But the market conditions of the agricultural sector generally and the overall state of the economy come a close second, with availability of grants, Government payments, subsidies and milk payments third in the factors driving demand.
The research for Marley Eternit’s profiled sheeting business, which dominates agriculture’s fibre cement roofing sector, was carried out by Lychgate with a total of 80 frame manufacturers/steel fabricators, contractors, merchants/distributors and architects/consultants known to have worked in the agricultural sector.
To avoid their answers being biased, they were not aware until halfway through the 20-minute telephone interview that the study was being conducted for the company.
Construction work in the agriculture sector between 1994 and 2004 peaked in 2003 at around £250million and is currently levelling out or even dropping off slightly although nowhere near the millennium trough of £150million. It currently represents 0.04% of all new construction work in the commercial and industrial sectors (excluding housing and infrastructure).
Farmers’ finances were cited by 19% of the respondents as being the main driver of demand for farm buildings, with the condition of the agricultural sector generally at 18% and availability of grants at 11%.
The research found market seasonality was still driven by the drier weather in the summer but also in the longer quiet time between lambing and harvest when farmers had time to concentrate on their forthcoming requirements in terms of shelter and storage.
When all of the audiences were asked who in their experience recommended the roofing material to be used for a medium or large-sized agricultural building, 45% said the frame or building manufacturer, 33% the farmer, and 25% and 23% respectively the architect and contractor.
But when it came to people who could influence the choice of roofing material, farmers were judged the most important, by 31% of the respondents. Local authority planners (15%) were the only other influencer of any merit. Contractors figured more highly when it came to the choice of manufacturer, with 25% of the vote compared to the frame or building manufacturer (50%), farmer (20%) and architect (15%).
Farmers were found to be more likely to be involved in material or brand choice when they had specific views on the building’s appearance or had other specific requirements (30%). Cost, or working to a low budget, was an issue with 15% of the respondents. Architects were more likely to be involved on larger or more complex buildings or where planning permission was required (22% each).
Roofing materials were specified based on the building’s use and by far the majority (51%) said that if livestock were being housed, they would use fibre cement as it prevented condensation. Past experience/knowledge played a part for 13% of the respondents while 12% each based their decision on cost and durability/performance guarantees.
The most important criteria for the roofing material was its quality (9.3 out of 10), fit for purpose (9.2), value for money (8.8), availability (8.3), ease of contact (7.9) and technical assistance (7.1).
The research also found that just over one third of specifications are changed although this is mostly on an occasional basis, with the farmer being the most likely party (48%) to change a specified brand, several commenting they would do this on cost grounds.