ºÃÉ«ÏÈÉúTV

Much attention has been given in recent weeks to the post of chief construction adviser. As I emphasised in ºÃÉ«ÏÈÉúTV last month, a good appointment could make a huge difference to the way the construction industry relates to government and vice versa. But the relationship between the industry and government is likely to be influenced to an even greater extent by another initiative that has received less media attention. That is the proposed Innovation and Growth Team (IGT) review of construction in relation to the development of a low carbon economy.

The review was announced by Lord Mandelson when he met the Strategic Forum for Construction last month. Its purpose is to examine how the construction sector is placed to meet the demands of a low carbon economy and to identify how the industry can best respond to the challenges and business opportunities that this creates.

The IGT approach has been adopted in other industry sectors and is seen as an effective means of identifying and securing industry support for innovation that will open up business opportunities. An IGT report on the automotive industry is often quoted as a particularly productive exercise.

The construction industry is better placed than almost every other industry to make the most of the business opportunities created by the low carbon imperative

There is of course a certain irony here, because as many will remember, one of the key themes of Sir John Egan’s Rethinking Construction was the need for construction to learn lessons from developments in the automotive sector. However, nobody is suggesting a return to Egan. Indeed, we are all too conscious, as Andrew Wolstenholme’s recent report for Constructing Excellence pointed out, of the need to move on. Although progress has been made since Egan’s report was published 11 years ago, it has not matched anyone’s expectations.

A new impetus will certainly be required if we are to revitalise the reform agenda. The IGT review could provide precisely that impetus and, given the nature of the low carbon challenge, it could potentially deliver the revolution that Egan would like to have achieved through his report.

In inviting Keith Clarke to head the IGT review, Lord Mandelson has chosen well. Not only is the chief executive of Atkins committed to the low carbon agenda but he has the experience, the range of skills and the intellectual capacity to deal with the complex issues involved. As he has stressed on many occasions in the past year, doing things better is not enough. In many cases we will not only have to improve, but also transform processes and products if we are to have any chance of meeting the daunting target of an 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050.

We cannot afford to spend time worrying if we have got all the right answers in place before we respond to the low carbon challenge

Yet the construction industry is better placed than almost every other industry to make the most of the business opportunities created by the low carbon imperative. Whether we are talking about housing, commercial buildings, infrastructure or the mass of materials and products that go into them, not to mention the processes in operating them for years ahead, construction contributes massively to carbon emissions and so offers huge scope for reductions.

For all his skills, Clarke alone will not be able to identify the range of opportunities that need to be seized, and the necessary approach to deliver transformational change across the whole industry. He will depend on the support of other industry leaders willing to give their time and expertise to help produce a report that can really give new impetus to improving the performance of UK construction.

Sensibly, Lord Mandelson has set a very challenging timetable for the IGT review, so there should be no risk of a protracted or bureaucratic process. Given the nature of the low carbon challenge, this is entirely appropriate. We cannot afford to spend time worrying if we have got all the right answers in place before we start.

We do have to be brave and take risks in developing innovative new responses to the biggest challenge of our time, while realistically accepting that some of them are likely to prove more productive than others. But this is a huge market where successful innovations will stand to make very large returns. So it is absolutely right for us to be working to put UK plc and specifically UK construction in pole position. If Keith Clarke’s IGT review succeeds in kickstarting even a small number of such innovative responses, it will have performed a hugely valuable task.