Castaño-Rosa, R and Nerweyi, D (2025) Bringing post-occupancy evaluation up front to enhance energy efficiency in residential buildings. Building Research & Information, 53(8), pp. 1075-1091. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
While previous research has shown the potential benefits of conducting post-occupancy evaluations (POE) to close operational performance gaps, ensuring residential buildings perform as designed still presents significant challenges. This study, through a systematic literature review, aims to address this challenge by investigating common methods and barriers to undertake POE in residential buildings, identifying the most common related performance gaps. Results showed the current static building industry with a lack of standardized practices and continuous data collection as the main barriers to undertake POE in residential buildings. Main performance gaps were related to lack of know-how, evidence-based decision-making, stakeholder engagement and user-centric approach. While data collection and building user engagement are often carried out during POE, considering them at the design phase and all through the implementation process plays a major role in achieving optimal building performance. Findings show that performance gaps are not only related to technical defects or occupant behaviour but also to decision-making and engagement practices at early phases. Ultimately, this study shows the need to change the current static, linear culture of design and implementation in residential building projects towards a dynamic, feedback-loop approach by proposing key considerations to address the most common performance gaps and promote more energy-efficiency residential buildings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | BPE; building user; performance gap; poe; residential building |
| Index terms: | stakeholder engagement, evidence, systematic literature review, user engagement, energy efficiency, residential building, efficiency, building industry, decision-making, performance gap, design phase, occupant behaviour, building performance, implementation, post-occupancy evaluation |
| Subjects: | evaluation methods, decision analysis, design methods, contractual arrangements, sustainability and energy, quality assurance, community and social dimensions, performance management, research evaluation and metrics, industry analysis, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, professional practice, health behaviours and lifestyles |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Construction Technology, Quality Management, Risk Management, Design Practice, Research Practice, Procurement, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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