Mixed methods analysis reveals modern slavery risks in material selections by practitioners and NGOs, indicating a dire need for improved regulations and education.
Understanding the social performance of buildings is challenging due to the complexity of their value chains. Building specifications and material selections are based on performance criteria governed by construction codes, standards, and industry guidelines, yet they often overlook modern slavery considerations. Due to this oversight, practitioners and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) risk neglecting the social implications throughout the building's design and construction stages. To investigate how Australian building practitioners and NGOs perceive modern slavery risks in their material specifications, we conducted a bottom-up analysis of responses to analyse industry actors' experiences and identify factors that influence the respondents’ decision-making during material specifications. Employing a mixed methodology with 18 expert interviews and 230 surveys, our study used industry sub-domains of 1) education, 2) clients, 3) material procurement and 4) regulation. Our findings suggest that the risk of modern slavery in selections is generated due to inadequate regulation, limited product information, and constrained access to modern slavery information, compounded by a lack of knowledge, time constraints, and project costs. This could be addressed through improved education, increased client awareness, transparent procurement, and stronger regulations. Product and material specifications frequently lack human rights information due to opaque supply chains and restrictive legislation, fostering practitioner distrust in addressing modern slavery. The outcomes underscore that a comprehensive approach is required, targeting the industry sub-domains identified and further integrating circular economy principles within supply chains to overcome the trust deficit among practitioners and NGOs when specifying products with human rights considerations. This paper proposes an integrated approach to assist in fostering the commitment of NGOs and practitioners to address modern slavery risks within the building sector.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anwyn Shoemark (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: