How useful and reliable are construction statistics?

The Pearce Report of 2003 drew attention to potential shortcomings in some of the existing statistics that were used to analyse the UK construction sector. The current study examines the broader statistical issues in greater depth to identify shortcomings that could cause some of the findings presented by Pearce, and similar studies, to need qualification and possible revision. Problems with reliable and accurate data collection and statistical analysis include defining the scope and coverage of the industry; measuring industry outputs and their allocation across different types of activity; identifying construction firms; and measuring capital formation and capital stock, inconsistencies in employment statistics and labour market variables, discrepancies in measuring productivity, and the lack of international comparison. Needed improvements include a wider definition of construction output and employment activities, a continuous review of the usefulness and reliability of the published construction statistics, and the resolution of the discrepancies between different registers. Industry stakeholders also need to become more engaged in the process of statistical revision and use. The creation of an international forum could improve the quality of statistics and deal with the more technical aspects of international comparisons.