Nguyen, Hong Trang (2018) Formulating supportive instruments for green building development in Vietnam. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
This research looks into the development of green building policy in Vietnam based on the results of a survey and interviews with construction professionals and policy-makers in Vietnam. It reveals the current market state, barriers and drivers to green building development, recommended policies and, thus, provides a policy-making framework as a holistic approach to policy design integrating those data and the relevant policy community. This study is also the first of its kind to investigate a case study for policy change and policy learning from a prospective approach, integrating two widely applied methods – lesson drawing guidance and policy transfer framework. It gives an important insight into factors affecting the process of initiating and incorporating a new policy for green building development in the current legislation given the complexity of a network of actors.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Skitmore, Martin and Tyvimaa, Tanja |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | green building; Vietnam; policy; policy instrument; policy network; foreign policy learning; lesson drawing; policy-making; barrier; driver |
| Index terms: | construction professional, Vietnam, case study, policy instrument, survey, drawing, legislation, holistic approach, policy design, interview, green building, complexity |
| Subjects: | systems engineering, professional development, policy studies, data collection methods, technical documentation, legal systems, business, design practice, Geography |
| Topics: | Governance, Geographical Context, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Legal Issues, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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