Quality control of constructions: European trends and developments

• Author: Frits Meijer, Henk Visscher
• Position: OTB Research Institute for the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
• Pages: 143-161

Quality control of constructions:

European trends and

developments

Frits Meijer and Henk Visscher

OTB Research Institute for the Built Environment,

Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

Abstract

Purpose –This paper aims to evaluate the qualitycontrol systems for constructions in seven countries in

Europe with the purpose to trace innovative approaches and best practices that can serve as examples for

other countries.

Design/methodology/approach –The paper is basedon a series of research projects carriedout over a

numberof years. The research results were updatedin 2016 with a desktop research projectin seven European

countries. The results from this latestproject form the heart of this paper. Theinformation is organised into

tables that describeand analyse the main features of thequality control systems of the countries(e.g. scope,

focusand main characteristics of theprocedures and quality demandson building professionals).

Findings –Several similartrends can be recognised in the quality control systemsof the various European

Union (EU) countries. Quality control is getting more and more privatised and the control framework is

setting checks and balances throughoutthe construction process. Other findings are that scope and focus of

the statutory control is unbalanced. Within the control processes emphasis is put on the safety aspects of

complex constructions. Far fewer demands are made on the quality of the builders. Re-orientation of the

buildingregulatory framework seems to be needed.

Research limitations/implications –The paper only focusses on European countries where private

quality control is establishedand on selected topics. The findings are based on desktop research and not on

the practicalexperiences of the stakeholders involved in the countries studied.

Practical implications –The paper draws some important recommendations for policymakers in the

building regulatory field. It suggests both an enhancement of the effectiveness of the quality control

procedureas well as the commitment of builders to comply with the regulations.

Social implications –The quality of constructionsis essential for the wellbeing and safety of its users,its

occupants or its visitors.This applies to the whole range of quality aspects: structural-and fire safety, health,

sustainabilityand usability aspects. The analyses and recommendationsof this paper aim to contribute to an

improvementof the overall construction quality.

Originality/value –The paper makes an original contribution to the (limited) literature that is available in this

field. The results can be used to situate the quality control systems of each member state within the EU, to assess the

main trends, and it can be used as a guide to develop strategic choices on possible improvements in each country.

Keywords Sustainability, European Union, Quality control, Privatisation, Building regulations,

Construction quality

Paper type Research paper

© Frits Meijer and Henk Visscher. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is

published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce,

distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-

commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full

terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

The authors would like to acknowledge the helpful comments from the reviewers.

Quality

control of

constructions

143

Received 6 February 2017

Revised 4 May 2017

Accepted 7 May 2017

InternationalJournal of Law in the

BuiltEnvironment

Vol.9 No. 2, 2017

pp. 143-161

EmeraldPublishing Limited

1756-1450

DOI 10.1108/IJLBE-02-2017-0003

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/1756-1450.htm

1. Introduction

Starting point of this paper is recent buildingregulatory developments in The Netherlands.

From the late 90s of the twentieth century,successive Dutch Governments have been trying

to minimise the building regulatory burden and to privatise the quality control of

constructions. These attempts have only been partly successful. Some technical

requirements have been withdrawn from the regulations, and the number of constructions

that are exempt from quality control has been enlarged substantially (Meijer and Visscher,

1998,2006,2016;Costa Branco et al., 2011).In the same period, however, new requirements

on energy and sustainable performance have been incorporated in the buildingregulations.

These requirements have been tightened regularly since then (Beerepoot, 2007). During the

past decade, discussions to fundamentally change the quality control system continued

(Meijer and Visscher, 2016). The dominant policy line of subsequent governments has been

“privatise if possible and keep it public when necessary”. Eventually, this has led to a new

bill on Quality Assurance of Buildings that was introduced in May 2016 into parliament

(MBZK Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties/Ministry of Interior and

Kingdom Relations, 2015). The final implementation is still under debate in parliament.

When adopted, this law will change quality control of constructions in The Netherlands

fundamentally. The control on compliance with the technical requirements will be

transferred from public authorities to private parties. Accordingto the policymakers, these

changes will have a general positiveeffect on the quality of the building stock. Besides that,

it will also streamline the building processes and diminish the administrative burdenon all

parties. This paper puts the current Dutch policy plans in a broader European framework

and places them within the main trends that have changed systems of quality control in

European countries in the past two decades. The paper is based on a series of research

projects on building regulatorysystems carried out by the authors from the mid-90s on. The

research questions and research themes addressed in these projects have been consistent

throughout these years. To name the most important ones: For what subjects minimum

quality demands are set? How are these demands formulated? Does the procedure make a

distinction in categoriesof construction works? How are permit procedures organised?What

tasks and responsibilities do public and private parties have with regard to permit

procedures and enforcement? These questions were answered in 1993 in 5 European

countries), in 1997 (7 countries),2002 (8 countries), 2009 (all European Union [EU] countries),

2015 (14 countries) and 2016 (7 countries). In all research projects, relevant policy reports

were analysed, such as the building regulations, technical documents, manuals and

guidance’s to interpret the regulations or the enforcement procedures). Additionally,

interviews were held with stakeholders in the various countries. In some projects, national

specialists answered specific questionnaires (e.g. 2009 and 2015). The state-of-the-art

description of the systems is mainly basedon the 2016 project. In our most recent European

comparative research project commissioned by the Dutch Government, quality control in

England & Wales, Ireland, Germany, France, Norway and Sweden were compared and

analysed (Meijer and Visscher, 2016). In these selected countries, private building control

already has been established withinthe regulatory framework. The insights into trends and

developments of the quality controlsystems are based on all studies mentioned. This paper

provides original and new insights into thematter. This applies to both the analyses of the

current situationas the analyses of the main trends.

This paper sketches the state-of-the-art of quality control systems for constructions in

Europe and places the insights into a wider perspective. The goal of the paper is not only to

explore to what extent current statutory quality control systems provide sufficient

assurance that constructions meet the minimumdemands set in the building regulations, it

IJLBE

9,2

144