Clarke, J L (2013) Sustainable buildings: sustainable behaviour? To what extent do sustainable buildings encourage sustainable behaviour through their design, construction, operation and use? PhD thesis, Kingston University, UK.
Abstract
The environmental impact of human behaviour on the design, construction and operation of buildings is often overlooked, frequently resulting in sub optimal performance over the lifecycle of the building (credibility gap and value-action gap). An over-reliance on technological and market solutions (false positivity) throughout the design, construction and operation of sustainable buildings means changing user behaviour is not currently envisaged by all but the most sustainability-minded built environment professionals. This study aims to develop an understanding of the dynamic and complex systems by which responsible environmental, social and economic action (sustainable behaviour) emerges from the relationship between people and the built environment. The primary research question asks to what extent sustainable buildings encourage sustainable behaviour, with broader research objectives covering the need for sustainable buildings and their social, environmental and economic benefits; a clear definition of sustainable behaviour and sustainable buildings; identifying opportunities for behavioural change from current best practice and how behavioural change theory can be applied to the built environment to encourage and optimise sustainable behaviour. Literature review reveals existing theory and practice in the fields of sustainability, architecture, behavioural psychology and pedagogy applied generally to the design, construction and operation of sustainable buildings. Five exemplar sustainable buildings with pedagogical functions are also investigated. The primary empirical research methodology uses grounded theory, ethnography and phenomenology through interview and survey data analysis, highlighting common best practices and innovative approaches, as well as revealing barriers to achieving sustainable built environments that encourage sustainable behaviour. The research reveals that there are numerous opportunities for behavioural interventions at critical stages throughout the lifecycle of buildings where ‘value-action’ gaps between our intentions to be more sustainable and our often sub-optimal actions or behaviours are identified. Strategies includes education, information provision, training, experiential learning, feedback, participation and regulation. The research contributes original knowledge by relating the way building mechanisms for change can be understood through the lens of behavioural psychology and the synthesis of the three disciplines of sustainability, architecture and pedagogy.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Pearce, J and Pretlove, S |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | best practice; built environment; environmental impact; performance; sustainable building; professional; human behaviour; market; sustainability |
| Index terms: | best practice, pedagogy, lifecycle, research methodology, built environment, phenomenology, behavioural change, grounded theory, complex system, ethnography, sustainable building, environmental impact, regulation, psychology, experiential learning, interview, data analysis, literature review, strategy, human behaviour, survey |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, business, research design and methodology, learning methods, data analysis and analytics, project delivery, management, qualitative and interpretive research, methods and analysis, teaching methods, infrastructure and transport systems, political science, systems engineering, environmental impact, health behaviours and lifestyles, theoretical framing, sustainable construction, behavioral psychology |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Governance, Education, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Sustainability |
| 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