A regulation evaluation system: A decision support system for the building code of Australia

Williams, P (1995) A regulation evaluation system: A decision support system for the building code of Australia. Construction Management and Economics, 13(3), pp. 197-208. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

Building regulations have historically been developed and drafted relying on groups of experts and their particular perceptions of what was an acceptable level of risk and what costs can be afforded by the community for improved health, safety or amenity. New technology, particularly in the areas of building design and material sciences, and the development of performance-based standards and codes are demanding major changes to the way in which regulations are developed and how they are assessed to ensure that any changes are in the community’s interest. The regulation evaluation system described here provides a computer-based framework on which proposed changes to the Building Code of Australia (BCA) may be systematically assessed. The system requires any proposal to amend the BCA to be clearly identified together with all alternatives which achieve the desired objective. Direct costs and benefits are identified and quantified, making use of internal and external data. Where there is inefficient data, stochastic modelling is employed. The system not only aids decision makers by providing all available information, it also provides a transparency to the decision making and regulation development process.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building regulations; cost-risk-benefit analysis; decision support; evaluation; risk management
Index terms: building code, performance-based, decision-making, regulation, proposal, material science, decision support, modelling, transparency, risk management, Australia, building design, building regulation, direct cost, new technology
Subjects: risk assessment, materials science, innovation and technology management, project planning, analytical methods, architectural design, performance measurement, economics, Geography, professional development, decision analysis, regulatory law, political science
Topics: Cost Management, Construction Materials, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Risk Management, Governance, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Quality Management
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