Pan, W and Sidwell, R (2011) Demystifying the cost barriers to offsite construction in the UK. Construction Management and Economics, 29(11), pp. 1081-1099. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Offsite construction has long been reported as an effective alternative to conventional construction, with wide-ranging benefits. However, a wider take-up has been inhibited by perceived cost barriers which are insufficiently studied. Such cost barriers are addressed, drawing on an examination of the cost performance of four types of construction method: pre-cast concrete cross-wall panel, in-situ reinforced concrete (RC) frame, steel frame and timber frame. Data were collected for 20 medium to high rise residential buildings of eight projects by a leading UK housebuilder over a five-year period (2004-08). In all cases, detailed cost comparisons were completed for build method selection. Cross-wall was found to be consistently cheaper than RC frame or steel frame by 11% to 32% in the projects. The process of developing and innovating cross-wall technology led to sustained cost savings up to 25% from its first use. Cross-wall construction also improved cost effectiveness of 20-storey high rise buildings over other solutions. Cost engineering means for achieving cost reduction and effectiveness are identified, which included efficiency learning, technological innovation, multinational partnering, and 'in-house' build management. The results prove the logic of the experience curve in improving the cost efficiency of offsite construction, and should encourage offsite construction in the future.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | apartment building; cost barrier; cost engineering; offsite construction; pre-cast concrete cross-wall |
| Index terms: | partnering, efficiency, housebuilder, in-situ, technological innovation, high-rise residential building, effectiveness, cost saving, cost engineering, cost-effectivenes, apartment building, drawing, construction method, reinforced concrete, high-rise building, cost reduction, cost efficiency, cost performance, steel frame |
| Subjects: | technical documentation, building materials, financial and cost management, innovation and technology management, construction type, practitioner, building construction, partnership management, performance management, economics, structural engineering |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Quality Management, Site Management, Cost Management, Construction Materials, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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