This article considers the success of the two distinct construction industry payment legislative models operating in Australia -"East Coast" and "West Coast" -in achieving their objective of improving cash flow throughout the construction industry. Success parameters are identified by the authors -namely: the levels of justice afforded by the legislation, the administrative and legal burden generated by the legislation, and the impact of the legislation on the relationships between the contracting parties -which are used as a basis to discuss and compare the performances of the East and West Coast models. It is concluded that the West Coast model provides a more just dispute resolution process, generates less administrative and legal burden, and is more conducive towards establishing positive relationships between contracting parties. However, it is recognised that there is a need for more data to be gathered from construction industry stakeholders before any firm recommendations can start to be made as to the most appropriate conceptual framework and detail for a harmonised approach.
Insolvency has become endemic in the Australian construction industry. The scale of the problem has reached such proportions that both the NSW Parliament and the Senate have, in recent times, commissioned inquiries into construction insolvency. This paper aims to identify the reasons as to why the construction industry is so susceptible to insolvency, evaluate the effectiveness of any existing insolvency protection measures available to construction firms, and to identify proposed future measures to address the factors causing construction insolvency. The results of a questionnaire survey designed to discover the extent of the construction insolvency problem, as well as building contractors’ views with respect to the causes and regulation of construction insolvency, in South Australia are presented. The research found that there is an appetite amongst building contractors for the introduction of further regulation to address construction insolvency. Further, although the research found underbidding to be the biggest contributory factor towards construction insolvency, it appears to be the most difficult factor to address through regulation which explains the paucity of recommendations which directly address underbidding emanating from the Senate inquiry in 2015.
Since the introduction of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act into New South Wales in 1999, construction industry payment legislation has progressively been enacted on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis throughout Australia. Of the eight Australian Acts, two distinct legislative models can be discerned -what have been termed the "East Coast" and "West Coast" models. This article compares the two models with respect to their payment systems and adjudication schemes, procedural justice afforded, incursion upon freedom of contract, uptake rates and efficiency. From this comparison, the strengths and weaknesses of the two models are identified. Finally, a dual process of adjudication based on progress payment claim size is proposed for a harmonised model, developed from previous proposals put forward by other authors, which aims to combine the strengths of the two existing models.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to identify building contractors’ views as to the need for, impact of and barriers to the use of project bank accounts (PBAs) in the UK construction industry. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional research study was carried out by the use of questionnaires to collect quantitative data. The population for the research was of construction professionals working as full-time employees for either main (Tier 1) or specialist contractors (Tiers 2-4). Findings Contractors consider PBAs as an effective initiative to encourage fair payment. There is uncertainty, however, as to whether PBAs will result in project cost savings. Head contractor resistance is perceived to be the biggest barrier to the use of PBAs. Adoption of PBAs in private-sector construction projects is likely to be slow. Research limitations/implications The relative infancy of PBA usage in the construction industry means that responses are largely based on awareness as opposed to experience. Nevertheless, survey data represent a snapshot of contractors’ perceptions with respect to PBAs, which may be used as a benchmark against which to compare future studies to monitor how contractors’ views and expectations have changed with time. Originality/value The survey results will be of particular interest to those international jurisdictions who are considering, or who have already embarked on, the path of trialling and/or using PBAs in the public sector.
PurposeThis study aims to investigate the effect of Australian construction firms' cooperative behavior on reverse logistics outsourcing performance (RLOP).Design/methodology/approachTo achieve the aim, a questionnaire survey was conducted to collect data from construction firms in Australia. Following this, the study used Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze 173 responses for testing seven hypotheses that are related to the positive effects of cooperative behavior on RLOP.FindingsThe results indicate that three dimensions of customer cooperative behavior (cooperation, commitment and planning) positively influence RLOP in different ways. Cooperation only directly affects RLOP while planning only has an indirect influence on RLOP. Commitment affects RLOP both directly and indirectly.Originality/valueThis is the first study examining empirically antecedents of RLOP in the construction industry. Additionally, it reveals the mediating role of cooperation. Cooperation fully mediates the relationship between planning and RLOP, and partially mediates the relationship between commitment and RLOP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.