Ethical issues in domestic building performance evaluation studies

Sharpe, T (2019) Ethical issues in domestic building performance evaluation studies. Building Research & Information, 47(3), pp. 318-329. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Dwellings are occupied by people and it would seem reasonable to expect that the way they are designed and constructed protects people’s health and wellbeing, and the effectiveness of this would be verified in practice. However, the construction sector is unusual in that is does not routinely evaluate the performance of its artefacts. Thus, when new forms of construction or technology are used, occupants are effectively the subjects of experiments, which raises ethical concerns. Building performance evaluation (BPE) is a critical tool that addresses this problem. This has mainly been conducted by academic organizations, but to be effective BPE needs to become more widely used by design and construction professionals. In these studies occupant behaviour is a key factor and, consequently, occupants are often the focus of studies. Domestic environments are particularly contentious due to the personal and sensitive data that may be collected. Some of the common ethical issues arising from BPE studies in housing are considered. It is argued that if BPE is to become more widely used by industry professionals and their clients, then a wider adoption of ethical policies is needed to protect the participants of such studies, and the practice of BPE itself.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building performance evaluation; construction sector; design; design research; ethics; feedback; occupants; professional practice; responsibility; wellbeing
Index terms: ethics, occupant behaviour, building performance evaluation, effectiveness, design and construction, health and wellbeing, domestic building, experiment, construction sector, housing, performance evaluation, professional practice, well-being, artefact
Subjects: contractual arrangements, ethical practice, health behaviours and lifestyles, construction type, data collection methods, mental health and wellbeing, industry analysis, sociology, building performance, professional development, performance measurement, performance management
Topics: Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Procurement, Construction Technology, Quality Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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