A knowledge based system for valuing variations in civil engineering works: a user centred approach

There has been much evidence that valuing variations in construction projects can lead to conflicts and disputes leading to loss of time, efficiency, and productivity. One of the reasons for these conflicts and disputes concerns the subjectivity of the project stakeholders involved in the process. One way to minimise this is to capture and collate the knowledge and perceptions of the different parties involved in order to develop a robust mechanism for valuing variations. Focusing on the development of such a mechanism, the development of a Knowledge Based System (KBS) for valuing variations in civil engineering work is described. Evaluation of the KBS involved demonstration to practitioners in the construction industry to support the contents of the knowledge base and perceived usability and acceptance of the system. Results support the novelty, contents, usability, and acceptance of the system, and also identify further potential developments of the KBS

Chemical Control of Lygus spp. (Hemiptera: Miridae) in British Columbia Peach Orchards

n/

Control of soft scales (Homoptera: Coccidae) in British Columbia peach and apricot orchards

n/

Chemical Control of Lygus spp. (Hemiptera: Miridae) in British Columbia Peach Orchards

n/

List of insects and mites attacking tree fruits in the interior of British Columbia

n/

Codling moth importation control by sterile insect release: Of fruit and fruit containers as a source of reinfestation

A program of codling moth, Laspeyresia pomonella (L.), control by the sterility principle is planned for the entire Similkameen Valley of British Columbia. If the program is successful, reinfestation by moth fly-in is unlikely because the valley is fairly well isolated. Importation of host fruits and fruit containers (bushel boxes) for roadside fruit stands could lead to reinfestation unless the boxes are fumigated. Localized annual releases of sterile moths around fruit stands may also be necessary. Orchard bins, used by commercial packinghouses, are unlikely to be a serious source of codling moth reinfestation

Diazinon: A summary of recent work on a new orchard insecticide

n/

Understanding supply chain management from a main contractor's perspective

The emergence of supply chain management (SCM) in construction was predominantly driven by major clients that began to adopt procurement arrangements such as prime contracting, partnering, and framework agreements. These were major clients that had the power leverage to mobilise construction firms for projects that spanned a considerable timeframe. Despite such early efforts towards SCM adoption, it increasingly became apparent that numerous subcontractors and suppliers were not fully integrated into these supply chain driven collaborative approaches. This has remained a key shortcoming of such collaborative efforts in the construction sector (Kumaraswamy et al. 2010). This situation has now provided main contractors with the enormous responsibility of coordinating and managing multi-layered tiers of suppliers and subcontractors for production and value addition across multiple projects. Main contractors have taken an interest in SCM as an approach for coordinating upstream linkages with demand-side organisations, in addition to the downstream tiers of supply chain firms assembled to deliver projects. However, empirical evidence of SCM initiatives and practices that have been implemented by main contractors to manage the lower tiers of the supply chain remain scarce (Pala et al. 2014, Broft et al. 2016). In this chapter, the multi-layered nature of subcontracting in construction will be discussed, together with its ramifications, before reviewing literature on SCM principles and practices that can be adopted by main contractors. A case study of SCM practices implemented by a large UK main contractor is then used to provide some empirical evidence of SCM adoption from a main contractor’s perspective. This case study focuses on the ‘dyadic’ relationship between a Tier-1 main contractor and Tier-2 subcontractors