When building thrives, everything thrives!

To construct or to build? The two verbs seem interchangeable, yet their etymology reveals a subtle distinction. The former comes from the Latin construere, meaning ‘to pile up in layers’ – a notion that suggests order. The latter has its roots in Proto-Germanic languages: bastijan meant ‘to mend’ and, by extension, ‘to patch up or assemble’. Its contemporary German descendant is bauen, and historically Bauer did mean both builder and farmer. Perhaps, then, there is more ambition in constructing than in simply building.

Most economists would agree with this hierarchy. In France, INSEE (the national statistics service) splits the construction sector into four branches: specialised construction trades (69% of added value in 2023; responsible for making structures functional), civil engineering (17%), building construction (8%) and property development (6%).

With this in mind, perhaps in the famous French saying ‘quand le bâtiment va bien, tout va bien’ (when building thrives, everything thrives), the word ‘bâtiment’ should be changed to ‘construction’? Probably. But before considering whether this adage still holds true, it is worth looking at its origins, if only to note yet another layer of confusion. The quote is attributed to Martin Nadaud, a 19th-century stonemason who became a member of parliament and prefect, largely thanks to many years of diligent work during evening classes. According to Jean-Marc Daniel, emeritus professor at ESCP Business School, Nadaud’s actual words were, ‘Quand le bateau va bien, quand le bateau va loin, tout va bien’ (when the boat goes well, when the boat goes far, everything goes well). It was Baron Haussmann who took up the idea and gave it the wording that has become popular today. Of course, in French, a bâtiment (building) can refer to a bateau (boat), just like it can be a house, a block of flats or a warehouse. Nevertheless, a shipyard wouldn’t be included in the construction sector, even though we do talk of shipbuilding (and also naval architecture)!

One observation is clear: the relevance of the proverb appears to have diminished over time. This is simply because construction’s share of total value added has declined steadily over the last few decades.

France provides a telling example. The sector accounted for 11% of total value added in 1950 and 13% in 1971 (its peak), before beginning a sharp decline to just over 5% today. In the same way as we speak of the deindustrialisation of France, perhaps we should also speak of its deconstruction. Undoubtedly – but there is a caveat. If we look not at value added but at production – that is to say, if we include the intermediate consumption necessary to generate output (as a reminder, value added = production – intermediate consumption) – the decline from the early 1970s until now is slightly less marked: the relative weight of construction falls from 14% to 7%.

This increase in intermediate consumption means that, over time, construction professionals have become more like assemblers of components produced by industry, representing a transfer of activity, albeit partial, from construction to manufacturing. Even so, it must be acknowledged that construction has grown more slowly than the economy as a whole. And because of that relative sluggishness, overall economic momentum has been weaker, all else being equal. Is this enough to invalidate the proverb? Not entirely, for two reasons.