Ngowi, A B (1998) Is construction procurement a key to sustainable development? Building Research & Information, 26(6), pp. 340-350. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Has specialization of professional roles obstructed the holistic approach and sustainable development? A preliminary survey in Botswana involving construction professionals found that existing procurement systems have not integrated the efforts of the different project participants and also fail to fulfil the expectations of the users. A holistic approach involving the re-integration of construction disciplines by applying new procurement methods is proposed. An integrated, holistic way of working could provide a number of synergies through the consideration of the building project as an entire system. The implications include better decision making upstream, more efficient use of resources and the mitigation of negative environmental effects downstream.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Botswana; concurrent engineering; procurement systems; professional roles; sustainable development |
| Index terms: | procurement system, construction procurement, environmental effect, concurrent engineering, decision-making, holistic approach, sustainable development, synergy, integration, specialization, survey, Botswana, mitigation, procurement method, construction professional |
| Subjects: | financial risk, partnership management, environmental impact, Geography, health safety and environment, data collection methods, decision analysis, business, organizational analysis, professional development, engineering methods, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, Procurement, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Cost Management, Information Management |
| 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