Sundling, R; Olander, S; Wallentén, P; Burke, S; Bernardo, R and Blomsterberg, Å (2019) Lifecycle profit analysis of prefabricated multi-active façades. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 37(5), pp. 565-578. ISSN 23984708
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify appropriate concepts of multi-active façades for the renovation of multifamily buildings in Sweden and to determine which, if any, are financially viable. Design/methodology/approach: A lifecycle profit (LCP) analysis was used to examine financial viability through a ten-step process, which included identifying concepts, assessing costs and prices, calculating the LCP and performing sensitivity analysis. Two existing buildings – one low rise and the other high rise – were used as reference models. Findings: The findings were contradictory. Implementing any of the multi-active façade concepts on the high-rise building would be financially beneficial. The opposite was, however, the case for the low-rise building. Two factors causing this contradiction have been identified: the façade material before renovation and the size of the building. Research limitations/implications: The study is limited to two case buildings situated in Sweden; however, similar buildings represent a significant amount of the existing building stock. Part of the purpose of the study is also to investigate the merits of LCP analysis to evaluate energy-efficient retrofitting. The study implicates the benefits and pitfalls of LCP analysis needed to be considered by researchers and practitioners alike. Originality/value: The research findings contribute to the understanding of energy-efficient retrofitting of existing multifamily buildings based on prefabricated multi-active façade concepts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | energy-efficient retrofitting; lifecycle profit analysis; multi-active façades; prefabrication; sustainability |
| Index terms: | high-rise building, retrofitting, high rise, methodology, practitioner, building stock, profit, sensitivity analysis, prefabrication, renovation, lifecycle, financial viability, Sweden |
| Subjects: | Geography, research methods, renovation and retrofit, environmental hazards, building construction, asset management, practitioner, construction type, project delivery, economic analysis, business management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here