Vermande, H M and Van Mulligen, P H (1999) Construction costs in the Netherlands in an international context. Construction Management and Economics, 17(3), pp. 269-283. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
OECD purchasing power parities (PPPs) are used regularly in strategic governmental policy papers to compare the performance of construction industries among countries. These PPPs suggest that the relative competitiveness of the Dutch construction sector is fairly weak compared with surrounding countries. This contradicts the general view that the Dutch construction industry is very productive and efficient, especially in house-building. For the member countries of the European Union the OECD uses data from Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. In this paper the methodology followed by OECD/Eurostat in their calculation of PPPs for construction is reviewed. The data for five European countries (Netherlands, Belgium, UK, France and Germany) are analysed. Next, the Eurostat results are placed alongside the results of other international building cost comparisons. The differences are observed and the conclusion is that the Eurostat PPPs do not reflect the real construction price or cost differentials among the five EU countries. It appears that the basic construction price data used by Eurostat are not very accurate, that the comparison methodology applied by Eurostat itself is insufficient to express and explain building cost differences among countries, and that the Eurostat figures for construction are the result of a complex statistical weighting and processing procedure in which corrections are not applied for extreme deviations. The conclusion is that the Eurostat data cannot be used for comparison purposes. Proposals for improvement of the comparison methodology are reviewed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building costs; international comparison; purchasing power parities; statistics |
| Index terms: | Netherlands, Belgium, international comparison, France, proposal, construction sector, Germany, methodology, European Union, purchasing, construction cost, deviation, construction industry, statistics, competitiveness |
| Subjects: | Geography, physical geography and landforms, research methods, procurement strategy, industry analysis, market analysis, mathematical modelling, data analysis and analytics, project planning, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Cost Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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