A middle-out approach for improving energy performance in buildings

Janda, K B and Parag, Y (2013) A middle-out approach for improving energy performance in buildings. Building Research & Information, 41(1), pp. 39-50. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

A middle-out perspective is used to investigate potential roles for professionals and practitioners in creating societal change. Social and technological innovations are commonly seen as either being induced from the top-down or evolving from the bottom-up. Instead, a middle-out perspective focuses on agents of change that are located in the middle, between the top and the bottom. This perspective shows that middle actors can affect change in several different directions: upstream, downstream and sideways. By linking the top and bottom more explicitly, this approach is both an alternative and complementary to bottom-up and top-down efforts to implementing low-carbon innovations and practices in society. One particular kind of middle in the built environment is explored: the role of building professionals to encourage (or discourage) societal change. Focusing on the demand side of the energy system, case studies of building professionals in the domestic and non-domestic sectors are used to emphasize the qualities of these middle agents as enablers/disablers, mediators and aggregators. Policy implications from the middle-out perspective are drawn, and comments on the near and long-term relationship between building professions and building performance are made.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: agents of change; buildings; built environment; influence; low carbon; middle-out; professionals; stakeholder motivation
Index terms: mediator, technological innovation, practitioner, policy implication, agent, case study, motivation, profession, building performance, low carbon, energy system, built environment, building professional, energy performance, society
Subjects: innovation and technology management, energy systems, practitioner, data collection methods, dispute resolution, sustainability assessment, profession, psychology, infrastructure and transport systems, quality assurance, institututions, communities and social development, policy studies
Topics: Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Urban Studies, Quality Management, Governance, Legal Issues, Human Resources
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

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