Construction Automation: Demands and Satisfiers in the United States and Japan
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 122, Issue 2
Abstract
Automation and robotics are often proposed as solutions to problems in productivity, quality, safety, and skilled-labor availability in the United States and in Japan. In recent years, many prototype robots have been developed, but few practical examples can be found on construction sites today. Nevertheless, several large Japanese contractors are aggressively pursuing research and development (R&D) programs to introduce robots on construction sites. United States contractors exhibit little interest. This paper evaluates construction automation and robotics in the context of their ability to satisfy the often conflicting demands of managers and owners, workers, and society in the United States and in Japan. In the United States, there is weak demand for construction automation and robotics. In fact, there may be considerable resistance. In Japan, there is a great deal of demand for automation and robotics, much of it coming from workers and society in general. Differences in cultural, economic, and business practices help explain why construction automation and robotics are generating so much activity and investment in Japan and so little in the United States.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Arditi, D., Sundareswaran, S., and Gutierez, A. (1990). “The future of automation and robotics in construction activities.”Proc., 7th Int. Symp. on Automation and Robotics in Constr., 447–454.
2.
Hasegawa, F., and Shimizu Group FS. (1988). Built by Japan . John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y.
3.
“Japan takes early lead in robotics.” (1983). ENR, 211(3), 42–45.
4.
Kirkland, L. (1980). “Productivity: a labor view.”Proc., Conf. on Productivity Res., Am. Productivity Ctr., Houston, Tex.
5.
Korman, R., Setzer, W., and Normile, D.(1992). “Learning to love the spotlight.”ENR, 229(16), 24–28.
6.
Koskela, L. (1992). “Process improvement and automation in construction: opposing or complementing approaches?”Proc., 9th Int. Symp. on Automation and Robotics in Constr., Japan Industrial Robot Assoc., Toyko, Japan, 105–112.
7.
Levy, S. (1990). Japanese construction: an American perspective . Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, N.Y.
8.
Ministry of Construction. (1990). White paper on construction . Printing Bureau of the Ministry of Finance, Tokyo, Japan.
9.
Muro, E., Arai, K., and Miura, N. (1990). “Analysis of construction works for robotization.”Proc., 7th Int. Symp. on Automation and Robotics in Constr., 483–490.
10.
Nam, C. H., and Tatum, C. B.(1989). “Toward understanding of project innovation process in construction.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 115(4), 517–534.
11.
Nam, C. H., and Tatum, C. B.(1992). “Strategies for technology push: lessons from construction innovations.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 118(3), 507–524.
12.
Navon, R., Kelly, P. W., and Johnstone, D. W. (1992). “Identification of human barriers to the successful implementation of construction automation.”Proc., 9th Int. Symp. on Automation and Robotics in Constr., Japan Industrial Robot Assoc., Tokyo, Japan, 138–140.
13.
Normile, D. (1993). “Building-by-numbers in Japan.”ENR, 230(9), 22–24.
14.
Rosenberg, N. (1982). Inside the black box: technology and economics . Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, England.
15.
Skibniewski, M. J., and Wooldridge, S.(1992). “Robotics material handling for automated building construction technology.”Automation in Constr., 1(3), 251–266.
16.
“Technological progress in the construction industry.” (1986). Constr. Industry Cost Effectiveness Rep. B-2, The Business Roundtable, New York, N.Y.
17.
Yamada, K. (1992). “Construction company: Best 10 and worst 10. Apple Publ., Tokyo, Japan.
18.
Yamada, R. (1986).“New CI strategy: point and blind point in corporate image strategy.”Industry Efficiency College Publ., Toyko, Japan.
19.
1994–1997 Agreement between the Labor Relations Division of Washtenaw Contractors Association, Inc. and the State of Michigan Laborer's District Council, Local No. 959, of Laborers' International Union of North America. (1994). Washtenaw Contractors Assoc., Inc., and the State of Michigan Laborer's District Council, Union of North America, Washington, D.C.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 122 • Issue 2 • June 1996
Pages: 147 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Jun 1, 1996
Published in print: Jun 1996
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.