ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
The construction industry in Malaysia is experiencing a transformation from conventional methods to a more systematic and mechanized method known as prefab system. Each state in Malaysia is currently examining the developments of the prefab system and its potential to overcome the shortages of housing accommodations in this country. Though, there are unsettled matters evolving from the continuing and widespread adoption of the traditional method of construction. Among them are the subsequent disintegration of the industry itself; slowdown in production and delivery time; superfluous surpluses and shortage of sustainability routine. The Malaysian government, involved through its agency, the Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) has been persistently pushing the construction industry to utilize of the prefab method of construction since the year 2003. It is a part of an incorporated endeavour to further improve the aptitude, potential, effectiveness, and competitiveness of the industry as well as to diminish the industry's dependence on foreign labours. This is also an attempt in the Malaysian construction industry to encourage positive inroads in matters related to construction-site safety with regards to a working environment which is cleaner, more convenient, and more organized. This production is also mentioned as being able to provide more protection to the environment as it secures the sustainability of the industry. This paper will discuss on some current matters related to the execution of prefab system and main barriers towards success of this construction type in Malaysia.
Abedi, M., Fathi, M. S., & Mirasa, A. K. (2011). Establishment and development of IBS in Malaysia. International Building and Infrastructure Technology Conference (BITECH 2011), 7 & 8 Jun 2011, Penang, Malaysia.
Akin, O. (2001). Variants in design cognition in C Eastman, M McCracken and W Newsletter (eds) Design knowing and learning: cognition in design education, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp: 105-124.
Cuff, D. (1991'0. Architecture: the story of practice. Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press. Cuff, D., 2000. Epilogue. In KOSTOF, S. (Ed.). The Architect: chapters in the history of the profession. Berkeley, Calif., University of California Press.
Edwards, E. H. (1999). The architect in the building process: pragmatic reflection, concrete experience. Stockholm, Royal Institute of Technology School of Architecture Surveying and Civil Engineeting.
Holm, I. (2006). Ideas and Beliefs in Architecture and Industrial design, (unpublished).ISSN 1502- 217X Phd Thesis, Oslo School of architecture and design, University of Oslo.
Porter, D. (2000). Why do architects wear black? Thinking beyond the trap. In TOFT, A. E. (Ed.) Ethics in architecture: architectural education in the epoch of virtuality. [Leuven], European Association for Architectural Education.
Purcell, T., & Gero, J. S. (1996). Design and other types of fixation, Design Studies, 17(4): 363-383.
Spector, T. (2001). The ethical architect: the dilemma of contemporary practice. New York, Princeton Architectural Press.
Visser, W. (2008). Design: one, but in different forms 2008 Elsevier Ltd. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com
In-Text Citation: (Mydin, 2022)
To Cite this Article: Mydin, M. A. O. (2022). Issues and Barriers in the Execution of Precast Construction. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 11(1), 448–454.
Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. 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 license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode