Choy, C F (2011) Revisiting the 'Bon Curve'. Construction Management and Economics, 29(7), pp. 695-712. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Bon's proposition of an inverted U-shaped relationship between the share of construction activities and stages of economic development, which is commonly known as the 'Bon curve', has been explored in earlier studies. The previous studies adopted cross-sectional comparison comprising a number of selected countries over a period of time. This study revisits Bon's theories with data maintained by the United Nations Statistics Division, which covers 205 economies from 1970 to 2009. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc tests and quadratic regression were used in the verification process. Cross-sectional comparison and longitudinal analysis were used to verify Bon's propositions. The inverted U-shaped relationship between construction activities and level of development was not confirmed when the aggregated data of all countries over time were considered simultaneously. The relationships across countries at a given time were not confirmed in the majority of the yearly aggregated data. The relationships within countries over time were confirmed in 78 economies, mostly from high and upper-middle income countries. Bon's proposition of 'volume follows share' was not confirmed. Declines in construction were found in most of the high income economies. In conclusion, Bon's curve is to be interpreted as explaining variation within the developed economies over time.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; economic development |
| Index terms: | level of development, variation, economic development, longitudinal analysis, construction industry, statistics, s-curve, income, construction activity, United Nations, variance |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, construction operations, economic analysis, institutional frameworks, mathematical modelling, industry analysis, measurement and scaling, contractual condition, design practice, economic development, economics |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Contract Administration, Site Management, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Sustainability, Governance |
| 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