of the regulatory framework (enablers). Through the promotion of the enablers, including legislative framework review as well as research and development, stakeholders could better manage the factors that impede the effective regulation and performance of the industry.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | coherence; construction; industry; legislative framework; Eswatini |
| Index terms: | accountability, promotion, phenomenological study, interview, transparency, construction industry, purposive sampling, economic growth, coherence, regulation, stakeholder engagement, corruption, economic sustainability, research and development |
| Subjects: | research methods, economic development, management, professional development, methods and analysis, research management, liability law, political science, professional ethics, industry analysis, data collection methods, community and social dimensions, human factors and perception, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Human Resources, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research 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