The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
1–10 of 426 posts
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#2> number of houses or total square footage built per employee
Average house size has probably doubled in the last 50 years.
Nail guns can't make up for building code and higher finish work demands. It's not uncommon to see 6 or 7 layers in sheathing today.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#3A number which is hard to define and impossible to measure should not be treated as a fact.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#4> number of houses or total square footage built per employee Average house size has probably doubled in the last 50 years. Nail guns can't make up for building code and higher finish work demands. It's not uncommon to see 6 or 7 layers in sheathing today.
I'm remodeling my place right now. You're totally right, the building codes are a lot more complex and there is more 'work' to do as a result. No more just hiding electrical boxes in the walls. Heh.
That said, the products being used have improved a lot. Things like PEX tubing for plumbing (instead of copper) and glue on walls for showers (over doing tile work), make some aspects go a lot faster.
Edit: Oh, I forgot to mention vinyl plank flooring... omg, so easy and the results look and function great.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#5> number of houses or total square footage built per employee Average house size has probably doubled in the last 50 years. Nail guns can't make up for building code and higher finish work demands. It's not uncommon to see 6 or 7 layers in sheathing today.
I have no idea how much it affects the data used to make that calculation, nor how much is its relevance in the US, but here (EU, Italy) besides the building code improvements there has been a very noticeable increase in amount/complexity of electric and hydraulic/heating/conditioning installments.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#6This is absurd. Houses are so much more complex than in the 1970s, and so much larger. In 1972 central AC was not common, now it's basically required. Square footage is way higher. Number of electrical outlets and switches per room. Moulding and trim are expected in many houses. Porches, decks, patios are much more ornate. Today's average house ia closer to the house of a millionaire in the 1970s than the average house from that time.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#7> number of houses or total square footage built per employee Average house size has probably doubled in the last 50 years. Nail guns can't make up for building code and higher finish work demands. It's not uncommon to see 6 or 7 layers in sheathing today.
I'm remodeling my place right now. You're totally right, the building codes are a lot more complex and there is more 'work' to do as a result. No more just hiding electrical boxes in the walls. Heh. That said, the products being used have improved a lot. Things like PEX tubing for plumbing (instead of copper) and glue on walls for showers (over doing tile work), make some aspects go a lot faster. Edit: Oh, I forgot t…
The big builders like DR Horton and Lennar target build times of 100 days per home that meets minimum code requirements, which is pretty good productivity. A community of 100 homes can be up and running in 2 years.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#8> And second, the authors describe the curious fact that producers located in more-productive areas do not grow at expected rates. Indeed, rather than construction inputs flowing to areas where they are more productive, the activity share of these areas either stagnates or even falls. The authors suggest that this problem with allocative efficiency may accentuate the aggregate productivity problem for the industry.
This is clearly accurate - people are not buying the cheapest housing in the middle of nowhere. Instead, the most money is spent in cities which are already built up and are more difficult to develop further.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#9> number of houses or total square footage built per employee Average house size has probably doubled in the last 50 years. Nail guns can't make up for building code and higher finish work demands. It's not uncommon to see 6 or 7 layers in sheathing today.
Pretty sure this is the right answer and calling this "worker productivity" seems a bit harsh. A "Pretty Good House" (book that was on the front page last week) includes insulation above and below the foundation slab, vapour barriers, double studs to break thermal bridges, complex window installation (again thermal bridges), air exchangers and heat pumps with ducts (or mini-splits).
New constructions (for cold zone), need to be air tight and that certainly comes at a cost in time as it is work to apply all the layers, run the conduits and whatnot.
Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector
#10This is absurd. Houses are so much more complex than in the 1970s, and so much larger. In 1972 central AC was not common, now it's basically required. Square footage is way higher. Number of electrical outlets and switches per room. Moulding and trim are expected in many houses. Porches, decks, patios are much more ornate. Today's average house ia closer to the house of a millionaire in the 1970s than the average hou…
From https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-air-conditioning :
> By the late 1960s, most new homes had central air conditioning
So the addition of central HVAC likely isn't a big factor, because most new homes in the US already had it 50 years ago.