Ruddock, L and Lopes, J (2006) The construction sector and economic development: The 'Bon curve'. Construction Management and Economics, 24(7), pp. 717-723. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
The complexities of the relationship between a country's level of construction activity and its stage of economic development are considerable. Studies over the last three decades, based on macroeconomic analysis, have attempted to model the relationship but have usually been hampered by problems of data quality and availability. Nevertheless, paradigms have emerged (usually based on Keynesian philosophy), which are concerned with the dynamics of construction activity as an agent in the promotion of economic growth in economies at different stages of development. One such is the 'Bon curve'. An examination of the data issues of attempting to assess the validity of the proposition is made and then the role of the construction sector in highly developed economies is considered.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | 'bon curve'; construction activity; economic development |
| Index terms: | economic growth, paradigm, dynamics, validity, construction activity, promotion, complexity, agent, construction sector, philosophy, economic development |
| Subjects: | philosophical studies, industry analysis, systems engineering, education and knowledge transfer, management, economic development, construction operations, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Human Resources |
| 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