Windapo, A O and Moghayedi, A (2020) Adoption of smart technologies and circular economy performance of buildings. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 10(4), pp. 585-601. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: This paper examines the use of intelligent technologies in buildings and whether the use of smart technologies impacts the circular economy performance of buildings in terms of energy and water consumption, their marginal cost and the management decision time and quality, for building management companies. Design/methodology/approach: The study is initiated through the detailed build-up of the proposition that employs a systematic literature review and adopts the case study research design to make a cross-case analysis of the information extracted from data. The data are derived from the operating costs of two buildings in which most advanced smart technologies are used in Cape Town and interviews with their facility managers. These data provide two research case studies. The results of the investigation are then analysed and linked back to the literature. Findings: The results of the research suggest that the implementation of smart technologies to create intelligent infrastructure is beneficial to the circular economy performance of buildings and the time taken for management decisions. The results of the study have proven that the impact of smart technologies on the circular economy performance of buildings is positive, as it lowers the cost of utilities and decreases the time required for management decisions. Research limitations/implications: The research reported in this paper is exploratory, and due to its limited sample size, its findings may not be statistically generalizable to the population of high-occupancy buildings in Cape Town, which incorporate smart infrastructure technologies within their building management systems (BMSs). Also, the empirical data collected were limited to the views and opinions of the interviewees, and the secondary data were obtained from the selected buildings. Practical implications: The findings suggest that investment in smart technologies within buildings is of significant value and will improve the circular economy performance of buildings in terms of low energy and water use, and effective management decisions. Social implications: The results imply that there would be more effective maintenance decisions taken by facilities managers, which will enable the maintenance of equipment to be properly monitored, problems with the building services and equipment to be identified in good time and in improved well-being and user satisfaction. Originality/value: The study provides evidence to support the concept that advanced smart technologies boost performance, the time required for management decisions and that they enable circularity in buildings. It supports the proposition that investment in the more advanced smart technologies in buildings has more positive rewards.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | 4ir; building maintenance; building performance; circular economy; energy and water consumption; facility management; management decision time; smart technologies |
| Index terms: | evidence, operating cost, methodology, interview, building management, building maintenance, investigation, manager, smart infrastructure, water consumption, research design, management decision, cross-case analysis, sample size, utilities, circularity, building service, facilities manager, case study, circular economy, secondary data, low energy, population, implementation, building management system, user satisfaction, well-being, systematic literature review, building performance |
| Subjects: | quality assurance, research design and methodology, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, research methods, systems engineering, sustainable materials, mechanical systems, evaluation and assessment methods, management, engineering systems, energy systems, practitioner, client relations, environmental resource management, demography, decision-making and reasoning, economic analysis, mental health and wellbeing, construction type, research evaluation and metrics, sustainable design, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Health and Safety, Quality Management, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Urban Studies, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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