Harris, H J (2008) Conquering winter: US consumers and the cast-iron stove. Building Research & Information, 36(4), pp. 337-350. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The history of the revolution in heating and cooking technology in the United States in the first half of the 19th century is explored along with the resulting transformation of the American indoor wintertime climate. It is argued, contra William Meyer (2000, 2002), that the reasons for this massive behavioural change are traceable to an underlying demand for greater comfort, and to the complex market forces involved in the development of the technology to satisfy it and an industry to create and sell the resulting appliances, rather than simply to the increase in the price of the prevailing fuel: firewood. An attempt is made to extract 'lessons' from this history - plausible parallels with later transformations in the technology of comfort.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | comfort; cooking; heating; indoor environmental quality; innovation; stove; supply chains; technology diffusion; United States |
| Index terms: | transformation, winter, behavioural change, United States, indoor environmental quality, history, comfort |
| Subjects: | occupational health and safety management, Geography, behavioral psychology, business, architectural and construction history, climate science, environmental health |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Health and Safety |
| 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