Construction Standards for Hong Kong A Presentation to PCICB

1
Construction Standards forHong KongA
Presentation to PCICB

• Mr. Michael I Arnold
• Prof. C M Tam

2
Construction Standards for Hong Kong

• The research was initiated by CII-HK in 2003.
• Project granted to CityU in 2003.
• The study was completed in 2005.
• A Task Force composed of senior industrial
  practitioners and CII-HK members was formed to
  guide the research team.
• 11 Task Force meetings were held.
• Two workshops for the project were held.

3
Construction Standards for Hong Kong

• Task Force members
• - Mr. Michael ARNOLD - Chairman
• - Mr. Kevin CHENG
• - Mr. Bernard HUI
• - Mr. Kenneth NG
• - Mr. Michael GREEN
• - Mr. Bo SODERSTORM
• - Mr. C. K. LAU
• - Mr. Tony LAU
• - Dr. Nicolas YEUNG

4
Research Findings

• Prof. C. M. Tam

5
Aims of Research Project

• To explore the feasibility of establishing
  construction standards for Hong Kong
• To set the strategic direction of standardization
  for the construction industry of Hong Kong
• To investigate the technical, social and
  economical viability
• To evaluate the pros and cons of each option

6
Research Methodology

• Literature review
• Internet
• Information collected by the four overseas
  investigators
• Libraries of local tertiary education institutes
• Standardization bodies around the world
• Government consultancy reports
• Meetings with the Taskforce
• Industrial views through
• Two questionnaire surveys (1st survey responded
  by participants in 1st workshop while 2nd
  questionnaire was distributed to 21
  organizations)
• Interviews with key stakeholders of the industry
  (20 interviews completed)
• Two focused group workshops (1st Workshop with 34
  participants an 2nd with 24)

7
Research Team

• Project Leader
• Prof. C. M. TAM
• Members
• Dr. John K. W. CHAN, Registered Structural Eng.
  Authorized Person, Adjunct Professor, CityU
• Dr. T. T. CHOW, Building Services Engineer,
  Principal Lecturer, CityU
• Mr. K. K. CHAN, Construction Manager, Instructor,
  CityU
• Overseas Members
• Mr. Jin-chi CAI, President of Beijing
  Construction Consultants Asso., PRC
• Mr. Jian-jun CHEN, Member of Construction
  Committee, Beijing, PRC
• Dr. Lam PHAM, Director of Policy International
  Strategic Development, Australian Building Codes
  Board, Australia
• Prof. Glenn SEARS, Professor Emeritus, University
  of New Mexico, USA
• Dr. Evelyn TEO, National University of Singapore,
  Singapore

8
Construction Standards Currently Used in Hong Kong

• 3312 standards compiled under Construction
  Standards used in Hong Kong
• Unlike countries with National Standardization
  Board, the standards are not officially adopted
  by any governmental or non-governmental parties
• The reason being the absence of a
  well-established mechanism that coordinates and
  manages all standards used

9
Findings and RecommendationsTerminology

• Findings The industry is in general confused
  with the terminology of standard and
  standardization because of deviations in
  definitions and meanings of these terms across
  the world.
• Recommendations The future standards body
  should define the various standards used, the
  relationship between standards, codes and
  regulations.

10
Findings and RecommendationsPerformance Concepts

• Findings A general industrial consensus that
  whenever possible, performance-based regulations,
  codes and standards are preferred, which however,
  can be too demanding to ensure the success of
  performance-based regulations because the data
  and information that determine the performance is
  sometimes impossible to obtain.
• Recommendations A mix of performance-based and
  prescriptive approaches is inevitable. The
  international approach is having the regulations
  written in performance-based while standards are
  more prescriptive in nature with the codes of
  practice providing the deem-to-satisfied
  solutions.

11
Findings and RecommendationsModels of
Standardization

• Findings Four typical models of
  standardization
• Vertical or Monolithic Model a centralized
  governmental standards system forming an integral
  part of the government
• Centralized Model centralized national standards
  bodies which may be government agencies
• Decentralized Model diversity in standards
  development
• Horizontal Model base of standards developers
  and users is large and diverse, applies to both
  private and government sectors
• Recommendations
• Vertical model is inappropriate due to the need
  for a governmental set-up and the preferred
  industrial-led approach
• Horizontal model is difficult due to the lack of
  a manufacturing base
• For centralized model, more resources are
  required and the body needs to generate all
  standards on its own painful adjustment by
  stakeholders
• For the decentralized model, the current
  government-led initiatives (works by BD, EMSD,
  FSD, and Standing Committee on Concrete
  Technology, etc.) can be retained as they are but
  coordinated by the standards body

12
Findings and RecommendationsFlowchart of
Suggested Model
13
Findings and RecommendationsAdoption of
International Standards

• Findings A general industrial consensus that
  Hong Kong need not develop its own construction
  standards adoption of international standards is
  preferred
• Recommendations Decision criteria need to be
  developed to determine which international
  standards to be adopted for example
• Source of import of major building
  materials/components
• Language
• Compatibility with local practices and existing
  facilities
• Trade relations
• Effect of mutual recognition of professional
  services under CEPA
• Technological advancement
• Comparability of economical development
• Obligations of signatory under some international
  agreements
• Others

14
Findings and RecommendationsCentral Construction
Standards Body

• Findings A number of organizations can
  accommodate the proposed central standards body,
  such as BD ETWB HKQAA HKAS HKPC/HK Science
  and Technology Parks
• Recommendations Assessed based upon financial
  stability, relevance in the field, capability to
  offer technical supports and commitment, none of
  the above options are better than the proposed
  future Construction Industry Council (CIC)
  further, the statutory power stipulated in the
  CIC Bill can facilitate the proposed construction
  standardization programme

15
Findings and RecommendationsRepresentation in
International Agencies

• Findings Currently, Hong Kong is represented
  by the Product Standards Information Bureau
  (PSIB) under the Commerce, Industry Technology
  Bureau, in ISO and other international
  standardization agencies
• Recommendations When the proposed central
  construction standards body is formed, the
  representation role of PSIB in international
  agencies should be replaced by the body until the
  Hong Kong government has decided to set up a
  division or branch which is empowered to develop
  Hong Kong standards in general

16
Findings and RecommendationsFunding

• Findings
• Direct subsidy from the Government
• Funded by the lead organization accommodating the
  standards body
• By levy
• Membership Subscription
• Sales of Standards
• Provision of Advisory and Training Services at a
  Charge
• Government subsidy in participation of
  international standardization organizations
  activities
• Recommendations The body should best be
  accommodated and funded by CIC, which generates
  income from industrial levy while the other
  income generating activities such as membership
  subscription, sales of standards, provision of
  advisory and training services are considered not
  viable due to the large resources commitment or
  the lack of a manufacturing base in Hong Kong

17
Findings and RecommendationsImplementation Plan

• Findings Under the current financial and human
  resource constraints, it may not be viable to set
  up the proposed Standards Body in its full swing
  at the start
• Recommendations To adopt a progressive
  development strategy and divide the development
  into 3 phases
• Coordination Phase
• Standards Adoption Phase
• Standards Development and Full Adoption of ISO
  Phase

18
Findings and Recommendations1. Timescale
19
Findings and Recommendations 2. Priority in
Standards Development
20
Findings and Recommendations3. Organization
Structure
21
Findings and Recommendations4. Constitution of
Standards Board

• Construction Standards Board (CSB) to be formed
  constitutes one of the subcommittees of the
  proposed CIC
• The Standards Body to be headed by a Chief
  Executive appointed by the Board
• Members of the CSB shall comprise people
  nominated from the CIC, the industry, tertiary
  institutions and other stakeholders

22
Findings and Recommendations5. Phase I
Coordination Stage

• Minimal manpower set-up
• Technical (Standards) Project Managers shall only
  provide secretariat supports to the workgroup
  composed of voluntary experts drawn from the
  industry, learnt societies and universities
• Project Managers shall be confined to 3 areas
• Building and Civil
• Electrical and Mechanical
• Safety, Health and Environmental
• An annual budget in the order of HK 10 million

23
Findings and Recommendations6. Phase II
Adoption Stage

• Project managers expanded to cover the following
  areas in standards adoption
• Building works
• Civil, structural and infrastructural
• Environmental
• Construction material
• Electrical and mechanical
• Safety and health
• An annual budget in the order of HK 15 million

24
Findings and Recommendations7. Phase III
Standards Development Stage

• Project managers extended to cover areas of
  (although their major role is limited to provide
  secretariat supports)
• Building
• Structure
• Civil and geotechnical
• Infrastructure
• Environmental
• Electrical
• Mechanical
• Fire
• Other building services
• Safety and health
• Chemicals and materials Building works
• An annual budget of HK 25 million to 26 million

25
Caveats

• The study was conducted in 2004 by then, both
  the economic situations and fiscal conditions of
  the government were weak. The pessimistic outlook
  of participants may not be able to represent the
  improved financial situations of the territory at
  the moment.
• The standardization systems of the four countries
  for comparative study (US, Australia, Singapore
  and P.R. China) have their historical background
  of development representing their own unique
  economic structure and culture of the industry.
• The Taskforce has tried the best endeavor to
  identify the major stakeholders and key players
  of the industry to be involved in the study yet
  the samples of people and organizations so
  identified may not be able to represent the whole
  construction population.

26
Thank you!