{"title":"The use of alternative building technologies as a sustainable affordable housing solution: perspectives from South Africa","authors":"Johnson Adetooto, A. Windapo, Francesco Pomponi","doi":"10.1108/jedt-05-2022-0257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to evaluate the perception of the local experts and end users on the drivers, barriers and strategies to the use of alternative building technologies (ABTs), with a focus on sandbag building technologies (SBTs) in the provision of sustainable housing in South Africa towards improving the public's understanding of SBTs.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis research adopted a qualitative approach that used focus group meetings as the primary data collection method for this study. This study's focus group participants comprised ABT experts and end users of ABT houses in South Africa who were selected using a convenient sampling technique. The data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using NVivo 11 software.\n\n\nFindings\nThis study found that the perceived drivers to using ABTs such as SBT comprise sustainability, affordability, job creation potentials, fire-resistant and earthquake resistance. This study revealed strategies for the SBTs, including awareness, building sandbag prototypes across cities and training.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThis study's findings have practical implications for the practice and praxis of ABT implementation and uptake in South Africa. This study provides a framework for broadening the worldwide understanding of use and uptake of SBTs to provide sustainable and affordable housing.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis study adds significantly to the limited body of knowledge on ABTs, focusing on sandbag houses. Consequently, the findings provide policymakers with information on the expert and end-user perspectives on the barriers and strategies to using ABTs.\n","PeriodicalId":46533,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Design and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Design and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-05-2022-0257","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to evaluate the perception of the local experts and end users on the drivers, barriers and strategies to the use of alternative building technologies (ABTs), with a focus on sandbag building technologies (SBTs) in the provision of sustainable housing in South Africa towards improving the public's understanding of SBTs.
Design/methodology/approach
This research adopted a qualitative approach that used focus group meetings as the primary data collection method for this study. This study's focus group participants comprised ABT experts and end users of ABT houses in South Africa who were selected using a convenient sampling technique. The data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using NVivo 11 software.
Findings
This study found that the perceived drivers to using ABTs such as SBT comprise sustainability, affordability, job creation potentials, fire-resistant and earthquake resistance. This study revealed strategies for the SBTs, including awareness, building sandbag prototypes across cities and training.
Practical implications
This study's findings have practical implications for the practice and praxis of ABT implementation and uptake in South Africa. This study provides a framework for broadening the worldwide understanding of use and uptake of SBTs to provide sustainable and affordable housing.
Originality/value
This study adds significantly to the limited body of knowledge on ABTs, focusing on sandbag houses. Consequently, the findings provide policymakers with information on the expert and end-user perspectives on the barriers and strategies to using ABTs.
期刊介绍:
- Design strategies - Usability and adaptability - Material, component and systems performance - Process control - Alternative and new technologies - Organizational, management and research issues - Human factors - Environmental, quality and health and safety issues - Cost and life cycle issues - Sustainability criteria, indicators, measurement and practices - Risk management - Entrepreneurship Law, regulation and governance - Design, implementing, managing and practicing innovation - Visualization, simulation, information and communication technologies - Education practices, innovation, strategies and policy issues.