A socio-technical system framework for risk-informed performance-based building regulation

Meacham, B J and van Straalen, I J (2018) A socio-technical system framework for risk-informed performance-based building regulation. Building Research & Information, 46(4), pp. 444-462. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Building regulatory systems have been evolving in recent decades, first with a transition to a functional or performance basis, and more recently with the introduction of new societal objectives, including those related to sustainability and climate change resiliency. Various policy and technical challenges have been identified with this evolution, including the lack of a common basis for establishing performance expectations, quantified performance metrics, and robust mechanisms to incorporate new objectives in a manner that effectively integrates a diversity of stakeholder input and results in regulatory requirements that do not compete with long-standing objectives. Among the mechanisms being explored to facilitate a managed evolution is the use of risk as a basis for performance, and modifications within the building regulatory environment to enable this. It is posited that framing the building regulatory system as a socio-technical system (STS) will highlight the complex interactions that exist between regulators and the market, the roles stakeholders play in characterizing risk for use in building regulation, and what steps are required to shift to a risk-informed performance-based building regulatory system, taking into account different legal structures and regulatory approaches that exist between jurisdictions.;Building regulatory systems have been evolving in recent decades, first with a transition to a functional or performance basis, and more recently with the introduction of new societal objectives, including those related to sustainability and climate change resiliency. Various policy and technical challenges have been identified with this evolution, including the lack of a common basis for establishing performance expectations, quantified performance metrics, and robust mechanisms to incorporate new objectives in a manner that effectively integrates a diversity of stakeholder input and results in regulatory requirements that do not compete with long-standing objectives. Among the mechanisms being explored to facilitate a managed evolution is the use of risk as a basis for performance, and modifications within the building regulatory environment to enable this. It is posited that framing the building regulatory system as a socio-technical system (STS) will highlight the complex interactions that exist between regulators and the market, the roles stakeholders play in characterizing risk for use in building regulation, and what steps are required to shift to a risk-informed performance-based building regulatory system, taking into account different legal structures and regulatory approaches that exist between jurisdictions.;

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building regulation; risk informed; risk; performance based; governance; socio-technical system; Climate change; Regulators; Environmental policy; Buildings; Sustainability; Evolution; Regulation; Risk management; Social aspects; Performance measurement
Index terms: regulator, performance-based, governance, environmental policy, interaction, social aspect, socio-technical system, climate change, performance measurement, performance metric, regulatory system, risk management, building regulation, regulation, jurisdiction, evolution, framing, risk-informed
Subjects: climate science, financial risk, performance measurement, public policy, environmental science, behavioral psychology, regulatory law, legal systems, political science, conceptual models, sociology, theoretical framing, business, risk assessment
Topics: Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Quality Management, Cost Management, Legal Issues, Governance
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