International Federation of Consulting Engineers

Mm

... than, say, a FIDIC or a NZS.

They don't tend to be heavily amended by special conditions.

People really lean into and believe in the philosophy of the contract and the model, which tends to be more collaborative.

Mm.

Dispute avoidance board.

FIDIC has a similar concept, which is a collection of senior construction professionals who are engaged right from the start of project inception.

They remain involved throughout the project.

So it essentially remains this one contract with no optionality when the market is demanding a suite of options.

And so this is where I think internationally recognized suites like NEC4 and FIDIC have an advantage over the Standards Australia suite at the moment.

They provide a much more complete ecosystem of forms and options.

They're not perfect, and neither NEC nor FIDIC yet sufficiently embedded in the Australian market.

They're not widely used in Australia yet.

But they do a better job of recognizing that different projects need different models.

In Sweden and Norway, they have similar rules.

Internationally, we have FIDIC.

If we are using these horizons, as I mentioned, it's only five years.

So basically, when the contractors call me and I help them, I'm saying basically make anything that will last at least for five years.

Which is a problem, because when you have pollution, when you have infrastructural works, whatever, your horizon is maybe 50 or 100 years.

And then, of course, we have the maximum liability in Denmark.

So if I do not use our Danish version of FIDIC AB, then we'll just have a 10-year liability.

But now we got the Danish code, which was upgraded here in 2018, which is called BR18, where we're suddenly having these LCA, life cyclist analysis, plus we have the second life discussion now.