Burrows, B G and Seymour, D E (1983) The evaluation of change in the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 1(3), pp. 199-215. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The paper describes the fortunes of a minor technical innovation - purpose-made, steel fabric reinforcement for concrete, and argues, through this example, that the discussion of change, which is formally carried on within 'technical' and 'economic' frameworks, must be extended in order to address explicitly the 'political' implications which are tacitly recognized by practitioners. The term 'political' is used in its widest sense to encompass the fact that the many parties involved within the construction process promote not only their own interests but different ways in which benefits are described and evaluated. The use of mainstream economics, offering to provide a unitary set of criteria by which to evaluate benefit, submerges this political dimension.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | concrete reinforcement; cost benefit; economic appraisal; Innovation |
| Index terms: | reinforcement, dimension, construction industry, construction process, practitioner, appraisal |
| Subjects: | practitioner, building materials, health monitoring assessment and metrics, factor and component analysis, building construction, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Site Management, Health and Safety, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Roles and Professions |
| 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