Risks in Chinese Construction Market—Contractors’ Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Chinese construction market will be increasingly open and finally become part of the international market. Because of different social and economic systems, as well as different historical and cultural backgrounds, contractors are likely to encounter different risks in different markets. Based on questionnaires and case studies, this paper adopts an importance evaluation index and makes an importance evaluation of various risks encountered by Chinese contractors when contracting for projects in Chinese markets. This paper also makes comparisons between and analyses of the research findings and related available investigation results. The Cox–Stuart trend increase test method is applied in the current research, the results indicating that the variance corresponding to the importance index value tends to increase as the risk event importance decreases. This tendency shows that those investigated tend towards unanimity in terms of higher importance risk events. This paper also examines the reliability of the questionnaires by means of Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient. The research shows that the main risk currently encountered by Chinese contractors in domestic markets includes owner’s irregular behavior and government departments’ interference in construction markets. China’s accession to the WTO has provided greater opportunities for international contractors to enter the Chinese construction market. Therefore the research results described in this paper can provide valuable data enabling international contractors to gain a better understanding of the potential risks in the environment of the Chinese construction market.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".