Strategies to promote the acceptance of sandbag building technology for sustainable and affordable housing delivery: the South African case

IF 2.6 Q1 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Engineering Design and Technology Pub Date : 2022-10-31 DOI:10.1108/jedt-06-2022-0290
Johnson Adetooto, A. Windapo, Francesco Pomponi, Fabio Companie, Kehinde Alade, Amanda Mtya
{"title":"Strategies to promote the acceptance of sandbag building technology for sustainable and affordable housing delivery: the South African case","authors":"Johnson Adetooto, A. Windapo, Francesco Pomponi, Fabio Companie, Kehinde Alade, Amanda Mtya","doi":"10.1108/jedt-06-2022-0290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nSandbag building technologies (SBTs) have been offered as a cost-effective and sustainable alternative building technology (ABT) capable of accelerating house construction in South Africa, but its acceptance remains low. However, knowledge about how to effectively improve SBT social acceptance is limited. This study aims to develop and prioritise SBT social acceptability strategies towards providing a comprehensive framework for the successful deployment and widespread adoption of sandbag technology.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study used a quantitative research strategy that included a literature review and a structured questionnaire survey of 228 ABT professionals and stakeholders in the South African housing industry. The study statistically analysed 13 strategies for the social acceptance of SBT.\n\n\nFindings\nThe analysis showed that the top three strategies include the availability of sandbag demonstration projects in all provinces, the approval of a sandbag building code and the availability of standard design methods for earthbags. A factor analysis clustered the 13 strategies into Stakeholders integration and policy formation, Effective education and knowledge sharing and Grassroots advocacy and incentives.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe current study’s findings provide a broad framework for the effective implementation and wide acceptance of sandbag technology in housing projects. It offered certain best practices that policymakers and practitioners might use to promote ABT and SBT societal acceptability.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, the study represents the first and only attempt to investigate the viewpoints of experts and housing market stakeholders in South Africa regarding sandbag technology social acceptance strategies and contributes to the social acceptance body of knowledge in ABT and SBT.\n","PeriodicalId":46533,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Design and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Design and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jedt-06-2022-0290","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: 2

Abstract

Purpose Sandbag building technologies (SBTs) have been offered as a cost-effective and sustainable alternative building technology (ABT) capable of accelerating house construction in South Africa, but its acceptance remains low. However, knowledge about how to effectively improve SBT social acceptance is limited. This study aims to develop and prioritise SBT social acceptability strategies towards providing a comprehensive framework for the successful deployment and widespread adoption of sandbag technology. Design/methodology/approach This study used a quantitative research strategy that included a literature review and a structured questionnaire survey of 228 ABT professionals and stakeholders in the South African housing industry. The study statistically analysed 13 strategies for the social acceptance of SBT. Findings The analysis showed that the top three strategies include the availability of sandbag demonstration projects in all provinces, the approval of a sandbag building code and the availability of standard design methods for earthbags. A factor analysis clustered the 13 strategies into Stakeholders integration and policy formation, Effective education and knowledge sharing and Grassroots advocacy and incentives. Practical implications The current study’s findings provide a broad framework for the effective implementation and wide acceptance of sandbag technology in housing projects. It offered certain best practices that policymakers and practitioners might use to promote ABT and SBT societal acceptability. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the study represents the first and only attempt to investigate the viewpoints of experts and housing market stakeholders in South Africa regarding sandbag technology social acceptance strategies and contributes to the social acceptance body of knowledge in ABT and SBT.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
促进接受沙袋建筑技术以提供可持续和负担得起的住房的战略:南非案例
沙袋建筑技术(sbt)作为一种具有成本效益和可持续性的替代建筑技术(ABT),能够加速南非的房屋建设,但其接受度仍然很低。然而,关于如何有效地提高性取向者的社会接受度的知识是有限的。本研究旨在制定并优先考虑SBT的社会可接受性策略,为沙袋技术的成功部署和广泛采用提供一个全面的框架。设计/方法/方法本研究采用定量研究策略,包括文献综述和对南非住房行业的228名ABT专业人员和利益相关者进行结构化问卷调查。该研究统计分析了13种社会接受性取向者的策略。结果分析表明,排在前三位的策略包括:沙袋示范工程在所有省份的可获得性、沙袋建筑规范的批准和沙袋标准设计方法的可获得性。因子分析将这13项战略分为利益相关者整合和政策形成、有效教育和知识共享以及基层宣传和激励。实际意义本研究的结果为沙袋技术在房屋项目中的有效实施和广泛接受提供了一个广泛的框架。它提供了一些最佳做法,供决策者和从业者使用,以促进ABT和SBT的社会可接受性。原创性/价值据作者所知,本研究首次也是唯一一次尝试调查南非专家和住房市场利益相关者对沙袋技术社会接受策略的观点,并为ABT和SBT的社会接受知识体系做出贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Engineering Design and Technology
Journal of Engineering Design and Technology ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
21.40%
发文量
67
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.
期刊最新文献
Development and validation of a framework for improving health and safety risk management at informal construction sites in Tanzania Impact of project risk allocation on PPP housing project delivery in Nigeria: partial least square structural equation modeling approach Ensemble of ensembles for fine particulate matter pollution prediction using big data analytics and IoT emission sensors Resource sustainability in the water, energy and food nexus: role of technological innovation Mechanical and microstructural characteristics of structural concrete containing RCA treated with sodium metasilicate
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1