Oliveira, S; Marco, E; Gething, B and Organ, S (2017) Evolutionary, not revolutionary: logics of early design energy modelling adoption in UK architecture practice. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 13(3), pp. 168-184. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
This paper examines the effects of early stage design energy modelling technology on architects' design practice. Energy analysis in design has traditionally been the domain of the building services engineer with emphasis placed on verifying established building simulation models at late stages in design. Recently, however, with advances in digital design media, leading architectural firms are acquiring in-house design simulation for energy modelling. The effects of broadening the use of energy modelling technology on architecture design practice or the design process are, however, poorly understood. Industry and academic attention has been gathering on the topic of building performance simulation with most of the focus placed on standardizing the wide array of tools and narrowing the broad spectrum of analysis parameters. Few discussions examine approaches to energy analysis across the diverse design settings and the principles, assumptions and identities designers negotiate. The analysis draws on institutional theory utilizing semi-structured interviews and focus group sessions with 26 participants across 4 large international architecture firms. Preliminary findings indicate differing organizational, team and project approaches with an emphasis placed on legitimating established design assumptions across the firms. The implications of the findings are twofold. First, the analysis provides an initial overview of how early stage design energy modelling is considered in design in architecture practice in the UK. Second, the paper provides an understanding of how architects negotiate meaning on energy in design. There are also implications for energy policy development in the context of the built environment particularly concerning building performance.This paper examines the effects of early stage design energy modelling technology on architects' design practice. Energy analysis in design has traditionally been the domain of the building services engineer with emphasis placed on verifying established building simulation models at late stages in design. Recently, however, with advances in digital design media, leading architectural firms are acquiring in-house design simulation for energy modelling. The effects of broadening the use of energy modelling technology on architecture design practice or the design process are, however, poorly understood. Industry and academic attention has been gathering on the topic of building performance simulation with most of the focus placed on standardizing the wide array of tools and narrowing the broad spectrum of analysis parameters. Few discussions examine approaches to energy analysis across the diverse design settings and the principles, assumptions and identities designers negotiate. The analysis draws on institutional theory utilizing semi-structured interviews and focus group sessions with 26 participants across 4 large international architecture firms. Preliminary findings indicate differing organizational, team and project approaches with an emphasis placed on legitimating established design assumptions across the firms. The implications of the findings are twofold. First, the analysis provides an initial overview of how early stage design energy modelling is considered in design in architecture practice in the UK. Second, the paper provides an understanding of how architects negotiate meaning on energy in design. There are also implications for energy policy development in the context of the built environment particularly concerning building performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building performance; energy modelling; institutional logics; design practice; computer simulation; energy policy; building services |
| Index terms: | building performance, meaning, computer simulation, designer, energy policy, institutional theory, institutional logic, building service, interview, energy modelling, design practice, design process, architectural firm, focus group, house design, building simulation, identity, media, built environment, energy analysis, architect, building services engineer, building performance simulation |
| Subjects: | theoretical framing, design process, sociology, engineering analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, quality assurance, data collection methods, profession, business, engineering systems, design methods, public policy, modelling and simulation, sustainability and energy |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Governance, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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