Wimalasena, N N; Chang-Richards, A; Wang, K I K and Dirks, K N (2022) What makes a healthy home? A study in auckland, New Zealand. Building Research & Information, 50(7), pp. 738-754. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The quality of the indoor environment in dwellings is a key contributing factor to occupants' health. Existing studies have largely focused on establishing frameworks on healthy homes in directing housing policies and improving housing quality. However, there is little research investigating how occupants understand the notion of a healthy home and what elements they consider to be important for a healthy home. This is particularly the case in the New Zealand context. To address this gap, a questionnaire was undertaken consisting of 296 Aucklanders, probing the critical housing features that occupants believe affect the healthiness of a home. The results revealed that 1) the presence of mould and dampness, 2) a lack of thermal insulation and 3) the characteristics of sanitation facilities were the top three most concerning health-related risk factors. Factor analysis categorised 15 critical factors into three groups, namely: 1) sick building syndrome features; 2) water supply and sanitation features; and 3) thermal comfort features. The findings provide insights into the features occupants considered to be closely related to the healthiness of their homes. Occupants' perspectives can be considered by policy makers, housing agencies and housing developers in their decision-making tools to enhance building performance and community. wellbeing.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | health and wellbeing; homeowners; Housing; New Zealand; occupants |
| Index terms: | New Zealand, critical factor, indoor environment, thermal insulation, presence, risk factor, thermal comfort, housing policy, factor analysis, water supply, building performance, health and wellbeing, homeowner, well-being, decision-making, questionnaire, mould, sanitation, agency, housing developer, sick building syndrome, housing |
| Subjects: | mental health and wellbeing, data collection methods, risk assessment, construction type, public policy, environmental science, energy systems, Geography, decision analysis, sociology, environmental health, environmental hazards, quality assurance, environmental engineering, statistical analysis, infrastructure and transport systems |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Construction Materials, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Governance, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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