Ofori, G (2001) Indicators for measuring construction industry development in developing countries. Building Research & Information, 29(1), pp. 40-50. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The problems of construction industries in developing countries are well researched. For over three decades, proposals have been made for action to address these difficulties. Developing countries have implemented these recommendations, and other initiatives. However, results have been disappointing and the problems have persisted. A possible reason for the lack of progress is the absence of measurable targets in construction industry development programmes to guide and assess, at intervals, the success of their implementation. This paper critically discusses the formulation of a set of indicators for measuring and monitoring progress in the effort to improve the construction industry in a developing country. Previous proposals of indicators and those used in Singapore are examined. A set of indicators is suggested and their merits and possible problems are considered. Recommendations are made on how the indicators can be most effectively implemented.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry development; developing countries; indicators; key performance indicators |
| Index terms: | construction industry, implementation, monitoring, construction industry development, programme, key performance indicator, developing country, Singapore, proposal |
| Subjects: | control systems, contractual arrangements, project planning, project delivery, Geography, development economics, industry analysis, project controls |
| Topics: | Site Management, Time Control, International Construction, Procurement, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| 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