On the proposed private certification of building works in Hong Kong

• Author: Yung Yau
• Position: Department of Public and Social Administration, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong

1 Introduction

1. 1 The nature of building regulations

Building regulations are often regarded as a burden by designers and builders ( Gann et al., 1998 ) who see their requirements as suffocating innovation and creativity in design. For example, Goodchild and Furbey (1986) consider that they do not benefit the built environment at all but simply prevent buildings with certain characteristics from being constructed. However, building regulations provide essential controls to safeguard the health and safety of building occupants and the general public as a whole. In the opinion of Visscher and Meijer (2007) , building regulations are more similar to social than economic regulations as they predominantly serve to ensure environmental health and safety, as well as consumer protection. This view is shared by scholars like Hunt (1978) and Turk (1972) who described laws as instruments for social control or for facilitating social interventions. In this regard, building regulations are similar to food safety and product safety laws which endeavour to protect the well-being of a community. In the past, the regulation of food, product and building safety was the sole responsibility of government. Today, regulations are increasingly seen as obstructions to market liberalization. As a result there is now an international trend towards reducing government responsibility for building quality and many countries are now attempting to simplify their building control regimes, often through a combination of deregulation and the shifting of responsibilities to the private sector.

1. 2 Research aims

In common with other jurisdictions, the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (hereafter “Hong Kong”) of the People's Republic of China is now considering a private certification system for minor building works. Under the proposed arrangement, a number of responsibilities which are now vested in the government will be transferred to the private sector. This initiative, which has not previously attracted the attention of scholars, is therefore considered by this paper for the first time. Specifically, the paper seeks to evaluate the quality and workability of the proposals through an examination of the views of local building professionals.

The paper is presented in four parts. The global trend towards the private certification of building works is first described. The Hong Kong initiatives, and the general responses from relevant professional institutions, are discussed within this context. Second, the paper describes the design of an opinion survey that was conducted in order to collate the views of building professionals within the city from a variety of relevant professional backgrounds. The findings of the survey are then reported and discussed within the third part. The fourth and final part of the paper then describes the conclusions of the research.

2 Private certification of building works

2. 1 Background

Building has been described as an artificial invention which alters the natural environment for the better accommodation of human beings ( Goudie, 2006 ). Therefore, the built environment must at least be safe and healthy in order to be fit for its purpose. Building control is the system which ensures the safety and health performance of building works. It does this by maintaining certain baseline regulatory standards so that public interests can be protected ( Buildings Department, 1999 ; Department for Communities and Local Government, 2008 ). A typical building control system encompasses building laws and regulations, standards, and mechanisms for scrutiny and law enforcement. The evolution of building control spans over the long history of human civilization. It is generally accepted that King Hammurabi of Babylonia who reigned from 1955 BC to 1913 BC introduced the first recorded building law ¹. Since then, building control laws throughout the world have continued to evolve up to the present day.

In most jurisdictions central or local government was traditionally the key policing and enforcement agent with regard to building control ( Johnston, 1992 ). These public authorities were actively involved in all its various processes, including scrutiny of building proposals, issuance of work permits, monitoring of building and demolition works, and the final checking of the completed works. In spite of this longstanding government-centred, command-and-control tradition, governments started deregulating building control in response to the rise of the new public management doctrines such as deregulation and wider private sector involvement in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s.

Over the past decade, as noted by Visscher and Meijer (2007) , there has been an increasing trend in European countries to extend the category of exempted or permit-free building works. In addition to this, the certification of building works by the private sector has been instigated by governments in some countries as part of their increasing commitment to the decentralization of building control.

2. 2 Experience in different countries

Private certification of building works has been a trend with momentum in many European countries since the late 1970s. By way of example, the UK Government attempted to reform the system of building control in 1979 by introducing self-regulation by the building industry through a system of private certification ( Ross, 1985 ; Downward, 1992 ). A statutory framework relating to private certification was therefore installed in the Building Act 1984. Under this new arrangement, a property owner could appoint an approved inspector to take responsibility for plan checking and inspection of the works. To initiate the process of private certification, the property owner and approved inspector are required to jointly notify the local authority of the intended works via service of an initial notice. Once the initial notice has been accepted by the local authority, the approved inspector then undertakes responsibility for the following to ( Pitt, 1984 ; Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005 ):

give the property owner advice on how the building regulations apply to the proposed building works;

check the plans of the proposed building works;

issue a plans certificate to the property owner to attest that the plans of the proposed building works comply with the requirements laid down in the building regulations;

inspect the works in progress; and

issue a final certificate to the local authority to confirm that the works referred to in the corresponding initial notice is completed in accordance with the prevailing building regulations.

Similar private certification arrangements also exist in other parts of Europe and in Australia ( Lampert, 1999 ; Visscher and Meijer, 2007 ), but usually for minor building works such as insubstantial extension of building and erection of non-structural fencing. These third-party certification arrangements represent one of two alternative models of private certification. In this model, an entity, who is not a public authority, takes responsibility for certifying compliance with the building regulations for the whole or parts of a project, but this entity is not directly involved in the design or performance of the building works.

In contrast, the alternative self-certification model allows an entity employed by the builder or client to design, supervise and/or carry out the works and also to certify that they comply with all relevant requirements in the building regulations. Self-certification is commonly applicable to minor works. For example, under the Competent Person Schemes in England and Wales the replacement of windows and doors and the installation of electrical, plumbing, heating and hot water service systems are all self-certifiable by a competent person undertaking the work as an alternative to submitting a building notice or using an approved inspector ( Billington et al., 2007 ). The rationale behind self-certification is straightforward. Entities who can be professionals or builders are presumably competent in their field so they are empowered to self-certify that their works comply with the prevailing statutory requirements with regard to building design and construction without the need to involve the local authority.

A similar self-certification scheme was proposed in Malaysia in 2005. With a view to cutting red tape and reducing bureaucracy, the Minister of Housing and Local Government planned to allow qualified persons to prepare and submit building plans to the local authority, attesting that the works had been designed in compliance with the Uniform Building By-Laws. Subsequently, the qualified persons would supervise the construction to ensure compliance and, upon the completion of the various stages of works, submit prescribed forms to notify the local authority and certify that...