4.6 Article

Assessment of Barriers and Strategies for the Enhancement of Off-Site Construction in India: An ISM Approach

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 14, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su14116595

关键词

India; interpretive structural modelling (ISM); MICMAC analysis; modern methods of construction (MMC); off-site construction (OSC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The low uptake of off-site construction (OSC) in India, despite its acknowledged efficiency, is hindered by several barriers. This paper uses interviews, a survey, and structural modeling to identify the top barriers for OSC implementation in India and proposes strategies to overcome them.
The tremendous urbanization pace of India calls for higher efficiency in housing development, currently typified by low productivity and poor sustainability performance. Although off-site construction (OSC) is a method of widely acknowledged efficiency, its current uptake in India is very low, and the factors hindering its wider adaptation have not been comprehensively researched. This paper employs interviews with experts, a questionnaire survey and the interpretive structural modelling (ISM) technique to achieve the following objectives: first, to reveal which factors are perceived as top barriers for OSC implementation in India; second, to develop a hierarchical model presenting the causality between these factors; and third, to propose the initiatives required for barriers with high impact on other barriers to be most efficiently tackled. The survey findings show that the barriers perceived as most important from the professionals' point of view are design inflexibility, difficulties in storage and transportation, supply chain weaknesses, initial capital requirements and lack of skills. The ISM reveals, though, that the underlying causes for these barriers lie with factors such as public procurement regulations and the fragmentation of the sector. Therefore, the latter are the barriers that need to be targeted in priority, as per the suggested strategies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据