Construction Management and Economics

(

December 2009)

27

, 11571173

Construction Management and Economics

ISSN 0144-6193 print/ISSN 1466-433X online 2009 Taylor & Francis
http://www.informaworld.com
DOI: 10.1080/01446190903222395

Identification of key liability risks of supervision engineers
in China

JIAYUAN WANG, JIAN LIU

*

, ZEGAO LIAO and PEI TANG

College of Civil Engineering, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China

Taylor and Francis

Received 24 December 2008; accepted 30 July 2009

10.1080/01446190903222395

Until the present, the supervision engineers liability risks in China have mostly been analysed by means of a
qualitative approach by which it is difficult to identify the key liability risks of the Chinese supervision
profession. Two questionnaire surveys were conducted to find out the supervision liability risks. The causes of
those risks were analysed by reference to Chinese laws, regulations and questionnaire survey results. The score
of the relative importance was creatively used to quantify the liability risks. Eleven key liability risks with higher
scores of relative importance were identified. The risks have important influences on project quality, safety
production and supervision profession development. The research results provide valuable information not
only to government departments, professional associations, Chinese supervision engineers and supervision
firms, but also to the foreign companies that offer services in China. The quantitative research method can be
employed for other questionnaire surveys such as construction project quality and safety accidents.

Keywords:

Liability risks, risk management, supervision, supervision engineer.

Introduction

In the late 1980s, a supervision system was initially
introduced into hydropower and transportation
projects in order to improve the quality and efficiency
of construction project management in China. The past
20 years have witnessed the success achieved by the
supervision system, which has played an important role
in quality, cost, safety and time management. In 1996,
the supervision system was extended to the entire
construction industry, but it was not made mandatory.
A series of laws and regulations for the construction
supervision system have been legislated and imple-
mented since 1997. These laws and regulations include
the Construction Law issued in 1997, the Contract Law
and the Safety Production Law in 2002, the Regula-
tions on the Quality Management of Construction
Projects in 2000 and the Regulations on Safety Produc-
tion of Construction Projects in 2003 (Standing
Committee, 1997, 2002a, 2002b; State Council, 2000,
2003). The Code of Construction Project Management
was developed and implemented (GB50319-2000) in
2001 (CAEC, 2001). The legal status of the supervision
system has been acknowledged by the above laws and
regulations. The supervision industry has developed
substantially in recent years. Under the Chinese super-
vision system, the supervision firm provides supervision
services during the construction phase according to the
laws, regulations, construction project supervision
contract and other documents. The supervision engi-
neers are the employees of the supervision firm who
carry out the supervision work on project sites accord-
ing to the Chinese laws, regulations, standards and
construction contracts (MOC, 2006a). According to
the

Yearbook of Chinese Construction Industry 2006

, there
are about 6000 supervision firms and over 430 000
supervision engineers in the construction industry
(MOC, 2006b).
The supervision firm conducts the project supervi-
sion management according to (1) construction project
documents approved by the relevant government
departments; (2) relevant laws and regulations; (3) the
construction project supervision contract; and (4) other
project construction contracts in the

Provisions on
Construction Supervision

made by the Ministry of
Construction in 1996 (MOC, 1996). The supervision
work mainly includes quality, cost, safety, time
management and coordination with the client, the

*

Author for correspondence. E-mail: liujian@szu.edu.cn
1158

Wang

et al

.

contractor and other stakeholders involved in the
projects (Zuo and Zillante, 2007). In 2001, the Minis-
try of Construction prescribed the scope of the
construction projects that must be supervised by super-
vision firms. These projects include national construc-
tion projects, large- and medium-scale public utility
projects, large residential developments, construction
projects with loans or aiding funds from foreign govern-
ments or international organizations, infrastructure
projects with total investments of over RMB 30 million
and relating to public interest and safety, and large-
scale public buildings such as schools, cinemas and
stadiums (MOC, 2001). Figure 1 shows the relation-
ship between the supervision firm and other major
stakeholders in the Chinese construction industry.

Figure 1

Relationship between the supervision firm and other main stakeholders in Chinese construction projects

In Japan and the USA, the main stakeholders, known
as the eternal triangle, include the client, the prime
contractor and prime design professional. In China, the
main stakeholders include the client, the prime contrac-
tor, the design professional and the supervision profes-
sional. The roles and responsibilities of Chinese
supervision engineers in China are similar to those of US
and Japanese design professional engineers. In the USA,
particularly when the federal government is involved, the
supervision or administration of construction is placed
with the client or an independent construction manage-
ment firm. Furthermore, many contracts require the
design professionals to perform supervisory and admin-
istrative functions during the construction phase
(Kelleher, 2005). In China, the work of construction
supervision or administration must be carried out by the
supervision firms according to the relevant stipulations
of the Construction Law, and other laws and regulations,
which indicate that the Chinese supervision engineer is
an independent professional. In addition, some govern-
ment authorities also participate in the supervision work,
auditing project quality and safety. The Chinese super-
vision work, which is carried out in accordance with laws
and regulations, is different from its US and Japanese
counterparts, which is carried out mainly according to
market demand. A supervision firm that is independent
of the client according to Chinese laws and regulations
provides its supervision service to the client according
to the construction project supervision contract and the
stipulations of the laws and regulations. Thus, the super-
vision firm and the supervision engineers have to bear
both contractual liabilities and legal liabilities in case of
failure to supervise the projects. Generally, the liabilities
involved in construction processes are similar to those
of the USA, mainly including contract liabilities, tort
liabilities and statutory liabilities (Bartholomew, 2001).
Some liabilities are not stipulated in the consulting
contracts and civil laws in developed countries. For
example, Item 14 of the Regulations on Safety Produc-
tion of Construction Projects stipulates that the super-
vision firm should supervise the project activities
according to the laws, regulations and compulsory tech-
nical standards, and assume the supervision liability of
safety production. This liability does not exist for
consulting engineers in developed countries.
The supervision liability risks are defined as the
uncertainties that result in the supervision engineers fail-
ing to fulfil the obligations stipulated in laws, regulations
and the construction project supervision contract.
These uncertainties are generally measured by their
probability of occurrence and by their influence on qual-
ity, safety and the development of the supervision
profession. Unfortunately, many supervision engineers
and supervision firms do not fully understand the
importance of their liability risks. Ignoring liability risks
in supervision activities may endanger the quality and
safety of construction projects, which in turn hinders the
development of the supervision profession.

Related previous research

Supervision liabilities may be divided into three catego-
ries: administrative liability, criminal liability and civil
liability (Wang, 2000a; Sai and Shao, 2002). Supervision
Figure 1 Relationship between the supervision firm and other main stakeholders in Chinese construction projects
Liability risks

1159
liability may be also divided into quality supervision
liability and safety supervision liability. Quality supervi-
sion liability exists because supervision engineers are
obligated to ensure that the project quality meets the
requirements of the laws and regulations, technical stan-
dards, design documents and the construction project
supervision contract signed with the client. The super-
vision engineer is accountable for any failure of quality
supervision. Safety supervision liability highlights the
supervision engineers responsibility to direct the safety
production of construction projects (Liu, 2004; Xie and
Wang, 2005; Liu and Liu, 2007). In other words, super-
vision engineers are liable for the accidents caused by fail-
ures of safety supervision. From the viewpoint of causes,
the supervision liability risks can be classified into behav-
iour, work skill, technical resources, management,
professional ethics and social responsibility risks (Wang,
2000b). There are uncertainties in these six aspects;
therefore, these factors may result in the liability risks.
In addition, Tian and Yu (2002) noted that the main
causes of supervision liability risks were the improper
behaviour of the client, the contractor, material and
equipment suppliers, governmental supervision depart-
ments, supervision firm and supervision engineers.
The qualitative analyses indicate that the main risks
are caused by unclear status, imperfect laws and regu-
lations, improper market behaviour, and low level of abil-
ity of the supervision engineers (Li, 2004; Tang, 2005;
Xu, 2005). Other sources of liability risks include
improper behaviour of the supervision firm, improper
intervention of the client, and illegal behaviour of the
contractor (Huang, 2005; Sun and Tian, 2005; Wang,
2005). Wang

et al

. (2007) discovered that the typical
professional faults of supervision engineers mainly result
from their improper behaviour and the professional
liabilities relative to the present laws and regulations, and
the supervision contract between the client and the
supervision firm. In a discussion of the status quo of safety
supervision responsibility on a construction project in
Shenzhen, Liu and Liu (2007) identified the problems
associated with existing laws, regulations and standards.
Even though the significance of supervision liabilities
and the supervision liability risks is well recognized,
there is generally a lack of systematic research on how
to quantify these risks. A quantitative approach was
adopted in this research to investigate the main liability
risks of supervision firms and supervision engineers.
The causes of these risks were analysed mainly by
means of the survey results.

Research method

A two stage questionnaire survey approach was
adopted to investigate the key liability risks in the
Chinese supervision profession. The questionnaires
were developed based on our literature review and
preliminary interviews with the experts in this field.
The first stage questionnaire survey was carried out in
Shenzhen, from May 2006 to July 2006, and its aim
was to identify the main liability risk factors of the
supervision profession in China. As one of the devel-
oped cities in China, Shenzhen has a mature supervi-
sion system. Therefore, Shenzhen was selected as the
location of the first stage questionnaire survey. The
first stage survey provided inputs for the second stage
questionnaire survey, which was conducted through-
out China from September 2006 to October 2006 to
investigate the causes of the liability risks.
The first stage questionnaire covered 50 liability risk
factors that were summarized from the literature review
and expert interviews. The probabilities and impacts on
the project quality, safety and the supervision profes-
sion itself were used as evaluation indices. According to
the causes of the supervision liability risks, the risk
factors were divided into four groups, namely risks
related to laws and regulations, supervision firm-related
risks, risks related to the onsite supervision team of the
supervision firm, and risks related to the behaviour of
the supervision engineers. For each factor, each
respondent was asked to evaluate the probability of
each liability and its impact on project quality, safety
and the supervision profession. Three hundred
questionnaires were sent to 80 supervision firms in
Shenzhen and 85 valid responses were received, yield-
ing a response rate of 28.3%.
The second stage questionnaire survey was especially
designed to investigate the risk causes. Two hundred
questionnaires were sent to supervision firms in the
cities of Shanghai, Wuhan and Hangzhou, the prov-
inces of Guangdong and Sichuan, and the autonomous
regions of Guangxi, Tibet and Inner Mongolia. Eighty
valid responses were received, representing a 42.5%
response rate.
In the first stage questionnaire survey, 79% of the
respondents had been involved in supervision work for
over 10 years, and 40% of the respondents had worked
for over 15 years. The respondents were generally well
educated; 72% respondents had degrees higher than
the bachelor degree.
Among the 73 supervision engineers who partici-
pated in the second stage questionnaire, 65% of the
respondents had been working in the supervision
profession for more than five years. Most of the
respondents in the two questionnaire surveys were
experienced supervision engineers with academic qual-
ifications. The educational backgrounds and work
experiences of the respondents were sufficient to
disclose the main risks encountered by supervision
firms and supervision engineers.
1160

Wang

et al

.

First stage questionnaire survey results

In order to quantify the liability risks, the probabilities
were set as 1, 0.5, 0.2 and 0 for high, middle, low levels
and none. The impacts of the risks on project quality,
safety and the supervision profession are assumed to be
equal to 1, 0.5 and 0.2 for severe, medium and low
degrees respectively. The relative importance of each
liability risk was measured by the probability multiplied
by its effects. The score of the relative importance for
each risk can be attained by the following equations:
where

RS

i

is the score of the relative importance for risk
factor

i

, which is equal to the average of the values of
relative importance given by all the respondents,

S

i
j

is
the value of relative importance of risk factor

i

given by
respondent

j

,

i
j

is the probability of risk factor

i

given
by respondent

j

,

i
j

is the effect or impact of risk factor

i

given by respondent

j

.
As regards the magnitude of risk significance, the
score of 0.25 can be regarded as high, which is obtained
by multiplying the middle probability, 0.5, and middle
level of the effect, 0.5 (Zou

et al

., 2009). In other
words, the probabilities and effects of these main risks
on the project quality, safety and supervision profession
were mid-range or higher. Table 1 shows the risk
factors in regard to project quality, safety and supervi-
sion profession with the top 10 higher scores of relative
importance. It should be noted that each factor affects
RS
S
n
i
j
i
j
n
=
=

1
( ) 1
S
j
i
j
i
j
i
= ( ) 2

Table 1

Main risk factors and scores of relative importance for project quality, safety and supervision profession
Item Score
1. Risks related to project quality
Not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government authorities 0.429
Exceedingly low supervision fee stipulated by relevant government department 0.379
Not reporting clients illegal activities to the government authorities 0.338
Inadequate resources of project supervision firms 0.314
Staff instability of project supervision firms 0.303
Failure of government departments during the execution of laws and regulations 0.288
Unclear scope of quality liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.285
Unclear scope of safety liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.283
Insufficient qualification and education of supervision engineers 0.280
Limited capacity of chief supervision engineer 0.272
2. Risks related to project safe production
Unclear scope of safety liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.472
Not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government authorities 0.447
Not reporting clients illegal activities to the government authorities 0.341
Exceedingly low supervision fee stipulated by relevant government department 0.333
Failure of government departments during the execution of laws and regulations 0.321
Unclear scope of quality liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.310
Inadequate resources of project supervision firms 0.303
Inaccurate definition of the supervision professions identity in current laws and regulations 0.302
Staff instability of project supervision firms 0.276
Limited capacity of chief supervision engineer 0.260
3. Risks related to supervision profession
Unclear scope of safety liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.525
Exceedingly low supervision fee stipulated by relevant government department 0.459
Not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government authorities 0.445
Failure of government departments during the execution of laws and regulations 0.433
Inaccurate definition of the supervision professions identity in current laws and regulations 0.402
Unclear scope of quality liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.388
Not reporting clients illegal activities to the government authorities 0.371
Staff instability of project supervision firms 0.344
Inadequate resources of project supervision firms 0.337
Insufficient qualification and education of supervision engineers 0.303
Liability risks

1161
project quality, safety and the supervision profession
differently. For example, the factor that allows unqual-
ified staff to work by using the name of supervision
engineers has an important effect on the supervision
profession, and the score of relative importance is
0.292; however, it has less significant effects on project
quality and safety, which have scores of relative impor-
tance of 0.203 and 0.194, respectively. Therefore, the
risks with scores of relative importance of over 0.25 for
all three aspects are defined as main risks in principle.
The main risks are:
(1) Inaccurate definition of the supervision profes-
sions identity in current laws and regulations
(F01).
(2) Unclear scope of quality liability of supervision
profession in current laws and regulations
(F02).
(3) Unclear scope of safety liability of supervision
profession in current laws and regulations (F03).
(4) Exceedingly low supervision fee stipulated by
relevant government department (F04).
(5) Failure of government departments during the
execution of laws and regulations (F05).
(6) Inadequate resources of project supervision
firms (F06).
(7) Staff instability of project supervision firms
(F07).
(8) Not reporting illegal subcontracting to the
government authorities (F08).
(9) Not reporting clients illegal activities to the
government authorities (F09).
(10) Limited capacity of chief supervision engineer
(F10).
(11) Insufficient qualification and education of
supervision engineers (F11).
The scores of relative importance of these factors
except F10 are greater than 0.25 for project quality and
safety and for the supervision profession. For F10, the
score of relative importance is 0.26 for project safety,
while the scores of relative importance are 0.202 and
0.232 for project quality and the supervision profes-
sion. This factor is selected as a main factor in view of
the important influence of the chief supervision
engineer on supervision work.
As shown in Figure 2, the scores of relative impor-
tance of the 11 main risks vary from 0.251 to 0.525
while most of them were between 0.3 and 0.4. It is
imperative to undertake a further analysis on the main
risks.

Figure 2

Scores of relative importance of main risks

Second stage questionnaire survey results

According to the results of the second stage question-
naire survey, the causes of the supervision liability risks
could be classified into three groups: (1) defects of laws
and regulations; (2) ineffective administration of
government authorities; and (3) improper behaviour of
the supervision profession (see Tables 2, 3 and 4).
Generally, laws and regulations determine supervi-
sion responsibilities. The defects of the legal environ-
ment will increase the liability supervision risks. Table
2 shows that more than half of all respondents are unsat-
isfied with the current laws and regulations. The major
issues associated with the current laws and regulations
are as described below.

Figure 2

Scores of relative importance of main risks
1162

Wang

et al

.

Unclear legal status of supervision firms in the
current law and regulation system

The original purpose of implementing the construc-
tion supervision system in China was to ensure that
project supervision was carried out throughout the
whole project life cycle. Although there have been
some successful experiences, most of the supervision
work is currently limited to construction quality
control, time management, and safety production
control during the construction process (Liu

et al

.,
2008). This phenomenon is mainly due to the fact
that the laws and regulations do not clearly stipulate
the status of the supervision profession. The supervi-
sion system was introduced during the transition
period of China from a planned economy to a market
economy. At that time, quality control, as the basic
goal of the supervision system, was suitable for devel-
opment in the construction industry. As a result of
these goals, the Construction Law (1997) stipulated
the supervision work only during the construction
phase. The law restricted development of the supervi-
sion profession into a higher level where services could
be provided at different stages of a project. Approxi-
mately 79% of the respondents held the opinion that
the supervision work was the supervision during the
construction phase; and more than 48% of the respon-
dents thought the supervision work was quality super-
vision. In other words, supervision engineers are
becoming the quality inspectors of the contractor.

Unclear scope of quality liability of supervision
profession in current laws and regulations

The laws and regulations in China stipulate that one of
the main liabilities of supervision firms and supervision
engineers is to carry out quality control and supervision
of construction projects. The survey results in Table 2
show that approximately 50% of the respondents think
that the stipulations on quality liability are reasonable.
Approximately 50% of the respondents consider the
scope of the quality liability of supervision firms to be
clear. On the other hand, around 50% of respondents
think that the scope of the quality liability of supervi-
sion firms is unclear. This indicates that the persons
who are engaged in the supervision profession have
different opinions on the scope of the quality liability of
supervision firms. Some stipulations on quality super-
vision liability are not well defined; they affect the
understanding of the scope of the quality liability of
supervision firms, and may increase supervision liability
risk. The supervision engineers are often used as scape-
goats when severe quality problems occur.

Unclear scope of safety liability of supervision
profession in current laws and regulations

Although the Regulations on Safety Production of
Construction Projects have existed for five years, the
officers and engineers in the construction industry are
still quite confused about safety supervision liability.
Table 2 shows that only 23.6% of the respondents agree
that the scope of the supervision safety liability is clear.
In addition, 38.8% of the respondents believe that the
safety liability is too onerous for the supervision engi-
neers. This indicates that the government authorities
may have disproportionately increased the safety liabil-
ity of the supervision firms and supervision engineers.
As a result, in most safety accidents, the supervision
firms and engineers are investigated in the first instance.
Some contractors treat the project supervision organi-
zation as their own safety inspectors by transferring
their safety production liabilities to the supervision
engineers. It should be noted that overemphasizing the

Table 2

Questionnaire survey results on the laws and regulations
1 Please rate your satisfaction with current laws and regulations on the supervision system.
Answer Very unsatisfied (12.9%), unsatisfied (41.2%), satisfied (44.7%), and very satisfied (1.2%)
2 What is the job of the supervision profession? (Multi-choice)
Answer Supervision during construction phase (78.8%), quality supervision (48.2%), and overall project management
(18.8%)
3 What do you think of the quality liability of the supervision firms stipulated in current laws and regulations?
Answer Too little liability (21.2%), reasonable (58.8%), and too much liability (20.0%)
4 What do you think of the safety liability of the supervision firms stipulated in current laws and regulations?
Answer Too little liability (20.0%), reasonable (41.2%), and too much liability (38.8%)
5 How clear is the scope of the supervision quality liability stipulated in current laws and regulations?
Answer Very unclear (1.2%), unclear (48.2%), slightly clear (20.0%), clear (27.1%), and very clear (3.5%)
6 How clear is the scope of the supervision safety liability stipulated in current laws and regulations?
Answer Very unclear (5.9%), unclear (35.3%), slightly clear (35.3%), clear (21.2%), and very clear (2.4%)
Liability risks

1163
safety liability of the supervision engineers would
weaken the contractors own sense of accountability as
the principal party responsible for production safety,
which is clearly stipulated in the Construction Law. If
the contractor relies too heavily on the supervision engi-
neers for safe production, it will reduce its own safety
production inputs and management. This phenomenon
endangers the safety of production and extends the
liability risks of the supervision engineers.
As shown in Table 3, nearly one-third of the respon-
dents believe the administration of the government
authorities on supervision work is far from satisfactory.
Therefore it is necessary to improve governmental
administration work.
Table 4 indicates that the following factors contrib-
ute towards the improper behaviour of the supervision
professionals.

Not fulfilling administrative obligations of the
supervision engineers

One example of the improper behaviour of supervision
engineers is the failure of supervision engineers to report
the illegal subcontracting activities of the contractor and
the client to government authorities. The survey results
show that illegal subcontracting activities which may
lead to bad construction quality and safety accidents are
quite common in the construction market. For example,
the contractor might illegally subcontract all or part of
the work to an unqualified construction company at a
price that is much lower than the contracted price. This
is strictly forbidden by Chinese law because this kind of
subcontracting can compromise the project in quality
and safety. Nevertheless, some contractors still break
the laws to pursue more profits. In the study, 44.16%
of the respondents felt that those illegal subcontracting
activities happened frequently, and 65.99% of the
respondents believed that the supervision engineers did
not report such illegal activities to the government
authorities. Supervision engineers have a poor attitude
regarding these illegal subcontracting practices and the
clients illegal activities. Unfortunately the clients illegal
activities are quite common in the construction process.
This kind of improper behaviour often endangers the
projects quality and safety. It was noted that 79.22%
of the respondents blamed the relationship between the
supervision firm and the client for the failure of super-
vision firms to fulfil their administrative obligations.
Many supervision engineers believed that reporting the
clients illegal activities to the government authorities
would offend the client, which in turn would reduce the
clients support for future work being undertaken by
that supervision firm. This reflects the common
phenomenon of psychological frustration among the
supervision professionals in China. While the Chinese
laws and regulations clearly stipulate that the supervi-
sion engineers should report illegal activities of the client
or the contractor to government authorities, many
supervision engineers choose to ignore these issues. This
is because the supervision engineers work on the project
site according to the supervision contract which is
signed by the client and the supervision firm. This puts
the supervision engineers in a difficult situation: if the
supervision engineers choose to report the illegal activ-
ities to the government authorities, the relationship
between the supervision firm and the client will be
damaged. The survey results show that nearly half of the
respondents agree that the illegal activities have a signif-
icant impact on the project quality, safety production
and development of the supervision profession.

Insufficient input of project supervision
organization

The supervision firms desperately need engineers with
skills and knowledge of management, laws and
economics so that the supervision firms can provide
extensive quality supervision services during the
construction phase. It was noted that 47.5% of the
respondents felt that the supervision firms did not have
sufficient financial capacity to undertake the supervi-
sion work. Fierce competition and improper behaviour
among the supervision firms have resulted in a decrease
in income for the supervision firms due to exceedingly
low supervision fees. To counteract the losses resulting
from the intense competition, supervision firms are
forced to reduce the committed resources after the
contract is awarded. Reducing the resources, such as
supervision engineers and equipment, is associated
with lower service quality. Over 46% of the respon-
dents expressed concern that the supervision firms did
not have sufficient supervision engineers in reserve.
The standard rate of the supervision fee was established
by the government 15 years ago and has not been
revised in line with economic development. As a result,
supervision firms find it difficult to achieve the level of

Table 3

Questionnaire survey results on governmental administration ability
1 Please rate your satisfaction with the governmental administration to the supervision work.
Answer Very unsatisfied (5.9%), unsatisfied (24.7%), satisfied (29.4%), and very satisfied (40.0%)
2 How do you evaluate the effect of the governmental administration on the supervision work?
Answer Very small (7.1%), slightly small (45.9%), slightly large (40.0%), large (4.7%), and very large (2.4%)
1164

Wang

et al

.

profits necessary to have specialists in reserve. The
client signs construction project supervision contracts
with supervision firms to avoid breaking laws, rather
than to improve the management of projects. Some
clients indicate expressly or by implication that super-
vision firms can reduce their committed resources after
the project commences.

Staff instability of project supervision firms

To provide a high quality service for the client, the
supervision personnel should keep project changes to a
minimum. Over 82% of the respondents believed that
the low supervision fee and the low salary of supervi-
sion engineers were responsible for the staff instability
seen in project supervision firms. Over 63% of the
respondents agreed that improper human resources
management and a shortage of engineers in reserve led
to staff instability. The increase of supervision liability
risks in recent years has also depressed the supervision
engineers enthusiasm to work in the supervision indus-
try. Approximately 22% of the respondents believed
that the defects of the present laws and regulations are
one of the reasons behind staff shortages and increasing
supervision liability risks. The government agencies
should pay more attention to this phenomenon, as staff
instability could seriously damage development of the
supervision profession.

Low competency of supervision engineers

The service quality of supervision work relies on the
capacity of the supervision engineers, while the work
performance of the project supervision organization is
related to the ability of the supervision engineers.
Survey results show that 67.06% of the respondents
agree that the competence of the supervision engi-
neers is low with 54.12% of the respondents stating
that the competence of the supervision engineers is
slightly lower than that of other engineers, and
12.94% of the respondents think the competence of
the supervision engineers is lower than the manage-
ment staff of the contractor. The low level of compe-
tence, including the lack of practical experience and
management knowledge, makes it difficult for super-
vision engineers to carry out organizational and coor-
dination work. Both the poor market environment
and inadequate attraction of talent present challenges
to the sustainable development of the supervision
profession in China.

Table 4

Questionnaire survey results on supervision profession
1 What do you think is the occurrence rate of the illegal subcontracting?
Answer Very high (44.16%), high (28.57%), low (27.27%), and very low (0.0%).
2 How high is the probability that the supervision firm does not report illegal subcontracting of the contractor and
illegal activities of the client to the government authorities?
Answer Very high (37.65%), high (28.24%), low (24.71%), and very low (9.40%).
3 What are the reasons why the supervision firm does not report the clients and contractors illegal activities to the
government authorities? (Multi-choice)
Answer Lacking of liability (28.57%), collusion with the Contractor (27.27%), insufficient administration by the government
authorities (54.55%), considering the interests with the client (79.22%), and thanking the supervision work just for
the client (45.45%).
4 How great are the effects of the supervision firm not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government authorities
on the project quality, safety production and supervision firm?
Answer On project quality: Very large (44.71%), large (40.00%), small (8.24%), and very small (7.06%).
On safety production: Very large (48.24%), large (28.24%), small (12.94%), and No (10.59%).
On construction supervision firm: Very large (50.59%), large (31.76%), small (10.59%), and very small (7.06%).
5 How great is the probability of inadequate input of the project supervision organization?
Answer Very large (15.29%), large (48.24%), small (17.65%), and very small (18.82%).
6 What are the reasons for the staff instability of the project supervision organization? (Multi-choice)
Answer Bad relationship with other engineers on project site (17.65%), change required by the client (27.06%), change
required by the supervision firm (23.53%), poor human resources management system (63.53%), low supervision fee
(82.35%), insufficient money (47.5%), insufficient engineers (46.25%), and increase of liability risks in supervision
profession (22.35%).
7 Please evaluate the competence of the supervision engineers as compared to the contractors engineers, cost
engineers, consulting engineers, and designers.
Answer Lower than the contractors engineers (12.94%), slightly lower than other engineers (54.12%), the same as other
engineers (29.41%), and higher than other engineers (3.53%).
Liability risks

1165

Conclusions

The previous studies on the supervision engineers
liability risks in China were mostly carried out by
means of a qualitative approach. The previous
researches did not identify the key liability risks that
exist in the Chinese supervision profession, and they
did not make clear which risks had important influence
on development of the supervision profession.
Two questionnaire surveys were conducted to find
out the liability risk factors of the Chinese supervision
profession. A quantitative approach, i.e. score of the
relative importance, was adopted in this research to
analyse the main supervision liability risks. Eleven
liability risks with higher scores of relative importance
were set as the key liability risks that have a major influ-
ence on project quality, safe production and supervi-
sion development.
The causes of the key liability risks were analysed on
the basis of the questionnaire survey results. The causes
of key liability risks were unclear stipulations of the
laws and regulations, improper fulfilment of the laws
and regulations by the government authorities, and
improper behaviour of supervision firms and supervi-
sion engineers. This research not only provides a better
understanding of the main liability risks, but also
presents valuable clues to prevent and control the
supervision liability risks effectively.
The supervision firms and supervision engineers
should pay attention to these key liability risks and the
causes to improve the supervision work. However, it
should be noted that there may be other key liability
risks which are not identified in the two questionnaire
surveys. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the ques-
tionnaires quality and scope in future study. Future
research would be useful to investigate the reasons for
improper behaviour of the supervision engineers and a
proper supervision fee mechanism that balances the
obligations, responsibilities and interests of all stake-
holders.

References

Bartholomew, S.H. (2001)

Construction Contracting: Business
and Legal Principles,

2nd edn, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle
River, New Jersey.
CAEC (China Association of Engineering Consultants)
(2001)

The Code of Construction Project Management
(GB50319-2000),

China Architecture & Building Press,
Beijing [in Chinese].
Huang, Z.C. (2005) Identication and protection of risks of
construction supervision companies.

China Engineering
Consulting,

5

, 267 [in Chinese].
Kelleher, Thomas, J. Jr. (ed.) (2005)

Smith, Currie &
Hancocks Common Sense Construction Law: A Practical
Guide for the Construction Professional,

3rd edn, John Wiley
& Sons, New York.
Liu, F. (2004) Analyses of supervision engineers quality
liabilities.

Shanxi Construction,

30

, 867 [in Chinese].
Liu, J. and Liu, X. (2007) Study on safety supervision liabil-
ity of construction project in Shenzhen. Paper presented
at the 12th International Research Symposium on the
Advancement of Construction Management and Real
Estate, Sydney, Australia, 813 August.
Liu, J., Zillante, G., Wang, J.Y. and Zuo, J. (2008) Supervi-
sion engineer versus building surveyorthe way forward,
securing high performance through cultural awareness
and dispute avoidance. Paper presented at the CIB W112
International Conference, Tongji University, Shanghai,
2123 November.
Li, L.R. (2004) Thoughts on Chinese construction supervi-
sion system.

Journal of Kunming Metallurgy College,

20

(4),
758 [in Chinese].
MOC (Ministry of Construction) (1996)

Provisions on
Construction Supervision,

available at http://www.fsou.com/
html/text/adm/3187671/318767163.html [in Chinese].
MOC (2001)

Provisions on the Project Scope and Scale of
Construction Supervision,

available at http://www.mohurd.
gov.cn/zcfg/jsbgz/200611/t20061101_159087.html
(accessed 26 June 2009) [in Chinese].
MOC (2006a)

The Management Regulation of the Registered
Supervision Engineer,

available http://www.cin.gov.cn/law/
depart/20060221302.htm [in Chinese].
MOC (2006b)

Yearbook of Chinese Construction Industry
2006,

China Building Industry Yearbook Press, Beijing [in
Chinese].
Sai, Y.X. and Shao, Y.J. (2002) Analyses of legal responsibility
of construction supervision.

Mine Construction Technology,

12

, 2932 [in Chinese].
Standing Committee (Standing Committee of the National
Peoples Congress) (1997)

The Construction Law of the
Peoples Republic of China

, China Architecture & Building
Press, Beijing [in Chinese].
Standing Committee (2002a)

The Contract Law of the
Peoples Republic of China,

Law Press China, Beijing [in
Chinese].
Standing Committee (2002b)

The Safe production Law of the
Peoples Republic of China

, available at http://www.gov.cn/
banshi/2005-08/05/content_20700.htm (accessed 26 June
2009) [in Chinese].
State Council (2000)

The Regulations on the Quality Manage-
ment of Construction Projects

, China Architecture & Building
Press, Beijing [in Chinese].
State Council (2003)

The Regulations on Safe Production of
Construction Projects

, China Architecture & Building Press,
Beijing [in Chinese].
Sun, X.L. and Tian, L.K. (2005) Discussion on application
of risk management to engineering supervision projects.

Coastal Enterprises and Science,

7

, 978 [in Chinese].
Tang, C.M. (2005) Discussion on problems and solutions of
supervision industry.

Journal of Hebei Northern University
(Natural Science),

21

(3), 6870 [in Chinese].
Tian, J.F. and Yu, Y. (2002) Risk management of supervision
corporation.

Journal of Hebei Polytechnic University (Social
Science),

24

, 7884 [in Chinese].
1166

Wang

et al

.

Wang, G. (2005) Risk analyses of supervision corporations
and engineers.

Guangxi Urban Construction,

11

, 646 [in
Chinese].
Wang, J.Y. (2000a) Jurisprudential analyses of construction
supervisions liabilities.

Project Management,

2

, 415 [in
Chinese].
Wang, J.Y. (2000b) Analyses of liability risks of construction
supervision.

Project Management,

6,

4851 [in Chinese].
Wang, J.Y., Liu, J. and Huang, L.Y. (2007) Study on the
professional liability insurance system of the supervision
engineer in China.

Construction Management and Economics,

25

(7), 80110.
Xie, Y.Q. and Wang, H.D. (2005) How to assume supervision
liabilities of safe production.

Project Management,

5

, 3941.
Xu, W. (2005) Suggestions on improving Chinese construc-
tion supervision system.

China Science and Technology
Information,

8

, 612.
Zuo, J. and Zillante, G. (2007) Building surveying in China
lessons learned from Australia. Paper presented at the 2007
International Transitions Conference, Australian Institute
of Building Surveyors, Adelaide, Australia, 5 March.
Zou, P.X.W., Zhang, G. and Wang, J.Y. (2009) Understand-
ing the key risks in construction projects in China.

International Journal of Project Management,

25

(6) (in press).
Liability risks

1167

Appendix 1

Questionnaire on the Chinese supervision liability risks (for first stage)

(Tick

on the choice you consider best)
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for helping us in this survey! The questionnaire is designed and made by the Construction Supervision
Institute of Shenzhen University. The purpose of the survey is to study the risks of the Chinese supervision profes-
sion and relevant issues. If necessary, you could obtain the survey results from the Institute. All private information
will be protected, and not be released to the public.

1. General information
Age

[ s quar e]

Younger than 30

[ s quar e]

3040

[ s quar e]

4050

5060

[ s quar e]

Older than 60

Education background

[ s quar e]

Graduate from three year college

[ s quar e]

Bachelor

[ s quar e]

Master [ s quar e] PhD
Institution
[ s quar e] Governmental Department [ s quar e] Developer [ s quar e] Design institute [ s quar e] Contractor [ s quar e] Supervision firm [ s quar e] Other
Work period in project management
[ s quar e] Less than 5 years [ s quar e] 510 years [ s quar e] Over 15 years
Professional qualifications
[ s quar e] Engineer [ s quar e] Senior Engineer [ s quar e] Senior Engineer at professor level [ s quar e] Supervision engineer
Cost engineer [ s quar e] Other
Project type involved in
[ s quar e] Municipal project [ s quar e] Housing building [ s quar e] Public building [ s quar e] Others
2. Risk factors (H = High; M = Middle; L = Low; S = Severe; Ls = Less)
Risk factors Probability Impact
Project
quality
Safety Supervision
profession
H M Ls No S M L S M Ls S M Ls
Risks related to laws and regulations
1. Inaccurate definition of the supervision professions
identity in current laws and regulations
2. Unclear scope of quality liability of supervision profession
in current laws and regulations
3. Unclear scope of safety liability of supervision profession
in current laws and regulations
4. Failure of government departments during the execution
of laws and regulations
5. Exceedingly low supervision fee stipulated by relevant
government department
1168 Wang et al.
Appendix 1 (Continued)
Risk factors Probability Impact
Project
quality
Safety Supervision
profession
H M Ls No S M L S M Ls S M Ls
Risks related to supervision firm
6. Doing supervision work without certificates
7. Carrying out project supervision beyond the qualification level
8. Carrying out project supervision with qualification obtained by
deception
9. Allow unqualified staff to work by using the name of supervision
engineers
10. Illegally subcontracting supervision work
11. Having common interests with the contractor, construction
material suppliers, construction structure suppliers and
construction equipment suppliers
12. Bad organizational management of supervision firm
Risks related to project supervision organization
13. Inadequate resources of project supervision firms
14. Inadequate professional persons in project supervision
organization
15. Staff instability of project supervision firms
16. Limited capacity of chief supervision engineer
17. Insufficient qualification and education of supervision engineers
Risks related to improper behaviour of supervision profession
18. Not reporting clients illegal activities to the government
authorities
19. Supervision work beyond the scope in the supervision contract
20. Not checking items that should be checked
21. Suggestions not meeting the requirements
22. Not requesting the contractor to do items over again that should
be reworked
23. Failing to supervise the key positions and processes on site
24. Issuing wrong directions
25. Low project quality by collusion and fraud with the client
26. Low project quality by collusion and fraud with contractor
27. Not checking if construction management schedule and special
safety plans meet the provisions of mandatory standards
28. Not requesting the contractor to do items that should be rectified
29. Not requesting the contractor to stop construction and not
reporting it to the client when finding severe potential safety
problems
30. Not reporting the government authorities when the contractor
does not stop construction and do items that should be rectified
31. Not participating in the design review conference
32. Not presiding over the regular site meetings that are required
33. Not checking and confirming the survey results during
construction process
34. Not examining construction materials, parts and equipment
35. Not requesting the contractor in time to rectify items that may
cause quality problems
Liability risks 1169
Appendix 1 (Continued)
Risk factors Probability Impact
Project
quality
Safety Supervision
profession
H M Ls No S M L S M Ls S M Ls
36. Not tracking and checking the rectification results of quality
problems
37. Not signing the recognition of quality inspections
38. Not collecting and sorting relevant construction and supervision
documents
39. Not censoring the qualifications of subcontractors
40. Not checking quantities in site
41. Not settling the project variation
42. Approving ineligible construction projects, building materials,
parts, construction machinery and equipment as eligible
43. Not requiring construction to be stopped in time when finding the
contract construction specifications are not according to the
engineering design drawings and construction technical standards
44. Releasing confidential information about the project and contracts
without authorization
45. Slandering, traducing or denigrating the reputation of client or
contractor
46. Unfairly, unjustly or unevenly addressing the project issues, and
lacking credibility
47. Not handing over the properties to the client when supervision
work is completed or suspended
48. Lending their name to allow unqualified other companies to carry
out supervision work
49. Not reporting illegal subcontracting to government authorities
50. Failing to fulfil the warranty supervision liability
1170 Wang et al.
Appendix 2
Questionnaire on the Chinese supervision liability risks (for second stage)
(Tick on the choice you consider best)
1. The responder information
[Same as the one in first stage questionnaire]
2. Questions
(1) Please rate your satisfaction with current laws and regulations on the supervision system.
[ s quar e] Very unsatisfied [ s quar e] Unsatisfied [ s quar e] Satisfied [ s quar e] Very satisfied
(2) Do you think the scope of the supervision liabilities stipulated in current laws and regulations is clear?
[ s quar e] Very unclear [ s quar e] Unclear [ s quar e] Slightly clear [ s quar e] Clear [ s quar e] Very clear
(3) Do you think the laws and regulations are effective for carrying out the supervision or not?
[ s quar e] Very ineffective [ s quar e] Ineffective [ s quar e] Slightly effective [ s quar e] Effective [ s quar e] Very effective
(4) What is the job of the supervision profession?
(Multi-choice)
[ s quar e] Supervision during construction phase [ s quar e] Quality supervision [ s quar e] Overall project management
(5) How do you view ownership of current supervision work?
[ s quar e] Work for the client [ s quar e] Work as quality examination team on construction site [ s quar e] Work as an independent
party
(6) What do you think of the quality liability of the supervision firms stipulated in current laws and regulations?
[ s quar e] Too little liability [ s quar e] Reasonable [ s quar e] Too much liability
(7) How clear is the scope of the supervision quality liability stipulated in current laws and regulations?
[ s quar e] Very unclear [ s quar e] Unclear [ s quar e] Slightly clear [ s quar e] Clear [ s quar e] Very clear
(8) What do you think of the safety liability of the supervision firms stipulated in current laws and regulations?
[ s quar e] Too little liability [ s quar e] Reasonable [ s quar e] Too much liability
(9) How clear is the scope of the supervision safety liability stipulated in current laws and regulations?
[ s quar e] Very unclear [ s quar e] Unclear [ s quar e] Slightly clear [ s quar e] Clear [ s quar e] Very clear
(10) Please rate your satisfaction with the governmental administration of the supervision work.
[ s quar e] Very unsatisfied [ s quar e] Unsatisfied [ s quar e] Satisfied [ s quar e] Very satisfied
(11) How do you evaluate the effect of the governmental administration on the supervision work?
[ s quar e] Very small [ s quar e] Slightly small [ s quar e] Slightly large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] very Large
(12) What do you think is the occurrence rate of the illegal subcontracting?
[ s quar e] Very high [ s quar e] High [ s quar e] Low [ s quar e] very Low
(13) How high is the probability that the supervision firm does not report illegal subcontracting of the contractor
and illegal activities of the client to the government authorities?
[ s quar e] Very high [ s quar e] High [ s quar e] Low [ s quar e] Very low
(14) How great are the effects of the supervision firm not reporting illegal subcontract to the government authorities
on the project quality?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
Liability risks 1171
(15) How great are the effects of the supervision firm not reporting illegal subcontract to the government authorities
on the safety production?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
(16) How great are the effects of the supervision firm not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government
authorities on the construction supervision firm?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
(17) How you do rate the probability of illegal activities of the client?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
(18) How high is the probability that the supervision firm does not report illegal subcontracting of the contractor
and illegal activities of the client to the government authorities?
[ s quar e] Very high [ s quar e] High [ s quar e] Low [ s quar e] Very low
(19) How great are the effects of the supervision firm not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government
authorities on the project quality?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
(20) How great are the effects of the supervision firm not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government
authorities on the safety production?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
(21) How great are the effects of the supervision firm not reporting illegal subcontracting to the government
authorities on the supervision firm?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
(22) What are the reasons why the supervision firm does not report the clients and contractors illegal activities
to the government authorities?
(Multi-choice)
[ s quar e] Lacking of liability [ s quar e] Collusion with the contractor [ s quar e] Insufficient administration by the government
authorities [ s quar e] Considering the interests of the client [ s quar e] Thinking the supervision work just for the client
(23) How great is the probability of inadequate input of the project supervision organization?
[ s quar e] Very large [ s quar e] Large [ s quar e] Small [ s quar e] Very small
(24) What are the reasons why inadequate input of the supervision firm to project supervision organization
happens?
(Multi-choice)
[ s quar e] Lack of money [ s quar e] Lack of human resources [ s quar e] Requirements of the client [ s quar e] Less attention paid by the
supervision firm [ s quar e] Insufficient engineers
(25) What are the reasons for the staff instability of the project supervision organization?
(Multi-choice)
[ s quar e] Bad relationship with other engineers on project site [ s quar e] Change required by the client [ s quar e] Change
required by the supervision firm [ s quar e] Poor human resources management system [ s quar e] Low supervision
fee [ s quar e] Insufficient money [ s quar e] Increase of liability risks in supervision profession [ s quar e] Insufficient engineers
(26) Please evaluate the competence of the supervision engineers as compared to the contractors engineers, cost
engineers, consulting engineers and designers.
[ s quar e] Lower than the contractors engineers [ s quar e] Slightly lower than other engineers [ s quar e] Same as other
engineers [ s quar e] Higher than other engineers
1172 Wang et al.
Appendix 3
Scores of relative importance for project quality, safety and supervision profession
Risk factors Scores of relative importance
Quality Safety Supervision
profession
Risks related to laws and regulations
1. Inaccurate definition of the supervision professions identity in current laws and regulations 0.267 0.302 0.402
2. Unclear scope of quality liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.285 0.310 0.388
3. Unclear scope of safety liability of supervision profession in current laws and regulations 0.283 0.472 0.525
4. Failure of government departments during the execution of laws and regulations 0.288 0.321 0.433
5. Exceedingly low supervision fee stipulated by relevant government department 0.379 0.333 0.459
Risks related to supervision firm
6. Doing supervision work without certificates 0.139 0.130 0.150
7. Carrying out project supervision beyond the qualification level 0.140 0.144 0.137
8. Carrying out project supervision with qualification obtained by deception 0.162 0.159 0.178
9. Allow unqualified staff to work by using the name of supervision engineers 0.203 0.194 0.292
10. Illegally subcontracting supervision work 0.209 0.223 0.237
11. Having common interests with the contractor, construction material suppliers, construction
structure suppliers and construction equipment suppliers
0.161 0.125 0.157
12. Bad organizational management of supervision firm 0.235 0.220 0.273
Risks related to project supervision organization
13. Inadequate resources of project supervision firms 0.314 0.303 0.337
14. Inadequate professional persons in project supervision organization 0.286 0.208 0.251
15. Staff instability of project supervision firms 0.303 0.276 0.344
16. Limited capacity of chief supervision engineer 0.202 0.260 0.232
17. Insufficient qualification and education of supervision engineers 0.280 0.251 0.303
Risks related to improper behaviour of supervision profession
18. Not reporting clients illegal activities to the government authorities 0.338 0.341 0.371
19. Supervision work beyond the scope in the supervision contract 0.099 0.109 0.120
20. Not checking items that should be checked 0.176 0.163 0.173
21. Suggestions not meeting the requirements 0.152 0.144 0.180
22. Not requesting the contractor to do items over again that should be reworked 0.150 0.120 0.144
23. Failing to supervise the key positions and processes on site 0.221 0.182 0.178
24. Issuing wrong directions 0.109 0.105 0.123
25 .Low project quality by collusion and fraud with the client 0.106 0.094 0.100
26. Low project quality by collusion and fraud with contractor 0.118 0.109 0.116
27. Not checking if construction management schedule and special safety plans meet the
provisions of mandatory standards
0.181 0.187 0.177
28. Not requesting the contractor to do items that should be rectified 0.127 0.145 0.148
29. Not requesting the contractor to stop construction and not reporting it to the client when
finding severe potential safety problems
0.135 0.185 0.180
30. Not reporting the government authorities when the contractor does not stop construction
and do items that should be rectified
0.217 0.252 0.258
31. Not participating in the design review conference 0.063 0.052 0.063
32. Not presiding over the regular site meetings that are required 0.077 0.079 0.074
33. Not checking and confirming the survey results during construction process 0.133 0.080 0.124
34. Not examining construction materials, parts and equipment 0.139 0.093 0.124
35. Not requesting the contractor in time to rectify items that may cause quality problems. 0.144 0.099 0.134
36. Not tracking and checking the rectification results of quality problems 0.161 0.111 0.129
Liability risks 1173
Appendix 3 (Continued)
Risk factors Scores of relative importance
Quality Safety Supervision
profession
37. Not signing the recognition of quality inspections 0.088 0.060 0.078
38. Not collecting and sorting relevant construction and supervision documents 0.085 0.070 0.107
39. Not censoring the qualifications of subcontractors 0.145 0.117 0.150
40. Not checking quantities in site 0.094 0.076 0.110
41. Not settling the project variation 0.120 0.093 0.114
42. Approving ineligible construction projects, building materials, parts, construction machinery
and equipment as eligible
0.127 0.118 0.121
43. Not requiring construction to be stopped in time when finding the contract construction
specifications are not according to the engineering design drawings and construction
0.132 0.112 0.129
44. Releasing confidential information about the project and contracts without authorization 0.059 0.052 0.092
45. Slandering, traducing or denigrating the reputation of client or contractor 0.030 0.033 0.073
46. Unfairly, unjustly or unevenly addressing the project issues, and lacking credibility 0.090 0.086 0.126
47. Not handing over the properties to the client when supervision work is completed or
suspended
0.028 0.028 0.049
48. Lending their name to allow unqualified other companies to carry out supervision work 0.204 0.151 0.258
49. Not reporting illegal subcontracting to government authorities 0.429 0.447 0.445
50. Failing to fulfil the warranty supervision liability 0.132 0.116 0.158
Copyright of Construction Management & Economics is the property of Routledge and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.