Abstract:
The introduction of Building Information Modelling (BIM) to New Zealand’s construction industry has been identified as one of the key approaches to improving the industry’s productivity. Although the adoption of BIM in the industry is gathering momentum, several obstacles still impede its widespread use. This research investigates the legal obstacles specific to New Zealand and presents a new working document, the New Zealand BIM Schedule, which will enable the industry to overcome those obstacles and realise the benefits of BIM. The research methodology consists of a thorough literature review identifying the legal implications of BIM, followed by a series of semi-structured interviews gathering industry perception on those implications. In addition, the suitability of the standard forms of contract and procurement methods commonly used in the industry is analysed against the context of New Zealand’s legal framework. The features of three existing BIM contractual addendums, the American Institute of Architects E202 BIM Protocol Exhibit, ConsensusDOCs 301 BIM Addendum and the United Kingdom’s Construction Industry Council’s BIM Protocol are also evaluated. The New Zealand BIM Schedule is drafted on the basis of the collated findings of the research and is accompanied by guidance notes to encourage industry use. In addition to the drafting of the New Zealand BIM Schedule, the findings enabled the following recommendations to be made: 1) It is possible to implement BIM with any standard form of contract and any procurement method. 2) However, certain forms of contract and procurement method are recommended as more suitable to enable the successful adoption of BIM. These are: a) The NEC3 (2005) contract, b) Procurement methods which facilitate early contractor involvements such as designbuild or novated design-build, c) Multi-party, relational procurement methods such as alliances, Integrated Project Delivery or partnering. In essence, BIM does not create any fundamentally new legal ideas. However, its practical implications on the existing legal framework are numerous and complex, and require careful consideration.
