Pearce, D (2006) Is the construction sector sustainable? Definitions and reflections. Building Research & Information, 34(3), pp. 201-207. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The paper reflects on the analysis of the UK construction industry in the Pearce Report of 2003. It outlines the economist's approach to sustainability, which, to date, has been mainly applied at the national economy level. That approach rests on the perception that human well-being is determined by wealth, or assets. Wealth needs to be interpreted broadly and reference is made to the growing literature that measures the asset base of a nation. The paper asks how far the asset-based approach can be applied to the sectoral level of an industry. While sustainability, and sustainable development, have broadly been assumed to be 'good things', the paper raises some challenges to an unquestioning belief in the notions of sustainability as guides to policy. By and large, however, using the asset-based approach is seen to provide real insights into the functioning of the construction sector and its broader role in social and economic development.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | assets; environmental capital; natural capital; human capital; man-made capital; social capital; sustainability; sustainable development; wealth; wealth accounting |
| Index terms: | construction sector, construction industry, accounting, national economy, reflection, well-being, social capital, sustainable development, human capital, economic development |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, mental health and wellbeing, sociology, industry analysis, economics, economic development, professional development, health safety and environment |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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