Search results

Clause 19 [Insurance] provides the requirements for insurance of the Works, Goods, liability for breach of professional duty, injuries to persons (including employees) and damage to property, as well as insurance required by Laws etc. Drafting a cohesive insurance strategy providing adequate cover for all relevant risks is a job for insurance specialists. If not drawn up by specialists, relevant risks might not be adequately covered or the global cost of providing insurance might increase (e.g. because some risks are insured by the Employer as well as the Contractor). Drawing up an insurance strategy may provide the best cover at the lowest cost but only if the work is done by suitably quali?ed specialists.

Clause 17 addresses issues relating to the care of the Works (i.e. the risk of incidental loss or damage to the Works) and the indemnities provided by the Contractor and the Employer, as well as the shared indemnities. It may not make perfect sense to bundle care of the Works in the same Clause as indemnities, but they sit together for historic reasons as Clause 17 in the 1999 edition included liabilities as well as care of the Works and indemnities and, therefore, provided a comprehensive approach to risks, liabilities and indemnities. In the 2017 edition, the main provisions on liabilities have been moved to Sub-Clause 1.15 [Limitation of Liability]. The passing of risk (the care of the Works) is addressed in Sub-Clause 17.1 [Responsibility for Care of the Works]; some exceptions to the allocation of this risk are stated in Sub-Clause 17.2 [Liability for Care of the Works]. Indemnities are dealt with in the remaining Sub-Clauses: Sub-Clauses 17.3 [Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights], 17.4 [Indemnities by Contractor], 17.5 [Indemnities by Employer], and 17.6 [Shared Indemnities].

Clause 4 [The Contractor] outlines the main provisions applying to the Contractor and their obligations in the execution of the Works. Clause 4 is one of the most important Clauses in the GC as it outlines the majority of the Contractor's core obligations.

This research investigated the impacts of COVID-19 on construction enterprises and good practices adopted by the enterprises in reducing COVID-19 risks. The Sendai Framework (TSF) is widely accepted as a strategic roadmap to reduce disaster risks throughout the life cycle of a disaster. As such, with the aim of enhancing the resilience of Australian construction enterprises, the identified good practices were mapped with TSF priorities to consolidate COVID-19 risk reduction practices that can be adopted by Australian construction enterprises.

Case study research approach was used, and three case studies were conducted with small, medium and large construction enterprises. Small, medium and large enterprises were selected based on the Australian Bureau of Statistics classification of the business size. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted with three executive members from the three enterprises. Data were analysed using content analysis.

The study found that construction enterprises faced demand and supply side impacts. Infrastructure projects, funded by public sector clients and larger enterprises were least affected. Investments and demand for residential and other building projects were reduced by private sector clients, affecting small and medium enterprises. Findings also show that the construction enterprises adopted good practices in identifying, managing, investing on resilience and recovery that align with TSF priorities. All three enterprises agreed on some common good practices on risk identification, risk management and effective recovery. Different views were shared on investments related to disaster resilience.

This study contributes to mitigate the COVID-19 impacts on construction enterprises and subsequent economic and social impacts.

This research found how Australian construction enterprises survived during COVID-19. The study adopted TSF to construction and COVID-19 context while consolidating COVID-19 risk reduction practices.

According to the market competition theory, a firm’s decision-making is influenced by the behaviors or strategies of its competitors. The repercussions of competition include market-stealing and spillover effects. Relatively few studies in the reinsurance literature discuss the effect of competitors on an insurer’s decision-making. This study aims to fill a gap in the reinsurance literature by comparing insurers' reinsurance demand to their competitors' reinsurance purchases.

This study uses unbalanced panel data for the US property-liability insurance industry from 2006 to 2017 to determine the impact of competitors' reinsurance purchases on insurers' reinsurance demand. This study employs the Mixed Effect Model and the Quantile Regression to test the proposed hypotheses.

The evidence suggests that the affiliated reinsurance purchases of competitors have a positive and substantial effect on the affiliated reinsurance demand of insurers, crediting mimicking the reinsurance strategy. Interestingly, the market-stealing effect is supported while the non-affiliated reinsurance metric is used. Remarkably, given insurers with low non-affiliated reinsurance purchases, the finding sustains the mimicking reinsurance strategy. Nevertheless, the market-stealing effect remains a concern for insurers with a high non-affiliated reinsurance purchase.

The new findings concerning competitor effects analysis fill a void in the reinsurance literature. Risk diversification, capital substitution, and real services demand may play a crucial role in determining the market-stealing effect, leading to a decrease in market share. Insurers can mitigate the market-stealing effect of competitors by accessing expertise and capital substitution through non-affiliated reinsurance purchases.

Clause 1 [General Provisions] contains the provisions that in many contracts are bundled together under the ‘miscellaneous’ or ‘other provisions’ heading and includes a list of definitions, some interpretation principles, rules on communication between the Parties, documents forming the Contract, assignment, confidentiality etc. But Clause 1 also contains other provisions, like the Employer's right to use documentation and other deliverables provided by the Contractor (in other contracts usually referred to as a license to use), and a substantive Sub-Clause on limitation of liability.

This study aims to examine facility management practices in the Nigerian healthcare sector, exploring approaches and identifying challenges facing effective healthcare facilities management. The purpose is to contribute to the development of a framework for enhancing healthcare facility management efficiency in Nigeria.

The study employs a sequential in-depth exploratory qualitative research approach. The data collection involved conducting semi-structured interviews with 15 facility managers from diverse healthcare organisations in Nigeria. The qualitative data collected were analysed using thematic analysis.

The study reveals scheduled, unscheduled and mixed approaches as the three facility management approaches used in Nigeria. It also substantiates the underdeveloped nature of facility management in Nigeria's healthcare sector, exacerbated by challenges such as socioeconomic, operational, technological and regulatory challenges.

The study uncovers systemic issues affecting have attainment of Sustainable Development Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and advocates for a comprehensive approach to enhance healthcare infrastructure, contributing to improved health outcomes and sustainable development.

This research uniquely uncovers the hidden challenges facing effective healthcare facility management in Nigeria, providing a foundation for stakeholders to formulate solutions and rescue the struggling state of healthcare facilities in the country.

The recent economic changes in India and the gender discrimination practices of the patriarchal society have forced Indian women to turn to the financial sector as an essential means of generating returns. This study aims to identify the factors influencing investors’ investment frequency in India’s two most recognized metropolitan areas.

The authors applied structural equation modeling to augment Allport’s consumer behavior model and the social influence theory for assessing the frequency of investments made by 690 investors. The direct and indirect linkages in the proposed model were evaluated using moderation and mediation techniques.

The study’s findings show that investors’ perceptions of gender discrimination practices and social influence considerably increase investors’ involvement, magnifying their investment frequency. In addition, access to reliable information reinforces the relationship between investors’ involvement and their frequency of investments, whereas the low-risk tolerance weakens this association.

The findings could help policymakers, investors, financial media outlets, financial experts, educational institutions and society strengthen India’s financial sector by leveraging the linkage between the underlying constructs and investors’ behavior.

The aspects of involvement and gender inequality have not garnered enough attention in the previous studies on behavioral finance. The study delves deeper into investor behavior by establishing a link between the underlying constructs and broadening the horizons of prominent consumer behavior models. It also unfurls the moderating role of access to information and risk tolerance to comprehend the association better.