Koch, C and Roenn, M (2023) Building companies in design build competitions aiming at circularity. In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 39th Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2023, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
While the research of architectural competitions is rich, there is less focus on other frequent participants in competitions: Building contractors, project developers and real estate companies. This is the research gap this paper address. Moreover, project competitions are probably confounded with the more profiled architects' competitions. Here the focus is on competitions about the right to build on a real estate owned by a municipality. We wonder who are the actors participating in such competitions, what is their aim, what experiences do they get and do their participation strengthen sustainable and circular solutions? Using institutional change as theoretical frame we analyse 10 companies participating in three project /design build competitions in Sweden. Interviews and document analysis was used. It is remarkable that most participating building contractors, project developers and real estate companies are small local companies, which draw on their knowledge about the sites. The municipalities try to obtain circular and sustainable solutions, but get relatively rudimentary proposals, resonating with the participating companies that are also critical, even if the jury judge winning proposals having high quality. The implication of this research could be to develop national guidelines and organised exchange of experiences.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design-build competitions; sustainability; circularity |
| Index terms: | Sweden, design build, document analysis, circularity, institutional change, building contractor, proposal, architectural competition, interview, municipality, architect, competition, real estate |
| Subjects: | Geography, tendering, administrative law, market analysis, sociology, sustainable materials, practitioner, data collection methods, profession, data science, contractual arrangements, project planning, real estate economics |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Urban Studies, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Sustainability, Roles and Professions |
| 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