“Why Is Construction So Backward?

A Review

It has been argued that the emotive aspect of the built environment is the underlying
cause for the backwardness of the building industry. Such explanations readily forget the
bold post war departures into contemporary environments which sprung up in the 50s
and 60s in Britain and elsewhere in Europe.

Forty years later economic pressures and political expediency produced first Latham’s
and then Egan’s reports which attempt to pinpoint and rectify areas of mismanagement
and lack of productivity in this important sector of our national GDP. In truth, the debate
about the manufacturing process of the building industry and how to bring it in line with
the fabrication methods of the automotive industry goes further back than that. Ever
since Ford’s revolutionary assembly lines for the first mass-produced car, the building
industry has been exposed to sporadic attempts of industrialisation. Never has this been
more exemplified than in the civil engineering efforts which have been advanced in
connection with war efforts, particularly during and after the 2nd World War. Few
engineers seized the opportunity to utilise these inventions in civil construction more
than Buckminster Fuller. In this book, tribute is given to him and to contemporary
protagonists of the most appropriate method of construction in order to establish a
meaningful agenda for tomorrow.

“Why Is Construction So Backward” is a welcome and timely publication, which takes

into account material as well as historic factors and develops a coherent argument for
the advancement of the building sector in our time. The book traces back the obstacles
within the industry and goes beyond immediate parameters by investigating such
important factors as the control of the land, the jurisdiction of the production process,
management methods, procurement routes and the dynamics of capital investment. It
throws into question a great deal of assumptions which have dominated the industry for
too long. By challenging the status quo it not just identifies the inhibitors of progress but
explores ways out of an impasse.

The authors are to be congratulated for taking on an industry, which has been neglected
by analytical stimulus and which has revelled in complacency for too long.

by Bernhard Blauel
Principal of Blauel Architects
October 2003