ABSTRACT
Construction disputes have long been identified as epidemics in the construction industry worldwide, which has become a more serious problem due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies on the dispute causes have primarily focused on country- or region-specific contexts and hence the results cannot be generalized in solving this chronic problem in a broader construction project worldwide. This study aims to explore and evaluate the critical dispute causes in construction projects through a comparative study between China and the United Kingdom. A total of 33 common dispute causes were identified through a comprehensive literature review and further consolidated by pilot surveys in the two countries. An online questionnaire survey was administered among construction professionals in China and the United Kingdom, with 170 valid responses returned for data analysis. Principal component factor analysis, mean score ranking approach, quartile analysis, and Mann-Whitney U testing were employed to identify the most critical dispute causes. Similarities and differences were mapped between the two countries. It was found that the five most critical categories of dispute causes in the two territories are: delay-related problems, lack of communication, contractual problems, site conditions, and design problems. The importance of variation in quantities, breach of contract, misinterpretation of contractual terms and conditions, and poor contract management was perceived significantly differently by the respondents in China and the United Kingdom, whereas design defects and failure to make compensation for additional work were the most critical common dispute causes in both countries. The research provides important findings for both academics and practitioners to holistically understand the similarities and differences of dispute causes in China and the United Kingdom and aids in preventing disputes more effectively in the global construction industry. © 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers.
ABSTRACT
Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, general secretary Xi Jinping has repeatedly stressed the issue of college students shouldering social responsibilities in the new era. He encourages college students to bear the responsibility of the times and learns to assume social responsibility. Based on the literature analysis, using the methods of data investigation and case analysis, the study explores how colleges and universities reasonably use and actively guide students to correctly understand and then agree to translate into action showing social responsibility. At the same time, according to the investigation of college students' sense of social responsibility, this paper analyzes the existing problems in education, so as to put forward objective and accurate feasible strategies and suggestions. © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
ABSTRACT
Aims: The burden of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an unintended reduction of available healthcare capacity for regular care. To guide prioritization of semi-elective surgery in times of scarcity, we previously developed a decision model to quantify the expected health loss due to delay of surgery, in an academic setting. The aim of this study is to validate our decision model in a non-academic setting and include additional surgical procedures. Method(s): In this study, we used the previously published three-state cohort state-transition model, to evaluate the health effects of surgery postponement for 28 surgical procedures commonly performed in non-academic hospitals. Scientific literature and national registries yielded nearly all input parameters, except for the quality of life estimates which were obtained from experts using the Delphi method. Two expert panels, one from a single non-academic hospital and one from different nonacademic hospitals in the Netherlands, were invited to estimate quality of life weights. We compared estimated model results (disability adjusted life years (DALY)/month of surgical delay) based on the QoL estimates from the two panels by calculating the mean difference and the correlation between the ranks of the different surgical procedures. The eventual model was based on the combined QoL estimates from both panels. Result(s): Pacemaker implantation was associated with the most DALY due to surgical delay (0.05 DALY/month, 95% CI 0.03-0.10) and hemithyreoidectomy with the least DALY/month (0.01 DALY/month, 95% CI 0.00-0.01). The overall mean difference between the two panels was 0.00 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.00). The correlation between ranks was 0.98 (p<0.001). Conclusion(s): Our study provides an accurate overview of incurred health loss due to surgical delay for frequently performed non-academic surgeries. The quality of life estimates used in our model are robust and validate towards a different group of experts. These results enrich our earlier published results on academic surgeries and contribute to prioritizing a more complete set of surgeries.