Resolving the UK construction skills crisis: A critical perspective on the research and policy agenda

Chan, P W and Dainty, A R J (2007) Resolving the UK construction skills crisis: A critical perspective on the research and policy agenda. Construction Management and Economics, 25(4), pp. 375-386. ISSN 1466433X

Abstract

The ongoing skills crisis in the UK construction industry has constrained the productive capacity of the industry. Past research and skills policies have largely failed to develop an understanding of the realities of the skills crisis at the grassroots level. Solutions offered by researchers and policy makers have previously had little demonstrable impact in addressing skills concerns. Much of these policies seems disconnected from the realities experienced by employers and by those working in the industry. A critical perspective on resolving the skills crisis is offered. A set of mutually reinforcing research and policy initiatives are proposed, including the need for researchers and policy makers to move away from the conventionally national approach in addressing the skills problem and to engage in genuine, joined-up thinking that meets the needs of local regions. Furthermore, employers and employees are called to be reflective practitioners in their participation of the skills development agenda. Adopting these recommendations could overcome many shortcomings in research and policy that have hitherto done little to combat the construction skills crisis.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: bottom-up approach; critical perspective; llabour market; research; skills shortages
Index terms: construction industry, bottom-up approach, skills development, practitioner, shortages
Subjects: personnel development, industry analysis, practitioner, urban planning, economic analysis
Topics: Roles and Professions, Governance, Research Practice, Human Resources
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