Huuhka, S and Lahdensivu, J (2016) Statistical and geographical study on demolished buildings. Building Research & Information, 44(1), pp. 73-96. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Demolition of buildings is one fundamental, but little studied, factor in the dynamics of building stocks. This research study examines the characteristics and location of demolished buildings in Finland as well as motives behind the demolition decisions. A statistical and geographical analysis was performed on a dataset of all 50 818 buildings demolished in Finland between 2000 and 2012. In the Finnish context, the study shows that the amount of demolition, the size of the community, demographic development and construction activity are all interconnected. In general, the larger the community, the more it gains inhabitants and the more is built as well as demolished. The data confirm that removals from the building stock are a result of conscious deliberation. Non-residential buildings dominate the amount of demolished floor area. In addition, they are much larger and younger at the time of demolition than residential buildings, which consist primarily of detached houses. Demolitions are geographically concentrated: cities account for 76% of demolished floor area; and city cores for as much as 44%. Public policy needs to include demolition to reduce environmental impacts and improve resource efficiency.; Demolition of buildings is one fundamental, but little studied, factor in the dynamics of building stocks. This research study examines the characteristics and location of demolished buildings in Finland as well as motives behind the demolition decisions. A statistical and geographical analysis was performed on a dataset of all 50,818 buildings demolished in Finland between 2000 and 2012. In the Finnish context, the study shows that the amount of demolition, the size of the community, demographic development and construction activity are all interconnected. In general, the larger the community, the more it gains inhabitants and the more is built as well as demolished. The data confirm that removals from the building stock are a result of conscious deliberation. Non-residential buildings dominate the amount of demolished floor area. In addition, they are much larger and younger at the time of demolition than residential buildings, which consist primarily of detached houses. Demolitions are geographically concentrated: cities account for 76% of demolished floor area; and city cores for as much as 44%. Public policy needs to include demolition to reduce environmental impacts and improve resource efficiency.;
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction and demolition waste; demolition; reuse; resilience; building stocks; resilient cities; building construction; demographics; residential buildings; cities; public policy; environmental impact |
| Index terms: | resource efficiency, dynamics, environmental impact, public policy, dataset, non-residential building, demographics, resilient city, residential building, building stock, construction activity, building construction, motive, Finland, construction and demolition |
| Subjects: | construction operations, sustainability and resilience, public policy, psychology, environmental impact, waste management, construction type, systems engineering, asset management, building construction, data management, demography, Geography, management |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Governance, Construction Technology, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Site Management, Human Resources, Urban Studies, Digital Applications |
| 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