A preliminary survey of attitudes to UK construction procurement practice

Although much literature on construction procurement is based on personal experiences, there is little data available to undertake realistic comparison between regions or from one year to another. A survey was undertaken in the UK to examine the feasibility of developing a replicable survey technique that will enable longitudinal studies and international comparisons. The survey showed that a majority felt traditional procurement methods were inappropriate. However, traditional general contracting is still the most common form of procurement. There was strong agreement that economic muscle compels weaker contracting parties to accept onerous contractual terms. There is no relationship between the size of a project and its procurement method, contrary to popular belief. The findings indicate that wider surveys would generate useful data about attitudes.

Briefing: re-engineering the city 2020–2050 – urban foresight and transition management

Cities may be responsible for up to 70% of global carbon emissions and 75% of global energy consumption and by 2050 it is estimated that 70% of the world's population could live in cities. The critical challenge for contemporary urbanism, therefore, is to understand how to develop the knowledge, capacity and capability for public agencies, the private sector and multiple users in city regions systemically to re-engineer their built environment and urban infrastructure in response to climate change and resource constraints. Re-Engineering the City 2020–2050: Urban Foresight and Transition Management (Retrofit 2050) is a major new interdisciplinary project funded under the Engineering and Physical Science Research Council's (EPSRC) Sustainable Urban Environments Programme which seeks to address this challenge. This briefing describes the background and conceptual framing of Retrofit 2050 project, its aims and objectives and research approach.

Sharing power? Prospects for a U.S. concert-balance strategy

The Pax Americana and the grand strategy of hegemony (or “Primacy”) that underpins it may be becoming unsustainable. Particularly in the wake of exhausting wars, the Global Financial Crisis, and the shift of wealth from West to East, it may no longer be possible or prudent for the United States to act as the unipolar sheriff or guardian of a world order. But how viable are the alternatives, and what difficulties will these alternatives entail in their design and execution? This analysis offers a sympathetic but critical analysis of alternative U.S. National Security Strategies of “retrenchment” that critics of American diplomacy offer. In these strategies, the United States would anticipate the coming of a more multipolar world and organize its behavior around the dual principles of “concert” and “balance,” seeking a collaborative relationship with other great powers, while being prepared to counterbalance any hostile aggressor that threatens world order. The proponents of such strategies argue that by scaling back its global military presence and its commitments, the United States can trade prestige for security, shift burdens, and attain a more free hand. To support this theory, they often look to the 19th-century concert of Europe as a model of a successful security regime and to general theories about the natural balancing behavior of states. This monograph examines this precedent and measures its usefulness for contemporary statecraft to identify how great power concerts are sustained and how they break down. The project also applies competing theories to how states might behave if world politics are in transition: Will they balance, bandwagon, or hedge? This demonstrates the multiple possible futures that could shape and be shaped by a new strategy. viii A new strategy based on an acceptance of multipolarity and the limits of power is prudent. There is scope for such a shift. The convergence of several trends—including transnational problems needing collaborative efforts, the military advantages of defenders, the reluctance of states to engage in unbridled competition, and hegemony fatigue among the American people—means that an opportunity exists internationally and at home for a shift to a new strategy. But a Concert-Balance strategy will still need to deal with several potential dilemmas. These include the difficulty of reconciling competitive balancing with cooperative concerts, the limits of balancing without a forward-reaching onshore military capability, possible unanticipated consequences such as a rise in regional power competition or the emergence of blocs (such as a Chinese East Asia or an Iranian Gulf), and the challenge of sustaining domestic political support for a strategy that voluntarily abdicates world leadership. These difficulties can be mitigated, but they must be met with pragmatic and gradual implementation as well as elegant theorizing and the need to avoid swapping one ironclad, doctrinaire grand strategy for another.