Abu Seif, Majed D (2023) Trees on buildings: Investigating opportunities and challenges for implementation. PhD thesis, Griffith University, Australia.
Abstract
In the era of climate change, there is an increased interest in including different types of green infrastructure in building legislation as a strategy to improve the built environment. Among these different types, trees on buildings have received little attention, and there is limited literature and policies to guide their design and implementation. Therefore, this research aims to explore trees on buildings from various perspectives to enrich the scholarship and policies and to enable their implementation. To achieve this, the research includes a four-stage mixed method using qualitative and quantitative approaches.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Dupre, Karine and Michael, Ruby |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | trees on buildings; green roofs; sustainable construction; tree selection; design framework; Australia |
| Index terms: | legislation, implementation, strategy, built environment, green roof, mixed method, sustainable construction, green infrastructure, climate change, design framework, Australia |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, sustainable construction, infrastructure and transport systems, sustainability and resilience, sustainable design, data collection methods, climate science, management, legal systems, Geography, design practice |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Geographical Context, Urban Studies, Procurement |
| 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