50 INDUSTRY VIEWFINDER: SOLVING THE HOUSING CRISIS VIA OFFSITE CONSTRUCTION INTRODUCTION (Answered Yes) (Answered No)


UPTAKE


ccording to ae  formerly the ngineering mployers’ ederation, around bn of private research has been invested in  since the publication of ar armer’s notorious  odernise or ie report, in which he argued that the ’s construction industry faced inexorable decline’ unless longstanding problems are addressed, with  proposed as a significant solution’ to tacle this.


This has not gone altogether unnoticed – with the Government providing a boost to the sector, requiring a minimum of 25% of their affordable homes programme to be constructed using . The criteria applied for homes to be classed as  is that they have a reanufactured alue  score of  or more. Despite this, our research revealed that it is still far from a staple for the average housebuilder, with this year’s respondents reporting even less experience with  than our 2021 survey respondents.


Overall, when asked if our respondents had ever used offsite building techniues, ust over half had , down from  in the previous study. f those who haven’t,   anticipate doing so within the next year,   in one to two years,   in five years,   in  years, and   on  study anticipate doing so in over  years. Perhaps even more surprisingly than this back-sliding, while some responses went into the millions of pounds, when asked how much money they had spent on research and


development for , the maority of respondents  had spent absolutely no money to date on offsite.


PERCEPTION


Despite this decrease in the utilisation of offsite construction techniques, and lack of investment in them, our data shows that the maority believe that all the staeholders our respondents work with are increasingly receptive to them. When asked how much they believe these stakeholders’ views of offsite building techniques have changed in the last five years,  believed housing associations and social housing providers views had dramatically improved,  said it had improved, 23% not changed at all, 4% worsened, and none believing they had dramatically worsened. Similarly, 5% believed other builders and developers’ views had dramatically improved,  improved,  not changed at all only 2% said it had worsened, and 1% dramatically worsened. Lastly, 2% believed homeowners and buyers’ views had dramatically improved,  improved,  had not changed at all, while  said it had worsened, and  dramatically worsened. With an overall improvement of perceptions but a lack of adoption, this begs the question: Do housebuilders and developers not believe the technology has enough benefits for the sector to mae the change to  nd if this is not the case, then what are the key barriers?


PRODUCED IN ASSOCIATION WITH


WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92