Bispham, J (2008) Historic imported softwood in eastern England: past knowledge, current perceptions and conservation. PhD thesis, Anglia Ruskin University, UK.
Abstract
By the 18th century the demand for timber for building in the East of England could not satisfied with home grown resources. Demand for timber was met by expanding the existing softwood trade, importing Scandinavian and Baltic, Pine, and Fir. From the Georgian period, the adoption of softwood as the primary timber for building construction raises interesting perceptions regarding the contemporary use of softwood in the construction of historic buildings. The choice of fabric in the conservation of any historic building often relies heavily on the perceived value and high profile rating given by conservation professionals. Also, the specifying of softwood for conservation projects requires an understanding of the historical usage of softwood; this research aims to understand the current awareness and knowledge of professionals of softwood in the conservation of historic buildings.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | conservation; historic buildings; timber; professional; England |
| Index terms: | building construction, historic building, conservation, England |
| Subjects: | construction type, environmental policy, Geography, building construction |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Sustainability, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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