Editorial 


Assoc. Prof. Peter Stewart 
Head, Department of Property, 
Construction and Project 
Management 
RMIT University 

Welcome to the December 2003 issue of The Australian Journal of Construction 
Economics and Building. This edition holds an interesting series of papers on 
topics ranging from the role of the professions to education . 

The first paper sees Loosemore discuss the difficulties of implementing reform 
within our industry. He argues that to achieve these reforms then we will need 
to fundamentally change the way that construction projects, construction 
companies and the government-industry interface are managed. Given the 
fragmentation of the industry and the project based nature of our work, one can 
only foresee a significant challenge for our industry leaders. In the second paper, 
Mills provides the views of industry leaders on challenges for the professions. 
The results of this research highlight that public status, maintenance of skills, 
and ethical standards, will remain the main objectives of professional societies. 
These findings underline the operational focus of professional groups in 
responding to the needs of their members and the leadership role each of these 
groups could take in tackling the reforms outlined in the previous paper. In 
the following paper, Lingard and Lin examine the work experiences of women 
in the construction industry. This paper is well written, and it encourages the 
reader to refiect on how rigid work practices create difficulties for some groups 
in our workforce. They conclude that there is a need for cultural and attitudinal 
change if women are to encouraged to take up site based roles in construction. 
Oyedele, Jaiyeoba and Fadeyi then identify the five most important design 
factors influencing the quality of building projects. While the research outcomes 
are clearly specific to building projects in Nigeria, their findings do provide 
interesting reading for others concerned with improving the quality of our building 
products. The next paper by Liu, Lyle and Langston examine the demolition 
costs of projects, and make cost comparisons of demolition and deconstruction 
approaches. They find that the lower costs of deconstruction and the reduced 
levels of waste entering land fill make this a viable approach for demolition. The 
final paper, presented by McLaughlin and Simpson discusses how teamwork 
and consulting skills can be developed by students undertaking tertiary study. 
Students have found that the focus on developing these skills has enhanced 
their learning experience and created a more professional approach to their 
work. 

My thanks go to all members of the Editorial Board who provided their valuable 
time and expertise in reviewing the papers submitted by our contributors. I would 
also like to personally thank the production staff from RMIT, particularly Mary 
Tomsic who has worked closely with reviewers and contributors. I hope that you 
find this edition as interesting as the last, and that in 2004 you will continue to 
publish and share the outcomes of your research with your colleagues. 

tftr 
Assoc. Prof. Peter Stewart 

December 2003 

The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building [Vol 3, No 2J 



ERRATA 

The incorrect Figure 1 was printed on page 55 in the last edition , please see below for the correct figure, from 
Lam , Edmond , Chan , Albert and Chan , Daniel , (2003) . Why is design-build commonly used in the public sector? An 
Illustration from Hong Kong . Australian Journal of Construction and Building Economics, 3(1) , 53-62. 

12 

ti 
~ 10 
e 
0 
u 8 
"" ~ 

6'0 
!!J 
01 4l!l 

e 
c: 

2 
!!J

c::. 

0 

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 

Ye ar 

Fig. 1: The trend ofthe use of D&B projects in the ASD over the past 8 years (Source: Chan et al. , 2001) 

The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building [Vo l 3 , No 2]