Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

PL EN


Journal

2017 | 1(49) | 47-61

Article title

Ocena funkcjonowania budynku – rozumienie korzyści i ryzyka dla zaangażowanych stron. Lekcje dla Polski płynące z doświadczeń brytyjskich

Content

Title variants

EN
Building performance evaluation – understanding the benefits and risks for the stakeholders involved. Lessons for Poland based on the UK experience

Languages of publication

PL EN

Abstracts

PL
Ocena funkcjonowania budynków (BPE) jest przedsięwzięciem zespołowym. Badania takie potencjalnie mogą dostarczyć wiedzę ułatwiającą doskonalenie środowiska zbudowanego, co jest ważne w czasie szybko rosnących oczekiwań względem budynków. Jednak ich potencjał może zostać uwolniony, tylko jeśli uda się zapewnić dobrowolne zaangażowanie kluczowych grup interesariuszy, a ich potrzeby i oczekiwania są odzwierciedlone w prowadzonych badaniach. Ten artykuł jest krytyczną refleksją na procesem wprowadzania BPE do kręgu zainteresowania przemysłu budowlanego w Wielkiej Brytanii. Autorka jest przekonana, że wnioski wyciągnięte z tamtego kontekstu stanowią cenny wzorzec, który może być wykorzystany w Polsce, pomimo wszelkich różnic pomiędzy oboma krajami. Określiła więc podstawowe korzyści i ryzyko, jakie poszczególni interesariusze mogą łączyć z własnym udziałem w badaniach. Wymieniła odpowiednie elementy badań BPE zabezpieczające uzyskanie korzyści i ograniczające wystąpienie ryzyka. Ich nazwanie uzasadnia konieczność rozumienia badań jako procesu całościowego, którego wszystkie elementy mają ważną rolę do odegrania.
EN
Building performance evaluation (BPE) is a group endeavour. It has the potential to enable context based learning and improvement of the built environment necessary at a time of rapidly increasing expectations towards buildings. This potential can only be released however if voluntary engagement of key stakeholders is secured and their needs and expectations are carefully considered. The paper is a critical reflection on the process of introducing BPE into the scope of interest of the mainstream building industry stakeholders in the UK. It is believed that these lessons provide useful precedent applicable in the Polish context despite any differences between the two countries. Key benefits and risks different stakeholder groups may link with their engagement in BPE are identified. BPE process elements securing specific benefits and addressing relevant risks are named in order to justify the necessity of thinking of BPE holistically.

Journal

Year

Issue

Pages

47-61

Physical description

Contributors

  • Wydział Architektury Politechniki Wrocławskiej

References

  • Cole R.J., Lorch R. (eds.), Buildings, Culture and Environment: Informing local and global practices, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford 2003.
  • Balvers J., Bogers R. et al., Mechanical ventilation in recently built Dutch homes: technical shortcomings, possibilities for improvement, perceived indoor environment and health effects, „Architectural Science Review” 2012, Vol. 55, Iss. 1, 4–14.
  • Baborska-Narozny M., Stevenson F., Mechanical ventilation in housing: understanding in-use issues, „ICE Engineering Sustainability” 2017, Vol. 170, Iss. 1, 33–46.
  • Mallory Hill S., Preiser W.F.E., Watson C., Enhancing building performance, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford 2012.
  • Sunikka-Blank M., Galvin R., Introducing the prebound effect: the gap between performance and actual energy consumption, „Building Research and Information” 2012, Vol. 40(3), 260–273.
  • van Dronkelaar Ch., Dowson M., Burman E., Spataru C., Mumovic D., A Review of the Energy Performance Gap and Its Underlying Causes in Non-Domestic Buildings, „Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering” 2016, No. 1(17).
  • Newsham G., Mancini S., Birt B., Do LEED-certified buildings save energy? Yes, but..., „Energy and Buildings” 2009, Vol. 41, Iss. 8, 897–905.
  • Galvin R., Why German homeowners are reluctant to retrofit, „Building Research and Information” 2014, Vol. 42, Iss. 4, 398–408.
  • Coulsting S., Insurance-backed warranty for whole life housing energy performance, Encraft, Leamington Spa 2015, http://www.sustainabilitywestmidlands.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/5.-StevenCoulsting.pdf [accessed: February, 2017].
  • Baird G., Sustainable Buildings in Practice – What the Users Think, Routledge, Abingdon 2010.
  • BPIE (Building Performance Institute Europe), Europe’s building under a microscope, BPIE, 2011, http://bpie.eu/publication/europesbuildings-under-the-microscope [accessed: February, 2017].
  • Derbez M., Berthineau B., Cochet V., Lethrosne M., Pignon C., Riberon J., Kirchner S., Indoor air quality and comfort in seven newly built, energy-efficient houses in France, „Building and Environment” 2014, Vol. 72, 173–187.
  • Stevenson F., Rijal H.B., Developing Occupancy feedback from a prototype to improve housing production, „Building Research and Information” 2010, Vol. 38, Iss. 5, 555–564.
  • Bordass B., Leaman A., Ruyssevelt P., Assessing building performance in use 5: conclusions and implications, „Building Research and Information” 2001, Vol. 29(2), 154, 144–157.
  • Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings (recast), „Official Journal of the European Union” 2010, No. 53(13), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2010:153:TOC [accessed: February, 2017].
  • Palmer J., Terry N., Armitage P., Building Performance Evaluation Programme: Findings from non-domestic projects, Innovate UK, London 2016.
  • Palmer J., Godoy-Shimizu D., Tillson A., Mawditt I., Building Performance Evaluation Programme: Findings from domestic projects, Innovate UK, London 2016.
  • Thompson M., Cooper I., Gething B., The business case for adapting buildings to climate change: Niche or mainstream?, Innovate UK, London 2015, https://connect.innovateuk.org/web/design-forfuture-climate [accessed: February, 2017].
  • Michie S., Johnston M., Abraham C., Lawton R., Parker D., Walker A., Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach, „Quality & Safety in Health Care” 2005, Vol. 14, 26–33.
  • Green S.D., Moss G.W., Value Management and Post-Occupancy Evaluation: Closing the Loop, „Facilities” 2000, Vol. 16, Iss. 1/2, 34–39.
  • Hua Y., Loftness V., Heerwagen J.H., Powell K.M., Relationship Between Workplace Spatial Settings and Occupant-Perceived Support for Collaboration, „Environment and Behaviour” 2011, Vol. 43, Iss. 6, 807–826.
  • Preiser W.F., Improving Building Performance, NCARB Monograph Series, Washington, D.C. 2003.
  • Frankel M., Edelson J., Colker R., Getting to outcome-based building performance; Report from a Seattle Summit on Performance Outcomes, National Institute of Building Sciences, Seattle 2015, https://newbuildings.org/sites/default/files/Performance_Outcomes_Summit_Report_5-15.pdf [accessed: February, 2017].
  • Pettifor H., Wilson C., Chryssochoidis G., The appeal of the green deal: Empirical evidence for the influence of energy efficiency policy on renovating homeowners, „Energy Policy” 2015, Vol. 79, 161–176.
  • Bryx M., Raport o stanie mieszkalnictwa w Polsce, Polski Związek Firm Deweloperskich, Wrocław 2016.
  • Quality of public administration: A practitioners Toolbox, European Commission, Brussels 2015, ec.europa.eu [accessed: February, 2017].
  • Gooding M., Gul M., Energy efficiency retrofitting services supply chains: A review of evolving demands from housing policy, „Energy Strategy Reviews” 2016, Vol. 11–12, 29–40.
  • Morse A., Green Deal and Energy Company Obligation, National Audit Office, London 2016, https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Green-Deal-and-Energy-Company-Obligation.pdf [accessed: February, 2017].
  • Stevenson F., Leaman A., Evaluating housing performance in relation to human behaviour: New challenges, „Building Research and Information” 2010, Vol. 38(5), 437–441.
  • Robson C., Real world research, Blackwell, London 1993.
  • Chapman M., Gajewska-De Mattos H., Clegg J., Buckley P.J., Close neighbours and distant friends – perceptions of cultural distance, „International Business Review” 2008, Vol. 17, Iss. 3, 217–234.
  • Todeva E., Models for comparative analysis of culture: the case of Poland, „International Journal of Human Resource Management” 1999, Vol. 10, Iss. 4, 606–623.
  • Kundzewicz Z.W., Matczak P., Climate change regional review: Poland, „WIREs Climate Change” 2012, Vol. 3, 297–311.
  • Miazga A., Owczarek D., Dom zimny, dom ciemny – czyli ubóstwo energetyczne w Polsce, „IBS Working Paper” 2015, 16, http://ibs.org.pl/app/uploads/2015/12/IBS_Working_Paper_16-2015.pdf [accessed: February, 2017].
  • “Soft Landings” BSRIA, https://www.bsria.co.uk/services/design/soft-landings/ [accessed: February, 2017].

Document Type

Publication order reference

Identifiers

YADDA identifier

bwmeta1.element.desklight-a4954f49-19d4-44c1-8db6-6355cf7b2909
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.