Johnson Adetooto, A. Windapo, Francesco Pomponi, Fabio Companie, Kehinde Alade, Amanda Mtya
{"title":"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","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":"{\"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}","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}
Strategies to promote the acceptance of sandbag building technology for sustainable and affordable housing delivery: the South African case
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.
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.