Andrews, F; Sal Moslehian, A; Johnston, N and Tucker, R (2024) Impacts of building defects on the health and wellbeing of apartment residents: A scoping review. Building Research & Information, 52(4), pp. 446-462. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
While recent high-profile incidents have highlighted the impacts of building defects, there remains a dearth of comprehensive research that examines the full spectrum of health risks encountered by residents living in apartments affected by these defects. In this paper, an interdisciplinary perspective provides a comprehensive and structured synthesis of the literature on the varied impacts of lifecycle construction quality characteristics and defects on the health and wellbeing of apartment residents, including classification of methodological approaches. Twenty-seven peer reviewed articles published from 2010 onwards were selected and analysed through a systematic process from eight major online databases. Our findings synthesize the impacts of construction defects on three aspects of health: (1) physical health; (2) mental health; and (3) the general wellbeing of occupants. For each aspect, we also identify the associated defects. This paper highlights significant knowledge gaps in relation to methodologies, cohorts sampled, and the wider health impacts of certain defects. In relation to policy and practice, we discuss the need for a broader, interdisciplinary understanding of the extent of apartment building construction issues, and thus for a more holistic exploration of the impacts on health of these issues.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building defects; construction quality; health and wellbeing; residential apartments; safety; literature review |
| Index terms: | mental health, lifecycle, database, construction defect, construction quality, exploration, methodology, well-being, apartment building, literature review, health and wellbeing, health risk, building defect |
| Subjects: | environmental resource management, professional practice, contract obligations, data analysis and analytics, project delivery, construction type, mental health and wellbeing, data management, health conditions and diseases, quality assurance, environmental health, research methods |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Legal Issues |
| 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