Ogunkah, I (2015) Rethinking low-cost green building material selection process in the design of low-impact green housing developments. PhD thesis, University of Westminster, UK.
Abstract
Since 1950, the world population has increased by more than double. The sprawling demographic shift due to continuous migration from rural to urban areas in developing countries imposes socio-economic and environmental pressures to the urban areas. Apparently, the high demand for housing and the unsustainable construction practices underlying its production in recent times constitute issues that merit the attention of low-impact green housing developments. The feasibility of such developments also lies in the effective use of low-cost green building materials and components (LCGBMCs),primarily because of their potential to conserve energy use, reduce life-cycle cost, lessen ecological footprints, and revive lost cultural traditions. Until recently however, only very few of these products have been widely established in mainstream, on account that most designers are constrained by their vaguely informed knowledge as to their sustainability impacts during the early stages of the design decision-making process, when most of the important decisions relating to sustainability are made. With the scale of complexity on how to incorporate sustainability principles in the early stages of the material selection decision-making process, and quest to stimulate the motivation for their use in a wider industry context, a clear gap is identified. Drawing on the concept of sustainability, this research aims to narrow the underlying gap by exploring and evaluating the significance of an integrated modular-oriented mode of assessment that is able to assist designers in developing an improved capability to make early-informed choices, when formulating decisions to select LCGBMCs at the early conceptual stages of the design process. With results derived from the relevant literature, industrywide surveys, and through empirical evidence gathered from interviews with a cross-section of house build stakeholders in Nigeria, key sustainability principle indicators impacting the selection of building materials are identified, analysed, grouped and ranked according to the relative importance that each decision factor holds, using a suite of statistical analytical methods. The information gathered from the analysis with inputs elicited from experienced professionals are used to develop a Multi-Criteria Material Selection Decision Support System (MSDSS), and later refined with feedbacks obtained from selected builder and developer companies. The above integration is enhanced using Macro-in-Excel Database Management System (DBMS), while the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) model is adopted as the ideal assessment methodology, given its ability to transform objective and subjective variables into weighted scores. Expert surveys are then used to demonstrate the usefulness of the suggested decision support system. The applicability and validity of this model are further illustrated using an ongoing housing project in Nigeria. By comparing the outputs from the model to monitored data from the case study, it would emerge that LCGBMCs, when properly assessed with consideration of the key sustainability principle indicators (influential factors) at the early stages of the design decision-making process, could reduce the potential life-cycle carbon embodied energy of a typical residential housing project by nearly 40% and yield energy savings of roughly 30-50% per year, when compared to their conventional carbon-embodied equivalents. This study concludes that by addressing integration of sustainability principles into the material selection decision making processes at the early stages of the design, better support will be provided to key decision makers with the expectation of improved understanding and better informed choices, hence stimulate the motivation for more use of LCGBMCs in a wider industry context. The limitations of the study are highlighted and future research directions to better exploit the model capabilities are proposed.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; case study; decision support; design process; developer; developing countries; green building; housing development; interview; materials |
| Index terms: | drawing, housing project, survey, residential housing, housing development, motivation, builder, developing country, interview, relative importance, design process, management system, decision support, green building material, complexity, design decision, housing, methodology, urban area, influential factor, integration, ecological footprint, population, evidence, green building, decision-making process, migration, designer, validity, database, Nigeria, case study, energy use, analytical hierarchy process, embodied energy, energy-saving, building material |
| Subjects: | technical documentation, building materials, energy systems, profession, risk assessment, data collection methods, design methods, decision analysis, data management, organizational analysis, systems engineering, design practice, management, psychology, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner, environmental impact, sustainable engineering, housing and residential development, demography, decision-making and optimization, urban form and morphology, research methods, development economics, Geography |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Human Resources, International Construction, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Sustainability, Risk Management, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles |
| 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