Incentive or deterrent: which encourages greater focus on health and safety in the Victorian construction industry?

The Australian Government commissioned a Royal Commission into the building industry in Australia that reported to Parliament in August 2002. Volume 6 of this report, released in February 2003, discussed certain aspects in occupational health and safety in Australia and leaned toward deterrents as a means of achieving reform. This research defines both incentives and deterrents used to increase awareness of, and improve safety on, building sites in Victoria, a state of Australia. A pilot survey questionnaire was developed following a literature review and industry employer representatives were invited to participate. Industry awareness of Government incentive programmes was found to be low, with less than a quarter stating they read Government strategies. One fund that provides actual research monies into health and safety was known to very few of the respondents. Of the employers surveyed, the majority agreed that financial fines do act as a valid deterrent. Increases in worker compensation premiums were seen as the greatest deterrent due to the effect on company overheads and thus competitive tendering bids. Deterrent programmes were more readily acknowledged by employers as they had an element of self promotion with employers attempting to avoid their application.

Embodied energy in buildings : wood versus concrete - reply to Börjesson and Gustavsson

We analyse the wood and concrete designs of the Wälludden building described by Börjesson et al. (Energy Policy 28 (2000) 575) in terms of their embodied energy, employing an environmentally extended input–output framework in a tiered hybrid life-cycle assessment, and in a structural path analysis. We illustrate the complexity of the inter-industry supply chains underlying the upstream energy requirements for the building options, and demonstrate that higher-order inputs are difficult to capture in a conventional process analysis. Our calculations show that Börjesson and Gustavsson's estimates of energy requirements and greenhouse gas emissions are underestimated by a factor of about 2, and that corresponding greenhouse gas balances are positive at about 30 t C-eq. Nevertheless, Börjesson and Gustavsson's general result—the concrete-framed building causing higher emissions—still holds.