Reed, W G and Gordon, E B (2000) Integrated design and building process: What research and methodologies are needed? Building Research & Information, 28(5-6), pp. 325-337. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The integrated design process encompasses cross-disciplinary teamwork enabling the improved integration of building, community, natural and economic systems and therefore is a key to sustainable design. The needs for further research, methodologies and validation for the integrated design process are considered by two design practitioners. A workable, replicable model demonstrating the costs and benefits is argued as having an enormous positive impact on the environment and the design and procurement processes. Assessment of some recent initiatives in Canada, Finland and the United States examines progress and identifies further research and practical needs. An agenda for research on integrated design processes is proposed, along with methodologies to codify practice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost; design process; design tools; green buildings; integrated design; practice; procurement; R&D; research policy; sustainable development |
| Index terms: | United States, sustainable design, teamwork, design process, procurement process, research policy, Finland, sustainable development, design and building, Canada, integration, methodology, validation, green building, practitioner, integrated design process |
| Subjects: | organizational analysis, professional development, design process, Geography, health safety and environment, research methods, management, design practice, contractual arrangements, design methods, practitioner, economic and policy analysis |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Information Management, Health and Safety, Procurement, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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