IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v18y2000i3p363-372.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of the concreting productivities in Hong Kong and Beijing and a proposed comparison methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Shou Qing Wang
  • Michael Anson

Abstract

The ready mixed concrete (RMC) industry is an important sector of the construction industry in many places. Its level of development in terms of size and performance may be taken as an index representative of the development level of a particular construction industry taken as a whole. Therefore comparisons between different places are of interest, and of potential economic benefit. As part of a larger research study in Hong Kong on the productivity of concreting, data have been obtained on the RMC industries in Hong Kong (HK) and Beijing (BJ). Both are large cities at different stages of economic development. The study involved close observation in the early 1990s of 154 pours on building construction sites in HK and 38 days spent at 38 RMC plants, one day at each, together with 34 site pours and 20 days at RMC plants in BJ. Much detailed performance information has been derived, and a comparison methodology is proposed which could have general application in this industry. It is demonstrated that the RMC industry in HK is more productive than the industry in BJ.

Suggested Citation

  • Shou Qing Wang & Michael Anson, 2000. "Comparison of the concreting productivities in Hong Kong and Beijing and a proposed comparison methodology," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 363-372.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:18:y:2000:i:3:p:363-372
    DOI: 10.1080/014461900370726
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014461900370726
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/014461900370726?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:18:y:2000:i:3:p:363-372. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.