Su, C K; Lin, C Y and Wang, M T (2003) Taiwanese construction sector in a growing 'maturity' economy, 1964-1999. Construction Management and Economics, 21(7), pp. 719-728. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Using 12 input-output tables compiled in Taiwan between 1964 and 1999, the role of the construction sector in the development of the Taiwanese economy is examined and analysed in relationship to other economic sectors. Analytical results reveal a two-stage inverted U-shaped relationship between the share of construction in GNP versus GNP per capita. The 'pull effect' of the Taiwanese construction sector is approximately equal to that of the Japanese construction sector over time, demonstrating that construction is more closely linked to the wider economy in Taiwan than elsewhere, like Italy, the UK and the USA. The 'push effect' increases significantly over time, indicating that the M&R (maintenance and repair) construction expenditures are growing in Taiwan. Finally, the direct and total construction input from manufacturing initially increased from 1969 and then declined after 1981, while the input from the service sector has been steadily growing. These findings confirm the increasing 'maturity' of the Taiwanese economy, a trend that mirrors the economic development of other AICs like Italy, Japan, the UK and the USA.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | input-output analysis; pull effect; push effect; Taiwanese construction sector |
| Index terms: | economic development, Italy, input-output analysis, repair, construction sector, Japan, Taiwan, input-output table |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, maintenance engineering, economic development, economic analysis, industry analysis, Geography |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Sustainability |
| 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