MMC for housing: sectoral perception on governance challenges

How do different actors across the housebuilding sector perceive the influence of England’s housing and planning policy on the use of modern methods of construction (MMC)? A stratified survey, administered through an established polling organisation, obtained valid responses (n = 501) from the UK-wide sector workforce, rating 25 policy areas for perceived importance and effect, from which a composite impact measure was derived. Five areas emerged as most influential: skilled labour; quality; supply chain stability; energy use; and health, safety and welfare. Disaggregated analysis revealed employer type, rather than occupation, geography, age or experience, as the characteristic most strongly associated with divergence in policy perception, self-assessed knowledge and innovation orientation. Interpreted through a network governance lens, this divergence tracks an actor’s role in the policy network, distinguishing the makers, takers and absorbers of policy, and suggesting a potential disconnect between the makers of policy and the wider sector. Representative evidence of perceived policy importance, effect and impact identified five policy areas that may provide a stronger basis for targeted interventions to promote MMC adoption, and support improvements in England’s housebuilding productivity.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Policymakers regularly cite MMC as a favoured route to improving the productivity and quality of housebuilding, yet the housebuilding sector in England has been slow to adopt MMC, despite repeated policy direction. Previous research has concentrated on technical and operational barriers to MMC adoption, leaving untested how the sector itself perceives policy influence and whether that perception is shared between those who make policy, those who take and interpret it, and those who absorb its consequences. Five policy areas are identified as key to targeted interventions to promote MMC use: skilled labour; quality; stable supply chain; energy use; and health, safety and welfare. The divergence by employer type shows where policy framed by its makers may not be perceived as influential by those who deliver it.