Green, S D (2022) Modern methods of construction: Reflections on the current research agenda. Buildings & Cities, 3(1), pp. 653-662. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
HIGHLIGHTS Modern methods of construction (MMC) comprise a value-laden and highly flexible discourse. Nevertheless, the constituent narratives have long-lasting consequences for the material fabric of the built environment. Current policy sources can be seen to possess an embedded pro-innovation bias that offsets any appetite for evidence-based research, especially that which relates to the mistakes of the past. Many policy narratives in favour of MMC are further characterised by an exaggerated sense of hubris, with an in-built institutionalised preference for disruptive innovation. Liberalised economies are especially prone to technological optimism, with a tendency to cast regulation as a barrier to be overcome. The Grenfell Tower tragedy provides a stark reminder of the limitations of viewing regulation solely through the lens of innovation. Hence, it illustrates how the prevailing built environment research–policy consensus has failed the civil society which it purportedly serves. These failings should be of concern to those who privilege evidence-based research as a means of negating the alarming onset of the post-truth society. Research is required that looks beyond the imperatives of narrowly defined productivity. It is essential that policy narratives such as MMC are fully explored in terms of their short-, medium-and long-term implications.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; fire safety; governance; grenfell tower; hubris; innovation; modern methods of construction; policy narratives |
| Index terms: | bias, reflection, privilege, narrative, built environment, regulation, civil society, evidence, preference, construction industry, built environment research, fire safety, research agenda, society, modern methods of construction, governance, productivity |
| Subjects: | political science, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, sociology, research management, building construction, probability and distributions, professional development, health safety and environment, qualitative and interpretive research, decision-making and reasoning, management, business, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Governance, Construction Technology, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, Urban Studies, Ethics |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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