4.4 Article

Research into the dynamic development trend of the competitiveness of China's regional construction industry

Journal

KSCE JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
Volume 18, Issue 1, Pages 1-10

Publisher

KOREAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS-KSCE
DOI: 10.1007/s12205-014-0048-7

Keywords

construction industry; competitiveness; development trend; PLS

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71102072, 71172148, 71271143, 70872029]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Communist Party of China proposed the concept of speeding up the industrial transformation and changing economic development mode in its 17(th) Congress. Against this background, it is of more practical significance to analyze problems existing in the development of China's regional construction industry and to make specific development strategies. Traditional researches into the industrial competitiveness mainly focus on the static analysis of several regions during the same period. However, the formation of industrial competitiveness is essentially a dynamic process. To evaluate the industrial competitiveness objectively and comprehensively, we comb relevant literatures about the competitiveness of the construction industry, and construct an evaluation indicator system of the competitiveness of China's regional construction industry. Subsequently, we use PLS path model to evaluate the competitiveness of China's construction industry from 2005 to 2008. Later we depict the dynamic development process of the competitiveness of construction industry, analyze advantages and disadvantages, and provide some suggestions. It can be concluded that 8 provinces have significantly improved their competitiveness, the competitiveness of 11 provinces have declined, and the remaining 10 provinces have remained constant. This research has achieved a theoretical and method innovation in the evaluation of industrial competitiveness from the time dimension.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available