Hyppää sisältöön
    • Suomeksi
    • In English
Trepo
  • Suomeksi
  • In English
  • Kirjaudu
Näytä viite 
  •   Etusivu
  • Trepo
  • TUNICRIS-julkaisut
  • Näytä viite
  •   Etusivu
  • Trepo
  • TUNICRIS-julkaisut
  • Näytä viite
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Barriers to implementing adaptable housing: architects' perceptions in Finland and Denmark

Tarpio, Jyrki; Huuhka, Satu; Vestergaard, Inge (2021-11-19)

 
Avaa tiedosto
Tarpio2021_Article_BarriersToImplementingAdaptabl.pdf (711.8Kt)
Lataukset: 



Tarpio, Jyrki
Huuhka, Satu
Vestergaard, Inge
19.11.2021

Journal of Housing and the Built Environment
doi:10.1007/s10901-021-09913-1
Näytä kaikki kuvailutiedot
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202112159234

Kuvaus

Peer reviewed
Tiivistelmä
Adaptability is one key aspect in making housing more sustainable. One major approach to adaptability is internal transformability of buildings, i.e. the possibility to make modifications to the spaces and their equipment within the existing building envelope. This aspect is often taken into consideration in the design and implementation of office buildings. However, in housing the situation is different, and internal transformability is very seldomly implemented in apartment buildings. There is a lack of studies for the reasons for this.<br/><br/>In this article we take a look at the barriers to internal transformability of apartment buildings in two Nordic countries, Finland and Denmark. We compare the situations in both countries, and highlight their similarities and differences. The research is based on interviews of Finnish and Danish architects who have been involved in designing such buildings within the last twenty years. <br/><br/>The interviews show that the disinterest of housing developers has been the main barrier to implementing internal transformability. Another important barrier is the developers’ cost-optimization. Secondary barriers were related to lack of solutions in building services that would support internal transformability. Additionally, secondary barriers were related to common construction techniques, regulations, and building conventions. Major barriers were similar in both countries. However, some differences in the secondary and other barriers between the two countries also exist.
Kokoelmat
  • TUNICRIS-julkaisut [24350]
Kalevantie 5
PL 617
33014 Tampereen yliopisto
oa[@]tuni.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste
 

 

Selaa kokoelmaa

TekijätNimekkeetTiedekunta (2019 -)Tiedekunta (- 2018)Tutkinto-ohjelmat ja opintosuunnatAvainsanatJulkaisuajatKokoelmat

Omat tiedot

Kirjaudu sisäänRekisteröidy
Kalevantie 5
PL 617
33014 Tampereen yliopisto
oa[@]tuni.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste