木头呢--“非木材”建筑专家对芬兰多层住宅环境监管、商业环境和未来趋势的看法

IF 1.1 4区 农林科学 Q3 FORESTRY
Aleksi Aaltonen, Elias Hurmekoski, J. Korhonen
{"title":"木头呢--“非木材”建筑专家对芬兰多层住宅环境监管、商业环境和未来趋势的看法","authors":"Aleksi Aaltonen, Elias Hurmekoski, J. Korhonen","doi":"10.13073/fpj-d-21-00033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Despite the sustained interest in multistory wood-frame construction (WMC) along with an expanding bioeconomy, the rate of market uptake has been modest outside North America. Changing environmental values and regulation are expected to boost WMC adoption along with an expanding bioeconomy, yet the future prospects of WMC are typically explored with an empirical focus on the actors that are already active in WMC. To address the possible bias, this paper elicits the views of nonwood actors (i.e., construction company managers and executives in the areas of procurement and project planning with no prior experience in WMC), through 10 semistructured interviews. The results indicate that the nonwood actors do not necessarily oppose WMC as such, but there remain competitive barriers for a major market growth of WMC related to, for example, lack of standardization and significant enough productivity benefits to motivate adopting a new potentially risky construction practice. Based on comparisons with previous literature, the most notable differences in opinions between wood actors and nonwood actors regarded the direction and strength of the impact of consumer preferences on WMC demand. While acknowledging that this is a crude comparison without statistical significance, one can observe similarities in the distribution of answers for the questions unrelated to WMC, but more dispersion for those addressing WMC. Yet, while the attitudes toward wood as a construction material seem to differ, both the wood and nonwood actors seem to regard the doubling of the market share of WMC in Finland by 2030 as feasible.","PeriodicalId":12387,"journal":{"name":"Forest Products Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What About Wood?—“Nonwood” Construction Experts' Perceptions of Environmental Regulation, Business Environment, and Future Trends in Residential Multistory Building in Finland\",\"authors\":\"Aleksi Aaltonen, Elias Hurmekoski, J. Korhonen\",\"doi\":\"10.13073/fpj-d-21-00033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Despite the sustained interest in multistory wood-frame construction (WMC) along with an expanding bioeconomy, the rate of market uptake has been modest outside North America. Changing environmental values and regulation are expected to boost WMC adoption along with an expanding bioeconomy, yet the future prospects of WMC are typically explored with an empirical focus on the actors that are already active in WMC. To address the possible bias, this paper elicits the views of nonwood actors (i.e., construction company managers and executives in the areas of procurement and project planning with no prior experience in WMC), through 10 semistructured interviews. The results indicate that the nonwood actors do not necessarily oppose WMC as such, but there remain competitive barriers for a major market growth of WMC related to, for example, lack of standardization and significant enough productivity benefits to motivate adopting a new potentially risky construction practice. Based on comparisons with previous literature, the most notable differences in opinions between wood actors and nonwood actors regarded the direction and strength of the impact of consumer preferences on WMC demand. While acknowledging that this is a crude comparison without statistical significance, one can observe similarities in the distribution of answers for the questions unrelated to WMC, but more dispersion for those addressing WMC. Yet, while the attitudes toward wood as a construction material seem to differ, both the wood and nonwood actors seem to regard the doubling of the market share of WMC in Finland by 2030 as feasible.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forest Products Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forest Products Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13073/fpj-d-21-00033\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"FORESTRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Products Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13073/fpj-d-21-00033","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

尽管对多层木框架建筑(WMC)的持续兴趣以及不断扩大的生物经济,但北美以外的市场占有率并不高。随着生物经济的发展,不断变化的环境价值观和监管预计将促进WMC的采用,但通常会对WMC的未来前景进行探索,重点关注已经活跃在WMC中的参与者。为了解决可能存在的偏见,本文通过10次半结构化访谈,征求了非木材参与者(即采购和项目规划领域的建筑公司经理和高管,他们之前没有WMC经验)的意见。结果表明,非木材行为者并不一定反对WMC,但WMC的主要市场增长仍存在竞争障碍,例如,缺乏标准化和足够显著的生产力效益,无法激励采用新的潜在风险建筑实践。根据与以往文献的比较,木材参与者和非木材参与者之间最显著的意见差异在于消费者偏好对WMC需求影响的方向和强度。虽然承认这是一个没有统计意义的粗略比较,但人们可以观察到与WMC无关的问题的答案分布相似,但与WMC相关的问题的分布更为分散。然而,尽管人们对木材作为建筑材料的态度似乎有所不同,但木材和非木材行为者似乎都认为到2030年将WMC在芬兰的市场份额翻一番是可行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What About Wood?—“Nonwood” Construction Experts' Perceptions of Environmental Regulation, Business Environment, and Future Trends in Residential Multistory Building in Finland
Despite the sustained interest in multistory wood-frame construction (WMC) along with an expanding bioeconomy, the rate of market uptake has been modest outside North America. Changing environmental values and regulation are expected to boost WMC adoption along with an expanding bioeconomy, yet the future prospects of WMC are typically explored with an empirical focus on the actors that are already active in WMC. To address the possible bias, this paper elicits the views of nonwood actors (i.e., construction company managers and executives in the areas of procurement and project planning with no prior experience in WMC), through 10 semistructured interviews. The results indicate that the nonwood actors do not necessarily oppose WMC as such, but there remain competitive barriers for a major market growth of WMC related to, for example, lack of standardization and significant enough productivity benefits to motivate adopting a new potentially risky construction practice. Based on comparisons with previous literature, the most notable differences in opinions between wood actors and nonwood actors regarded the direction and strength of the impact of consumer preferences on WMC demand. While acknowledging that this is a crude comparison without statistical significance, one can observe similarities in the distribution of answers for the questions unrelated to WMC, but more dispersion for those addressing WMC. Yet, while the attitudes toward wood as a construction material seem to differ, both the wood and nonwood actors seem to regard the doubling of the market share of WMC in Finland by 2030 as feasible.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forest Products Journal
Forest Products Journal 工程技术-材料科学:纸与木材
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
30
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Products Journal (FPJ) is the source of information for industry leaders, researchers, teachers, students, and everyone interested in today''s forest products industry. The Forest Products Journal is well respected for publishing high-quality peer-reviewed technical research findings at the applied or practical level that reflect the current state of wood science and technology. Articles suitable as Technical Notes are brief notes (generally 1,200 words or less) that describe new or improved equipment or techniques; report on findings produced as by-products of major studies; or outline progress to date on long-term projects.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信