Innovation in construction : a case study of the Australian context

The dominant economic paradigm currently guiding industry policy making in Australia and much of the rest of the world is the neoclassical approach. Although neoclassical theories acknowledge that growth is driven by innovation, such innovation is exogenous to their standard models and hence often not explored. Instead the focus is on the allocation of scarce resources, where innovation is perceived as an external shock to the system. Indeed, analysis of innovation is largely undertaken by other disciplines, such as evolutionary economics and institutional economics. As more has become known about innovation processes, linear models, based on research and development or market demand, have been replaced by more complex interactive models which emphasise the existence of feedback loops between the actors and activities involved in the commercialisation of ideas (Manley 2003). Currently dominant among these approaches is the national or sectoral innovation system model (Breschi and Malerba 2000; Nelson 1993), which is based on the notion of increasingly open innovation systems (Chesbrough, Vanhaverbeke, and West 2008). This chapter reports on the ‘BRITE Survey’ funded by the Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation which investigated the open sectoral innovation system operating in the Australian construction industry. The BRITE Survey was undertaken in 2004 and it is the largest construction innovation survey ever conducted in Australia. The results reported here give an indication of how construction innovation processes operate, as an example that should be of interest to international audiences interested in construction economics. The questionnaire was based on a broad range of indicators recommended in the OECD’s Community Innovation Survey guidelines (OECD/Eurostat 2005). Although the ABS has recently begun to undertake regular innovation surveys that include the construction industry (2006), they employ a very narrow definition of the industry and only collect very basic data compared to that provided by the BRITE Survey, which is presented in this chapter. The term ‘innovation’ is defined here as a new or significantly improved technology or organisational practice, based broadly on OECD definitions (OECD/Eurostat 2005). Innovation may be technological or organisational in nature and it may be new to the world, or just new to the industry or the business concerned. The definition thus includes the simple adoption of existing technological and organisational advancements. The survey collected information about respondents’ perceptions of innovation determinants in the industry, comprising various aspects of business strategy and business environment. It builds on a pilot innovation survey undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) for the Australian Construction Industry Forum on behalf of the Australian Commonwealth Department of Industry Tourism and Resources, in 2001 (PWC 2002). The survey responds to an identified need within the Australian construction industry to have accurate and timely innovation data upon which to base effective management strategies and public policies (Focus Group 2004).

Psychometric analysis of the Brisbane Practice Environment Measure (B-PEM)

Purpose: To undertake rigorous psychometric testing of the newly developed contemporary work environment measure (the Brisbane Practice Environment Measure [B-PEM]) using exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Methods: Content validity of the 33-item measure was established by a panel of experts. Initial testing involved 195 nursing staff using principal component factor analysis with varimax rotation (orthogonal) and Cronbach's alpha coefficients. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using data from a further 983 nursing staff. Results: Principal component factor analysis yielded a four-factor solution with eigenvalues greater than 1 that explained 52.53% of the variance. These factors were then verified using confirmatory factor analysis. Goodness-of-fit indices showed an acceptable fit overall with the full model, explaining 21% to 73% of the variance. Deletion of items took place throughout the evolution of the instrument, resulting in a 26-item, four-factor measure called the Brisbane Practice Environment Measure-Tested. Conclusions: The B-PEM has undergone rigorous psychometric testing, providing evidence of internal consistency and goodness-of-fit indices within acceptable ranges. The measure can be utilised as a subscale or total score reflective of a contemporary nursing work environment. Clinical Relevance: An up-to-date instrument to measure practice environment may be useful for nursing leaders to monitor the workplace and to assist in identifying areas for improvement, facilitating greater job satisfaction and retention.

Aboriginal public health and education : has it made a difference in practice?

Over the years, public health in relation to Australian Aboriginal people has involved many individuals and groups including health professionals, governments, politicians, special interest groups and corporate organisations. Since colonisation commenced until the1980s, public health relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people was not necessarily in the best interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but rather in the interests of the non-Aboriginal population. The attention that was paid focussed more generally around the subject of reproduction and issues of prostitution, exploitation, abuse and venereal diseases (Kidd, 1997). Since the late 1980s there has been a shift in the broader public health agenda (see Baum, 1998) along with public health in relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (NHMRC, 2003). This has been coupled with increasing calls to develop appropriate tertiary curriculum and to educate, train, and employ more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Aboriginal people in public health (Anderson et al., 2004; Genat, 2007; PHERP, 2008a, 2008b). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been engaged in public health in ways in which they are in a position to influence the public health agenda (Anderson 2004; 2008; Anderson et al., 2004; NATSIHC, 2003). There have been numerous projects, programs and strategies that have sought to develop the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Public Health workforce (AHMAC, 2002; Oldenburg et al., 2005; SCATSIH, 2002). In recent times the Aboriginal community controlled health sector has joined forces with other peak bodies and governments to find solutions and strategies to improve the health outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (NACCHO & Oxfam, 2007). This case study chapter will not address these broader activities. Instead it will explore the activities and roles of staff within the Public Health and Research Unit (PHRU) at the Victorian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (VACCHO). It will focus on their experiences with education institutions, their work in public health and their thoughts on gaps and where improvements can be made in public health, research and education. What will be demonstrated is the diversity of education qualifications and experience. What will also be reflected is how people work within public health on a daily basis to enact change for equity in health and contribute to the improvement of future health outcomes of the Victorian Aboriginal community.

Effect of clear zone widths on run-off-road crash outcomes

Current guidelines on clear zone selection and roadside hazard management adopt the US approach based on the likelihood of roadside encroachment by drivers. This approach is based on the available research conducted in the 1960s and 70s. Over time, questions have been raised regarding the robustness and applicability of this research in Australasia in 2010 and in the Safe System context. This paper presents a review of the fundamental research relating to selection of clear zones. Results of extensive rural highway statistical data modelling suggest that a significant proportion of run-off-road to the left casualty crashes occurs in clear zones exceeding 13 m. They also show that the risk of run-off-road to the left casualty crashes was 21% lower where clear zones exceeded 8 m when compared with clear zones in the 4 – 8 m range. The paper discusses a possible approach to selection of clear zones based on managing crash outcomes, rather than on the likelihood of roadside encroachment which is the basis for the current practice. It is expected that this approach would encourage selection of clear zones wider than 8 m when the combination of other road features suggests higher than average casualty crash risk.