Consoli, G (2006) The architect's dilemma: A self reflection in understanding prison design and construction in private prison projects. Construction Economics and Building, 6(2), pp. 1-10. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
Australia embarked upon a number of private prison projects during the 1990's. These projects involved the competitive bidding for prison projects by consortia, which generally consisted of a correctional operator, contractor and architect. The architect's role in such projects was to satisfy the needs and desires of the operator, contractor and government assessors.As a result, the architect became acritical element in the successful delivery of the prison projects.Intensive interviews with such architects have shown that a number of issues were experienced as a result of their inclusion in the projects.These architects reported: (a) uncertainty in undertaking large specialist projects,(b) grappling with their own expectations and those of other participating parties as to the role of the prison architect, (c) a desire to acquire a working knowledge of the philosophies of incarceration and prison design and construction, and (d) difficulties in working within an environment where suspicions were raised in regards to conflicting and underlying objectives of the operators and contractors.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design and construct; prison design and construction; privatisation, architect; procurement |
| Index terms: | Australia, interview, prison, philosophy, architect, reflection, privatization, consortium, design and construction, competitive bidding |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, partnership management, professional development, philosophical studies, administrative law, economic analysis, Geography, bidding, profession, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Legal Issues, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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