Zalejska Jonsson, A and Hungria Gunnelin, R (2019) Defects in newly constructed residential buildings: Owners' perspective. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 37(2), pp. 163-185. ISSN 23984708
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present defects reported by cooperative owners, and to determine the relationship between building characteristics, developer’s/contractor’s company size and defect type. Design/methodology/approach: The analysis is based on defects reported by board members of cooperatives in Sweden through a survey questionnaire. The 1,563 questionnaires were posted by regular mail to the boards of cooperatives for buildings. The current research presents results from analysis of responses from 394 regular residential projects constructed between 2006 and 2013. The responses represent owners' experience from a total 1,107 buildings. Findings: Findings presented in this study indicate that building quality might be one of the factors contributing to the energy gap. The analysis indicates that the most severe problems reported by cooperatives are issues related to building envelope, particularly shortcomings in the function of windows, issues related to the function of the balcony and cracks in the facade and leakage caused by rain water. The results show that the building quality differs depending on developers' size, measured by number of employees. The authors have also found a significant relationship between reported defects and location expressed by size of the city/municipality. Originality/value: The discussion on newly constructed residential buildings has been dominated by the perspective of professionals (inspectors) and contractors (or developers) rather than of the owners/users themselves. This study presents findings from the owners' perspective, thus contributing the owners' viewpoint to the debate on building quality.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | defects; owner; quality; residential buildings; user |
| Index terms: | residential building, owner, Sweden, rain, building envelope, energy gap, survey, window, methodology, residential project, questionnaire, municipality |
| Subjects: | climate science, data collection methods, construction type, energy systems, Geography, economic development, architectural elements, research methods, administrative law, sociology |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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