Milani, B (2005) Building materials in a green economy: Community-based strategies for dematerialization. PhD thesis, University of Toronto, Canada.
Abstract
The building industry can be a strategic fulcrum for green economic conversion in society as a whole. Not only is it decentralized, present in every community, but the built environment constitutes everyone's personal habitat and has a direct bearing on all people's well-being. Equally significant, it is responsible for perhaps forty percent of the economy's materials and energy throughput, and so changes in building have great potential impacts in extraction, manufacturing and waste management. Creating a green economy is not just about encouraging environmental protection, but about establishing closed-loop ecological alternatives in every sector that substantively contribute to both dematerialization and detoxification of the economy. Besides creating cyclical material flows, green development is also geared to increasing production of service (i.e. directly meeting human and environmental need) rather than material output. What would the role of building materials be in an ecological construction industry geared to service and cyclical flows? This dissertation surveys the many dimensions involved in transforming materials use in building to create a closed-loop service-oriented building industry. The thesis includes chapters on, respectively, the evaluation, production, consumption, recycling, and regulation of building materials. It attempts to explore potentials in these areas by simultaneously reviewing the practical initiatives already taking place in green building—including life-cycle analysis, green building assessment, eco-labelling, eco-industrial development, clean production, design-for-disassembly, deconstruction services, natural building and alternative materials, product stewardship, extended producer responsibility, building code reform, green procurement, collective consumerism, and green market creation. How can these many fronts be combined and coordinated to comprehensively green the building industry and create healthy sustainable communities? Besides surveying key developments in these crucial areas, the thesis attempts to clarify priorities for green development that cohesively link these realms in community economic development strategy. The central role of information, knowledge and education is highlighted.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; economic development; education; market; building industry; green building; manufacturing; recycling; regulation; waste management |
| Index terms: | conversion, recycling, industrial development, alternative material, building industry, building material, built environment, construction industry, dimension, dissertation, green procurement, economic development, community-based, surveying, environmental protection, society, disassembly, strategy, survey, sustainable community, well-being, regulation, green building, waste management, green development, building code, consumption |
| Subjects: | sustainable design, design practice, management, economic development, manufacturing engineering, environmental engineering, political science, communities and social development, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, regulatory law, waste management, consumer economics, materials science, mental health and wellbeing, research dissemination and communication, data collection methods, construction type, health monitoring assessment and metrics, contractual arrangements, building materials, operations management |
| Topics: | Governance, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Site Management, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Sustainability, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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