Canada and Australia are asking similar questions – but arriving at different answers

New Canadian research echoes themes explored by Australia’s System 600 while highlighting different approaches to industrialised housing.

When Perkins&Will recently released its research into a modular mass timber housing system for Canada, the immediate takeaway was straightforward: another country is exploring how prefabrication, standardisation and offsite manufacturing might help address housing supply.

Look a little closer, however, and another story emerges.

Although developed independently and for different purposes, the Canadian research and Australia’s System 600 initiative appear to be grappling with many of the same questions. How can housing become easier to manufacture? How can design, approvals and construction become more repeatable? And how can industrialised construction support domestic manufacturing rather than relying on isolated proprietary systems?

The answers, however, are not identical.

Shared questions, different starting points

The Canadian project, developed by Perkins&Will in collaboration with industry and academic partners, is built around a rationalised structural grid, a concise kit of prefabricated components, coordinated building services and modular planning principles. The objective is to streamline design, manufacturing and assembly while supporting Canada’s housing and climate objectives.

Many of those themes will sound familiar to Australians following Building 4.0 CRC’s System 600 research, which also explores standardised design rules, coordinated interfaces and component-based construction.

Neither project simply asks how to manufacture buildings in a factory. Instead, both investigate whether greater coordination across design, manufacturing and construction can improve productivity, simplify delivery and create more repeatable outcomes.