The main focus of the analysis is examining the contribution of industry reform to the recent outperformance of construction industry productivity. To do this, the study uses the latest information to perform the same three types of productivity comparisons as reported in the Previous Reports. Broadly, the comparisons are designed to compare the timing of the period of outperformance with the timing and nature of changes in industrial relations policies and the timing and nature of the operations of the ABCC and the Taskforce. The three types of productivity comparisons and the reason for conducting the comparisons are outlined in detail below.
• Year-to-year comparisons of construction industry productivity are made using a variety of sources to determine whether there has been a link between the timing of industry reform and productivity outperformance in the construction industry.
• Rawlinsons data on costs is used to assess whether industry reforms have succeeded in improving productivity in non-housing construction vis-à-vis housing construction.
Industry reforms have been focused on the more regulated, non-housing side of the industry, where costs for the same construction tasks are higher than on the housing side of the industry. We assess whether industry reforms have reduced this cost penalty for the nonhousingside of the industry by improving its productivity.
The key aggregate long-term economic effects under the Reform Scenario, when compared with the Baseline Scenario, are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Summary of Economy-Wide Effects of the Impact of Industry Reform
Annual Economic Welfare Gain (2009/10 terms) $ 5.9 billion
Consumer Price Index -0.7%
Household consumption 0.7%
Source: KPMG Econtech MM900 simulation
Note: The above results refer to permanent effects on the levels, not growth rates, of indicators relative to what they
otherwise would be. For example,...