Muianga, E A D; Kowaltowski, D C C K and Koolwijk, J S J (2026) Social housing improvement factors for upgrading processes. Building Research & Information, 54(3), pp. 306-329. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
A large social housing (SH) stock exists around the world, and many developments need upgrading for various reasons. Upgrading demands careful planning and execution with specific improvement interventions that require clear, socially conscious, and technological as well as environmental objectives. In mandatory processes, top-down government improvement initiatives are mandated by directives, while users in non-mandatory processes instigate a bottom-up upgrading. In this context, people improve their living conditions and undertake self-built reforms, often at high costs due to a lack of planning and technical support. This study investigated upgrading interventions and improvement factors for SH. We discuss upgrading with a literature review to understand the operational improvements with user quality of life in mind. Results identify improvement interventions on topics of Energy and Resource Efficiency; Housing Quality and Comfort; Building Systems and Infrastructure; Health, Psychological and Social Wellbeing; Green and Open Spaces; Functional Design and Accessibility; Mobility and Services; Waste and Water Management. The study classified interventions by their complexity of execution. Frameworks for both mandatory and non-mandatory upgrading processes were created, and the impacts of SH upgrades are outlined. The contributions support decision-making roadmaps for upgrading processes to improve SH.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment improvements; improvement interventions; social housing; transformations; upgrading actions |
| Index terms: | social housing, building system, resource efficiency, open space, built environment, comfort, transformation, accessibility, mobility, water management, living condition, complexity, housing, well-being, decision-making, quality of life, literature review, upgrading |
| Subjects: | mental health and wellbeing, business, engineering systems, data analysis and analytics, public and environmental health, management, decision analysis, sociology, occupational health and safety management, systems engineering, infrastructure and transport systems, strategic management, construction type, environmental resource management, inclusive design, urban design, housing and residential development |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Design Practice, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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